Changing perceptions of depression: ten-year trends from the general social survey.
ABSTRACT The authors examined the changes in beliefs about the causes of and appropriate treatments for major depression between 1996 and 2006 in a representative sampling of U.S. adults.
The authors compared data about depression from the mental health modules of the General Social Survey from 1996 (300 respondents) and 2006 (397 respondents), which measured perceptions of mental illness through use of vignettes.
There was an increase in the belief that depression is attributable to biological causes, from 77% in 1996 to 88% in 2006 (risk ratio [RR]=1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.04-1.23). Attitudes toward the treatment of depression changed as well, with 60% of respondents prioritizing a biological focus for treatment in 2006 compared with 48% in 1996 (RR=1.29, CI=1.04-1.59). These changes varied modestly by sociodemographic variables and were most pronounced among male, white, and elderly populations.
There have been changes in attitudes about the causes and treatments of depression among the American public in the past decade, with a shift toward a biological framework. A greater understanding of beliefs about depression may lead to more effective outreach and education efforts.
- SourceAvailable from: Yuan Pang Wang[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Few studies have investigated gender difference and associated disability among workers. Comprehensive investigations concerning the occurrence and consequences of depression in workplace are scarce. The study aims to evaluate how workers perceive depression in workplace, as well as to examine depression-related disabilities by gender. This is a cross-sectional web-based survey of 1000 Brazilian workers recruited from Internet sources. Participants answered an online questionnaire about depressive symptoms and related consequences in the workplace. Common symptoms attributable to depression were crying, loss of interest, and sadness. Almost one in five (18.9%) participants reported had ever been "labeled" by a health professional as suffering from depression. However, the majority of ever-depressed workers (73.5%) remained working. Performance-related impairments were reported by around 60% of depressed workers who continued working. Over half of them also complained about cognitive symptoms (concentration difficulties, indecisiveness, forgetfulness), with men reporting more cognitive dysfunctions than women. One in three workers had taken off work due to depression (mean 65.7 out-of-role days), with these periods being lengthier for men than women. Some depressive events might have occurred before working age, since the participants have self-reported the diagnosis of health professionals in past timeframe. The representativeness of recruited workers was reliant upon the availability of Internet service. The findings suggest that identification and management of symptoms of depression should be set as a priority in worker׳s health care. General and gender-related strategies to handle depression in the workplace are recommended. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Journal of Affective Disorders 02/2015; 176C. DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2015.01.058 · 3.71 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Purpose of the study is to investigate helpseeking preferences of the Sardinian public in case of depression. A telephone survey was conducted among the adult population, using quota sampling (N = 1,200). Respondents were presented with a vignette depicting a person with symptoms of major depressive disorder, followed by a fully structured interview. Psychologists were most frequently selected as source of professional help, followed by psychiatrists and G.P.s. Residents of small towns more frequently recommended mental health professionals than city residents. Public help-seeking preferences reflect the availability of services, beliefs about the appropriate treatment of depression and attitudes towards those providing it.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research 10/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10488-014-0604-y · 3.44 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Little is known about how the views of the public are related to self-stigma among people with mental health problems. Despite increasing activity aimed at reducing mental illness stigma, there is little evidence to guide and inform specific anti-stigma campaign development and messages to be used in mass campaigns. A better understanding of the association between public knowledge, attitudes and behaviours and the internalization of stigma among people with mental health problems is needed. This study links two large, international datasets to explore the association between public stigma in 14 European countries (Eurobarometer survey) and individual reports of self-stigma, perceived discrimination and empowerment among persons with mental illness (n=1835) residing in those countries [the Global Alliance of Mental Illness Advocacy Networks (GAMIAN) study]. Individuals with mental illness living in countries with less stigmatizing attitudes, higher rates of help-seeking and treatment utilization and better perceived access to information had lower rates of self-stigma and perceived discrimination and those living in countries where the public felt more comfortable talking to people with mental illness had less self-stigma and felt more empowered. Targeting the general public through mass anti-stigma interventions may lead to a virtuous cycle by disrupting the negative feedback engendered by public stigma, thereby reducing self-stigma among people with mental health problems. A combined approach involving knowledge, attitudes and behaviour is needed; mass interventions that facilitate disclosure and positive social contact may be the most effective. Improving availability of information about mental health issues and facilitating access to care and help-seeking also show promise with regard to stigma.Psychological Medicine 11/2011; 42(8):1741-52. DOI:10.1017/S0033291711002558 · 5.43 Impact Factor