Journal
JAMA PSYCHIATRY
Volume 72, Issue 7, Pages 697-705Publisher
AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0575
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- Thematic Project Grant from the State of Sao Paulo Research Foundation [03/00 204-3]
- Shenzhen Mental Health Survey
- Shenzhen Bureau of Health
- Shenzhen Bureau of Science, Technology, and Information
- Colombian National Study of Mental Health
- Ministry of Social Protection
- Saldarriaga Concha Foundation
- European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders project [QLG5-1999-01042]
- European Commission [2004123]
- Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria (the Piedmont Region [Italy])
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Spain) [FIS 00/0028]
- Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologia (Spain) [SAF 2000-158-CE]
- grants Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red [CB06/02/0046]
- Redes Tematicas de Investigacion Cooperativa en Salud from the Departament de Salut, Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain [RD06/0011 REM-TAP]
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Iraq Mental Health Survey (IMHS)
- Japanese and European funds through United Nations Development Group Iraq Trust Fund
- Lebanese National Mental Health Survey
- Lebanese Ministry of Public Health
- World Health Organization (WHO) (Lebanon)
- Janssen Cilag
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Roche
- Novartis
- Mexican National Comorbidity Survey (MNCS)
- National Institute of Psychiatry Ramon de la Fuente [INPRFMDIES 4280]
- National Council on Science and Technology, and supplemental support from the Pan American Health Organization [CONACyT-G30544-H]
- New Zealand Mental Health Survey
- New Zealand Ministry of Health
- Alcohol Advisory Council
- Health Research Council
- Nigerian Survey of Mental Health and Well-being
- WHO (Geneva)
- WHO (Nigeria)
- Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja
- Peruvian World Mental Health Study
- National Institute of Health of the Ministry of Health of Peru
- US National Comorbidity Survey Replication
- National Institute of Mental Health [U01-MH60220]
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation [044708]
- John W. Alden Trust
- John Cade Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council [APP1056929]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
IMPORTANCE Community-based surveys find that many otherwise healthy individuals report histories of hallucinations and delusions. To date, most studies have focused on the overall lifetime prevalence of any of these psychotic experiences (PEs), which might mask important features related to the types and frequencies of PEs. OBJECTIVE To explore detailed epidemiologic information about PEs in a large multinational sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We obtained data from the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys, a coordinated set of community epidemiologic surveys of the prevalence and correlates of mental disorders in representative household samples from 18 countries throughout the world, from 2001 through 2009. Respondents included 31 261 adults (18 years and older) who were asked about lifetime and 12-month prevalence and frequency of 6 types of PEs (2 hallucinatory experiences and 4 delusional experiences). We analyzed the data from March 2014 through January 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Prevalence, frequency, and correlates of PEs. RESULTS Mean lifetime prevalence (SE) of ever having a PE was 5.8% (0.2%), with hallucinatory experiences (5.2% [0.2%]) much more common than delusional experiences (1.3% [0.1%]). More than two-thirds (72.0%) of respondents with lifetime PEs reported experiencing only 1 type. Psychotic experiences were typically infrequent, with 32.2% of respondents with lifetime PEs reporting only 1 occurrence and 31.8% reporting only 2 to 5 occurrences. We found a significant relationship between having more than 1 type of PE and having more frequent PE episodes (Cochran-Armitage z = -10.0; P < .001). Lifetime prevalence estimates (SEs) were significantly higher among respondents in middle-and high-income countries than among those in low-income countries (7.2% [0.4%], 6.8% [0.3%], and 3.2% [0.3%], respectively;chi(2)(2) range, 7.1-58.2; P < .001 for each) and among women than among men (6.6% [0.2%] vs 5.0% [0.3%]; chi(2)(1) = 16.0; P < .001). We found significant associations with lifetime prevalence of PEs in the multivariate model among nonmarried compared with married respondents (chi(2)(2) = 23.2; P < .001) and among respondents who were not employed (chi(2)(4) = 10.6; P < .001) and who had low family incomes (chi(2)(3) = 16.9; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The epidemiologic features of PEs are more nuanced than previously thought. Research is needed that focuses on similarities and differences in the predictors of the onset, course, and consequences of distinct PEs.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available