4.4 Article

The prevalence and clinical characteristics associated with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Version-5-defined anxious distress specifier in adults with major depressive disorder: results from the International Mood Disorders Collaborative Project

Journal

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN CHRONIC DISEASE
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 153-159

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/2040622315627805

Keywords

anxious distress specifier; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Version-5; major depressive disorder

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of and illness characteristics in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) with anxious distress specifier (ADS) enrolled in the International Mood Disorders Collaborative Project, which is a collaborative research platform at the Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit, University of Toronto, Canada and the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. Methods: Data from participants who met criteria for a current major depressive episode as part of MDD (n = 830) were included in this post hoc analysis. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Version-5-defined ADS was operationalized as the presence of at least two out of three proxy items instead of two out of five specifiers. Results: A total of 464 individuals (i.e. 56%) met criteria for ADS. There were no between-group differences in sociodemographic variables (e.g. gender, employment, marital status). Greater severity of illness was observed in adults with ADS as evidenced by a higher number of hospitalizations, higher rates of suicidal ideation, greater depressive symptom severity, greater workplace impairment, decreased quality of life, and greater self-reported cognitive impairment. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the importance of evaluating ADS in adults with MDD as its presence identifies a subpopulation with greater illness-associated burden and hazards.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available