3.8 Article

Patterns of the Diagnosis Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders in the Population Aged 0-18 Years Based on the Nationwide Insurance Sample Data

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD CHILD & ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY
DOI: 10.5765/jkacap.200017

Keywords

Psychiatric disorder; Diagnosis prevalence; Adolescents; Childhood; Pattern; Trend

Categories

Funding

  1. Korea Mental Health R&D Project, Republic of Korea [HM15C1084]
  2. Korea Health Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [HI12C0021/A120029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the trend in diagnostic prevalence of psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents. Methods: Individuals aged 0-18 years were included in the study based on the National Health Insurance Claims Data. To investigate the trends in diagnosis and diagnostic prevalence of psychiatric disorders reflecting the decrease in the birth rate, data were analyzed from 2010 as a reference year to 2015. Results: The number of patients diagnosed with psychiatric disorder decreased annually, from 23,412 on 2010 to 18,821 on 2015. The most common disorder was hyperkinetic disorder in male and depressive episode in female. Although there was no significant change in overall diagnostic prevalence rate of psychiatric disorders, age groups <10 years and some disorders had significant changes in prevalence rate. This study classified the diagnostic prevalence by age into two unique patterns: group in which the diagnosis rate increases with age and group in which the diagnosis rate peaks at a certain age and then decreases. Conclusion: Diagnostic prevalence of psychiatric disorders was different according to age and sex. These patterns should be reflected in the formulation of policies related to mental health and in medical practice for pediatric patients. It is urgent to identify how these patterns change in young adults.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available