4.2 Article

Age and risk for depression among the elderly: a meta-analysis of the published literature

Journal

CNS SPECTRUMS
Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 142-154

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1092852912000533

Keywords

Age; depression; elderly; meta-analysis

Funding

  1. National Foundation of Natural Science of China [81170752]
  2. government of Sichuan province of china [2010FZ0061]
  3. health department in the government of Sichuan province
  4. government of MianYang City [09s001]
  5. Third Hospital of Mianyang

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between age and risk for depression among the old and the oldest old. Method. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database were used to identify potential studies. The studies were divided into cross-sectional and longitudinal subsets. For each study, the numbers of the total participants, cases (for cross-sectional study), or incident cases (for longitudinal study) of depression in each age group were extracted and entered into Review Manager 4.2 software. Qualitative meta-analyses of cross-sectional studies and of longitudinal studies were performed. For prevalence and incidence rates of depression, odds risk (OR) and relative risk (RR) were calculated, respectively. Results. The qualitative meta-analyses showed that, compared with younger participants (above vs. below 65 years, above vs. below 70 years, above vs. below 75 years, and above vs. below 80 years), older age groups had a significantly higher risk for depression. (All of the ORs and RRs were significant.) Compared with participants aged 55-89, those aged above 90 years had no higher risk for depression. (Neither the OR nor the RR was significant.) Conclusions. Despite the methodological limitations of this meta-analysis, older age appears to be an important risk factor for depression in the general elderly population (aged below 80 years), but not in the oldest population (aged above 85 years).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available