4.5 Article

Prevalence of depressive symptoms in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

期刊

GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 33, 期 3, 页码 217-223

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2011.03.009

关键词

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Depression; Meta-analysis; Prevalence; Systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This meta-analysis was aimed to evaluate the differences in aggregated prevalence of depressive symptoms among people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as compared to controls without COPD and to determine underlying moderators to explain potential heterogeneity of prevalence. Methods: A meta-analysis of published work was performed using the random effect model. A total of eight studies were identified. We calculated the differences in prevalence proportion of depressive symptoms in patients with COPD versus controls. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to identify factors that may contribute to heterogeneity. Results: The prevalence proportion of depressive symptoms was found to be significantly higher (pooled odds ratio: 2.81; 95% CI: 1.69-4.66) among 39587 individuals with COPD as compared to 39,431 controls (24.6%, 95% CI: 20.0-28.6% vs. 11.7%, 95% CI: 9-15.1%). Meta-regression was conducted to account for the heterogeneity of the prevalence proportion, but moderators like mean age, gender, mean FEV1 and proportion of current smokers among COPD patients were nonsignificant and could not explain heterogeneity in prevalence of depressive symptoms. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences based on different methods of assessment of depressive symptoms and countries sampled. Conclusion: This meta-analytical review identified higher prevalence of depressive symptoms among COPD patients, and meta-regression showed that demographic and clinical factors were not the determinants of heterogeneity in prevalence of depressive symptoms. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据