You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 57 No. 3, March 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (6)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Psychiatry, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Controversies in Community-Based Psychiatric Epidemiology

Let the Data Speak for Themselves

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57:227-228.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

RECENT brushfires have emerged from the decades-old controversy regarding "caseness" in community-based epidemiological studies of psychiatric disorders.1-3 Three studies4-6 in this issue of the ARCHIVES speak to this controversy not so much through the opinions of the investigators but rather through a fresh look at the data from 2 large longitudinal surveys. As noted by Regier et al,1 the research field of psychiatric epidemiology has been most productive during the past 20 years, due in large part to 2 surveys—the Epidemiologic Catchment Area (ECA) Study7 and the National Comorbidity Survey (NCS).8 Yet prior to that time, major community-based studies were fielded, the best now being the Stirling County Study9 and the Midtown Manhattan Study.10 Unlike earlier studies, the ECA Study and NCS were fielded in large part to bring community-based studies into concert with clinical studies primarily through applying DSM-III11 (and its successors') criteria to community samples. Unfortunately, the basic . . . [Full Text of this Article]


RELATED ARTICLES

A 40-Year Perspective on the Prevalence of Depression: The Stirling County Study
Jane M. Murphy, Nan M. Laird, Richard R. Monson, Arthur M. Sobol, and Alexander H. Leighton
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(3):209-215.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Comparison of Self-report and Clinical Diagnostic Interviews for Depression: Diagnostic Interview Schedule and Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry in the Baltimore Epidemiologic Catchment Area Follow-up
William W. Eaton, Karen Neufeld, Li-Shiun Chen, and Guojun Cai
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(3):217-222.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Community Diagnosis Counts
Darrel A. Regier
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(3):223-224.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Comparison of Diagnostic Interviews for Depression in the Stirling County Study: Challenges for Psychiatric Epidemiology
Jane M. Murphy, Richard R. Monson, Nan M. Laird, Arthur M. Sobol, and Alexander H. Leighton
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(3):230-236.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Johns Hopkins Legionary: Leighton's Lineage and Legacy
Lumsden
Transcultural Psychiatry 2006;43:21-44.
ABSTRACT  

Prior Juvenile Diagnoses in Adults With Mental Disorder: Developmental Follow-Back of a Prospective-Longitudinal Cohort
Kim-Cohen et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003;60:709-717.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.