The concept of prevalence applied to psychiatric disorders and symptoms | Psychological Medicine | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Synopsis

Statements about prevalence, of the type ‘x% of the general population are mentally ill’, imply a concept of prevalence that is difficult to define operationally. It requires the specification of a cut-off point, a level of severity from which the presence of an illness can be inferred, and this is largely arbitrary. A more generally useful type of statement compares the frequency distribution of severity for declared cases with that for the rest of the population. This avoids the need for a defined cut-off point. We are still left with the problem of defining a dimension of severity and a declared case, but these should follow easily from a clear statement of the purpose of any specific inquiry. The argument is illustrated from the results of a study of self-referrals to general practitioners.

References

Foulds, G. A. & Bedford, A. (1975). The hierarchy of classes of personal illness. Psychological Medicine 5, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goldberg, D. P. (1972). The Detection of Psychiatric Illness by Questionnaire. Oxford University Press: London.Google Scholar

Kendell, R. E. (1973). Psychiatric diagnoses: a study of how they are made. British Journal of Psychiatry 122, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maxwell, A. E. (1961). Analysing Qualitative Data. Methuen: London.Google Scholar

Wing, J. K., Cooper, J. E. & Sartorius, N. (1974). The Measurement and Classification of Psychiatric Symptoms. Cambridge University Press: London.Google Scholar

Wood, M. M. & Elwood, P. C. (1966). Symptoms of iron deficiency anaemia: a community survey. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 20, 117–121.Google ScholarPubMed