Cargando…

Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches

OBJECTIVES: For many research cohorts, it is not practical to provide a “gold‐standard” mental health diagnosis. It is therefore important for mental health research that potential alternative measures for ascertaining mental disorder status are understood. METHODS: Data from UK Biobank in those par...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davis, Katrina A.S., Cullen, Breda, Adams, Mark, Brailean, Anamaria, Breen, Gerome, Coleman, Jonathan R.I., Dregan, Alexandru, Gaspar, Héléna A., Hübel, Christopher, Lee, William, McIntosh, Andrew M., Nolan, John, Pearsall, Robert, Hotopf, Matthew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6877131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31397039
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1796
_version_ 1783473316769562624
author Davis, Katrina A.S.
Cullen, Breda
Adams, Mark
Brailean, Anamaria
Breen, Gerome
Coleman, Jonathan R.I.
Dregan, Alexandru
Gaspar, Héléna A.
Hübel, Christopher
Lee, William
McIntosh, Andrew M.
Nolan, John
Pearsall, Robert
Hotopf, Matthew
author_facet Davis, Katrina A.S.
Cullen, Breda
Adams, Mark
Brailean, Anamaria
Breen, Gerome
Coleman, Jonathan R.I.
Dregan, Alexandru
Gaspar, Héléna A.
Hübel, Christopher
Lee, William
McIntosh, Andrew M.
Nolan, John
Pearsall, Robert
Hotopf, Matthew
author_sort Davis, Katrina A.S.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: For many research cohorts, it is not practical to provide a “gold‐standard” mental health diagnosis. It is therefore important for mental health research that potential alternative measures for ascertaining mental disorder status are understood. METHODS: Data from UK Biobank in those participants who had completed the online Mental Health Questionnaire (n = 157,363) were used to compare the classification of mental disorder by four methods: symptom‐based outcome (self‐complete based on diagnostic interviews), self‐reported diagnosis, hospital data linkage, and self‐report medication. RESULTS: Participants self‐reporting any psychiatric diagnosis had elevated risk of any symptom‐based outcome. Cohen's κ between self‐reported diagnosis and symptom‐based outcome was 0.46 for depression, 0.28 for bipolar affective disorder, and 0.24 for anxiety. There were small numbers of participants uniquely identified by hospital data linkage and medication. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that ascertainment of mental disorder diagnosis in large cohorts such as UK Biobank is complex. There may not be one method of classification that is right for all circumstances, but an informed and transparent use of outcome measure(s) to suit each research question will maximise the potential of UK Biobank and other resources for mental health research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6877131
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68771312020-02-12 Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches Davis, Katrina A.S. Cullen, Breda Adams, Mark Brailean, Anamaria Breen, Gerome Coleman, Jonathan R.I. Dregan, Alexandru Gaspar, Héléna A. Hübel, Christopher Lee, William McIntosh, Andrew M. Nolan, John Pearsall, Robert Hotopf, Matthew Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Original Articles OBJECTIVES: For many research cohorts, it is not practical to provide a “gold‐standard” mental health diagnosis. It is therefore important for mental health research that potential alternative measures for ascertaining mental disorder status are understood. METHODS: Data from UK Biobank in those participants who had completed the online Mental Health Questionnaire (n = 157,363) were used to compare the classification of mental disorder by four methods: symptom‐based outcome (self‐complete based on diagnostic interviews), self‐reported diagnosis, hospital data linkage, and self‐report medication. RESULTS: Participants self‐reporting any psychiatric diagnosis had elevated risk of any symptom‐based outcome. Cohen's κ between self‐reported diagnosis and symptom‐based outcome was 0.46 for depression, 0.28 for bipolar affective disorder, and 0.24 for anxiety. There were small numbers of participants uniquely identified by hospital data linkage and medication. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that ascertainment of mental disorder diagnosis in large cohorts such as UK Biobank is complex. There may not be one method of classification that is right for all circumstances, but an informed and transparent use of outcome measure(s) to suit each research question will maximise the potential of UK Biobank and other resources for mental health research. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6877131/ /pubmed/31397039 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1796 Text en © 2019 The Authors International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Davis, Katrina A.S.
Cullen, Breda
Adams, Mark
Brailean, Anamaria
Breen, Gerome
Coleman, Jonathan R.I.
Dregan, Alexandru
Gaspar, Héléna A.
Hübel, Christopher
Lee, William
McIntosh, Andrew M.
Nolan, John
Pearsall, Robert
Hotopf, Matthew
Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title_full Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title_fullStr Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title_full_unstemmed Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title_short Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches
title_sort indicators of mental disorders in uk biobank—a comparison of approaches
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6877131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31397039
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1796
work_keys_str_mv AT daviskatrinaas indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT cullenbreda indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT adamsmark indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT braileananamaria indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT breengerome indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT colemanjonathanri indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT dreganalexandru indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT gasparhelenaa indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT hubelchristopher indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT leewilliam indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT mcintoshandrewm indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT nolanjohn indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT pearsallrobert indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches
AT hotopfmatthew indicatorsofmentaldisordersinukbiobankacomparisonofapproaches