Search

BackgroundIn this global study we sought to estimate the degree to which a family member might feel embarrassed when a close relative is suffering from an alcohol, drug, or mental health condition (ADMC) versus a general medical condition (GMC). To date, most studies have considered embarrassment and stigma in society and internalized by the afflicted individual but have not assessed family embarrassment in a large-scale study.MethodIn 16 sites of the World Mental Health Surveys (WMHS), standardized assessments were completed including items on family embarrassment. Site matching was used to constrain local socially shared determinants of stigma-related feelings, enabling a conditional logistic regression model that estimates the embarrassment close relatives may hold in relation to family members affected by an ADMC, a GMC, or both conditions.ResultsThere was a statistically robust association such that subgroups with an ADMC-affected relative were more likely to feel embarrassed compared to subgroups with a relative affected by a GMC (p < 0.001), even with covariate adjustments for age and sex.ConclusionsThe pattern of evidence from this research is consistent with conceptual models for interventions that target individual- and family-level stigma-related feelings of embarrassment as possible obstacles to effective early intervention and treatment for an ADMC. Macro-level interventions are under way but micro-level interventions may also be required among family members, along with care for each person with an ADMC. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives:(1) To investigate whether there is an association between obesity and mental disorders in the general populations of diverse countries, and (2) to establish whether demographic variables (sex, age, education) moderate any associations observed.Design:Thirteen cross-sectional, general population surveys conducted as part of the World Mental Health Surveys initiative.Subjects:Household residing adults, 18 years and over (n=62 277).Measurements:DSM-IV mental disorders (anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, alcohol use disorders) were assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0), a fully structured diagnostic interview. Obesity was defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or greater; severe obesity as BMI 35+. Persons with BMI less than 18.5 were excluded from analysis. Height and weight were self-reported.Results:Statistically significant, albeit modest associations (odds ratios generally in the range of 1.2–1.5) were observed between obesity and depressive disorders, and between obesity and anxiety disorders, in pooled data across countries. These associations were concentrated among those with severe obesity, and among females. Age and education had variable effects across depressive and anxiety disorders.Conclusions:The findings are suggestive of a modest relationship between obesity (particularly severe obesity) and emotional disorders among women in the general population. The study is limited by the self-report of BMI and cannot clarify the direction or nature of the relationship observed, but it may indicate a need for a research and clinical focus on the psychological heterogeneity of the obese population.International Journal of Obesity (2008) 32, 192–200; doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803701; published online 21 August 2007 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The development of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) and ICD-11 has led to reconsideration of diagnostic criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The World Mental Health (WMH) Surveys allow investigation of the implications of the changing criteria compared to DSM-IV and ICD-10., Methods: WMH Surveys in 13 countries asked respondents to enumerate all their lifetime traumatic events (TEs) and randomly selected one TE per respondent for PTSD assessment. DSM-IV and ICD-10 PTSD were assessed for the 23,936 respondents who reported lifetime TEs in these surveys with the fully structured Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). DSM-5 and proposed ICD-11 criteria were approximated. Associations of the different criteria sets with indicators of clinical severity (distress-impairment, suicidality, comorbid fear-distress disorders, PTSD symptom duration) were examined to investigate the implications of using the different systems., Results: A total of 5.6% of respondents met criteria for "broadly defined" PTSD (i.e., full criteria in at least one diagnostic system), with prevalence ranging from 3.0% with DSM-5 to 4.4% with ICD-10. Only one-third of broadly defined cases met criteria in all four systems and another one third in only one system (narrowly defined cases). Between-system differences in indicators of clinical severity suggest that ICD-10 criteria are least strict and DSM-IV criteria most strict. The more striking result, though, is that significantly elevated indicators of clinical significance were found even for narrowly defined cases for each of the four diagnostic systems., Conclusions: These results argue for a broad definition of PTSD defined by any one of the different systems to capture all clinically significant cases of PTSD in future studies., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)