Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: Current epidemiologic knowledge about bipolar disorder (BD) in Canada is inadequate. To date, only 3 prevalence studies have been conducted: only 1 was based on a national sample, and none distinguished between BD I and II. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of BD I and II in Canada in 2012.
Method: Data were obtained from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey: Mental Health and Well-being, a cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative sample of household residents ages 15 years and older (n = 25 113). The survey response rate was 68.9%. Interviews were based on the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Prevalence was estimated using generalized linear modelling. Prevalence of self-reported diagnosis of BD and use of lithium were also estimated.
Results: The estimated lifetime prevalence of BD I and II (based on the CIDI) in Canada in 2012 was 0.87% (95% CI 0.67% to 1.07%) and 0.57% (95% CI 0.44% to 0.71%), respectively. Prevalence did not differ by sex. The estimated prevalence of self-reported BD was 0.87% (95% CI 0.65% to 1.07%). There was a lack of congruence between CIDI-defined and self-reported BD, and few people taking lithium were positive for BD on the CIDI, which raises some concerns about the validity of the CIDI's assessment of BD.
Conclusions: These prevalence estimates align with those reported in prior literature. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting general population studies that use CIDI-defined BD owing to the possibility of misclassification.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4394715 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/070674371506000310 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!