Representativeness of survey participants in relation to mental disorders: a linkage between national registers and a population-representative survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
IntroductionSurveys and registers have provided important insights into the mental health of the community. However, both sources have strengths and limitations. While participation in surveys has been shown to be lower among those with mental disorders, misclassification and limited information on confounders are typical issues for registers. ObjectivesTo examine if participants of the Central Denmark Region's 2017 How are you? survey were representative of the general population in terms of mental disorder diagnoses. MethodsBy linking data from the Central Denmark Region's 2017 How are you? survey with the Danish national registers, we compared the frequency of mental disorder diagnoses among (a) participants in the survey (n = 32,417), before and after applying non-response weights, and (b) the entire population who were eligible to participate (n = 1,063,082; 16 years of age or older on 10th January 2017 and registered as living in the Central Denmark Region). Using logistic regression models, we estimated associations between being diagnosed with any mental disorder and nine general medical conditions to assess whether selection into the survey appeared to bias these associations. ResultsBased on register data, 10.4% (n = 110,492) of the eligible population had received a diagnosis of any mental disorder prior to the date of this survey. Among the unweighted survey sample, 8.2% (n = 2,648) had received a diagnosis; once non-response weights were applied, this corresponded to 9.5%. Representativeness varied by sex, age and type of mental disorder. For example, people with organic disorders or substance use disorders were generally underrepresented among survey participants of all ages; however, representativeness of common disorders such as mood or neurotic disorders was generally good. With respect to the association of any mental disorder and general medical conditions, we found that estimates were similar for survey samples (both weighted and unweighted) compared to the entire eligible population. ConclusionsPeople with a previous diagnosis of a mental disorder are slightly underrepresented in the survey. However, this selection bias was minimized when non-response weights were applied. Associations between mental disorders and general medical conditions did not appear to be affected by selection bias. With the application of non-response weights, the survey provided a sample representative of the general population in terms of mental disorder diagnoses.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,070 | 0,152 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».