Anxiety and depression: a 40‐year perspective on relationships regarding prevalence, distribution, and comorbidity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Building on a report about the prevalence of depression over time, this paper examines historical trends regarding anxiety in terms of its prevalence, its distribution by age and gender, and its comorbidity with depression. Methods for conducting such time trend analysis are reviewed. METHOD: Representative samples of adults were selected and interviewed in 1952, 1970, and 1992. Logistic regressions were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Although twice as common as depression, the prevalence of anxiety was equally stable. Anxiety was consistently and significantly more characteristic of women than men. A re-distribution of rates in 1992 indicated that depression but not anxiety had significantly increased among younger women (P = 0.03). Throughout the study, approximately half of the cases of anxiety also suffered depression. CONCLUSION: The relationships between anxiety and depression remained similar over time with the exception that depression came to resemble anxiety as a disorder to which women were significantly more vulnerable than men. Social and historical factors should be investigated to assess their relevance to this change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it