Refining Estimates of Major Depression Incidence and Episode Duration in Canada Using a Monte Carlo Markov Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serial period prevalence estimates for recurrent diseases such as major depression are available more frequently than fully detailed longitudinal data, but it is difficult to estimate incidence and episode duration from such data. Incidence and episode duration are critical decision modeling parameters for recurrent diseases. OBJECTIVES: To reduce bias that would otherwise occur in national incidence and duration-of-episode estimates for major depressive episodes deriving from studies using serial period prevalence data and to illustrate a methodological approach for the estimation of incidence from such studies. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulation was applied to a Markov process describing incidence and recovery from major depressive episodes. RESULTS: The annual incidence and episode duration were found to be 3.1% and 17.1 weeks, respectively. These estimates are expected to be less subject to bias than those generated without modeling. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the usefulness of Markov models for analysis of longitudinal data. The methods described here may be useful for decision modeling and may be generalizable to other chronic diseases.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".