Incidence of depression in the Stirling County Study: historical and comparative perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Stirling County Study provides a 40-year perspective on the epidemiology of psychiatric disorders in an adult population in Atlantic Canada. Across samples selected in 1952, 1970 and 1992 current prevalence of depression was stable. This paper concerns time trends in annual incidence as assessed through cohorts selected from the first two samples. METHODS: Consistent interview data were analysed by a computerized diagnostic algorithm. The cohorts consisted of subjects at risk for a first depression: Cohort-1 (N = 575) was followed 1952-1970; Cohort-2 (N = 639) was followed 1970-1992. Life-table methods were used to calculate incidence rates and proportional hazards procedures were used for statistical assessment. RESULTS: Average annual incidence of depression was 4.5 per 1000 for Cohort-1 and 3.7 for Cohort-2. Differences by gender, age and time were not statistically significant. The stability of incidence and the similarity of distribution by gender and age in these two cohorts corresponds to findings about the two early samples. In contrast, current prevalence in the recent sample was distributed differently and showed an increase among women under 45 years. CONCLUSIONS: The stability of the incidence of depression emphasizes the distinctive characteristics of current prevalence in the recent sample and suggests that the dominance of women in rates of depression may have occurred among those born after the Second World War. The results offer partial support for the interpretation of an increase in depression based on retrospective data in other recent studies but they indicate that the increase is specific to women.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".