Estimating the Burden of Common Mental Disorders Attributable to Lifestyle Factors: Protocol for the Global Burden of Disease Lifestyle and Mental Disorder (GLAD) Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) collects and calculates risk-outcome data for modifiable lifestyle exposures (eg, dietary intake) and physical health outcomes (eg, cancers). These estimates form a critical digital resource tool, the GBD VizHub data visualization tool, for governments and policy makers to guide local, regional, and global health decisions. Despite evidence showing the contributions of lifestyle exposures to common mental disorders (CMDs), such as depression and anxiety, GBD does not currently generate these lifestyle exposure-mental disorder outcome pairings. This gap is due to a lack of uniformly collected and analyzed data about these exposures as they relate to CMDs. Such data are required to quantify whether, and to what degree, the global burden of CMDs could be reduced by targeting lifestyle factors at regional and global levels. We have established the Global burden of disease Lifestyle And mental Disorder (GLAD) Taskforce to address this gap. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to generate the necessary estimates to afford the inclusion of lifestyle exposures as risk factors for CMDs in the GBD study and the GBD digital visualization tools, initially focusing on the relationship between dietary intake and CMDs. METHODS: The GLAD project is a multicenter, collaborative effort to integrate lifestyle exposures as risk factors for CMDs in the GBD study. To achieve this aim, global epidemiological studies will be recruited to conduct harmonized data analyses estimating the risk, odds, or hazards of lifestyle exposures with CMD outcomes. Initially, these models will focus on the relationship between dietary intake, as defined by the GBD, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: As of August 2024, 18 longitudinal cohort studies from 9 countries (Australia: n=4; Brazil: n=1; France: n=1; Italy: n=3; The Netherlands: n=3; New Zealand: n=1; South Africa: n=1; Spain: n=1; and United Kingdom: n=3) have agreed to participate in the GLAD project. CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive, collaborative approach allows for the concurrent execution of a harmonized statistical analysis protocol across multiple, internationally renowned epidemiological cohorts. These results will be used to inform the GBD study and incorporate lifestyle risk factors for CMD in the GBD digital platform. Consequently, given the worldwide influence of the GBD study, findings from the GLAD project can offer valuable insights to policy makers worldwide around lifestyle-based mental health care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/65576.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.058 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.016 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".