ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The World Health Organization's (WHO's) proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition (ICD-11) includes several major revisions to substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses. It is essential to ensure the consistency of within-subject diagnostic findings throughout countries, languages and cultures. To date, agreement analyses between different SUD diagnostic systems have largely been based in high-income countries and clinical samples rather than general population samples. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of, and concordance between diagnoses using the ICD-11, The WHO's ICD 10th edition (ICD-10) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th and 5th editions (DSM-IV, DSM-5); the prevalence of disaggregated ICD-10 and ICD-11 symptoms; and variation in clinical features across diagnostic groups. DESIGN: Cross-sectional household surveys. SETTING: Representative surveys of the general population in 10 countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Iraq, Northern Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Spain) of the World Mental Health Survey Initiative. PARTICIPANTS: Questions about SUDs were asked of 12 182 regular alcohol users and 1788 cannabis users. MEASUREMENTS: Each survey used the World Mental Health Survey Initiative version of the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview version 3.0 (WMH-CIDI). FINDINGS: Among regular alcohol users, prevalence (95% confidence interval) of life-time ICD-11 alcohol harmful use and dependence were 21.6% (20.5-22.6%) and 7.0% (6.4-7.7%), respectively. Among cannabis users, 9.3% (7.4-11.1%) met criteria for ICD-11 harmful use and 3.2% (2.3-4.0%) for dependence. For both substances, all comparisons of ICD-11 with ICD-10 and DSM-IV showed excellent concordance (all κ ≥ 0.9). Concordance between ICD-11 and DSM-5 ranged from good (for SUD and comparisons of dependence and severe SUD) to poor (for comparisons of harmful use and mild SUD). Very low endorsement rates were observed for new ICD-11 feature for harmful use ('harm to others'). Minimal variation in clinical features was observed across diagnostic systems. CONCLUSIONS: The World Health Organization's proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition (ICD-11) classifications for substance use disorder diagnoses are highly consistent with the ICD 10th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV). Concordance between ICD-11 and the DSM 5th edition (DSM-5) varies, due largely to low levels of agreement for the ICD harmful use and DSM-5 mild use disorder. Diagnostic validity of self-reported 'harm to others' is questionable.
Subject(s)
Alcoholism/diagnosis , Marijuana Abuse/diagnosis , Alcoholism/classification , Alcoholism/epidemiology , Argentina/epidemiology , Australia/epidemiology , Brazil/epidemiology , Colombia/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Humans , International Classification of Diseases , Iraq/epidemiology , Marijuana Abuse/classification , Marijuana Abuse/epidemiology , Northern Ireland/epidemiology , Poland/epidemiology , Portugal/epidemiology , Romania/epidemiology , Spain/epidemiology , Substance-Related Disorders/classification , Substance-Related Disorders/diagnosis , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Unexpected death of a loved one (UD) is the most commonly reported traumatic experience in cross-national surveys. However, much remains to be learned about posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after this experience. The WHO World Mental Health (WMH) survey initiative provides a unique opportunity to address these issues. METHODS: Data from 19 WMH surveys (n = 78,023; 70.1% weighted response rate) were collated. Potential predictors of PTSD (respondent sociodemographics, characteristics of the death, history of prior trauma exposure, history of prior mental disorders) after a representative sample of UDs were examined using logistic regression. Simulation was used to estimate overall model strength in targeting individuals at highest PTSD risk. RESULTS: PTSD prevalence after UD averaged 5.2% across surveys and did not differ significantly between high-income and low-middle income countries. Significant multivariate predictors included the deceased being a spouse or child, the respondent being female and believing they could have done something to prevent the death, prior trauma exposure, and history of prior mental disorders. The final model was strongly predictive of PTSD, with the 5% of respondents having highest estimated risk including 30.6% of all cases of PTSD. Positive predictive value (i.e., the proportion of high-risk individuals who actually developed PTSD) among the 5% of respondents with highest predicted risk was 25.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence and meaningful risk of PTSD make UD a major public health issue. This study provides novel insights into predictors of PTSD after this experience and suggests that screening assessments might be useful in identifying high-risk individuals for preventive interventions.
Subject(s)
Attitude to Death , Death , Health Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Life Change Events , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/epidemiology , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Asia/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant , Logistic Models , Male , Prevalence , Risk , Socioeconomic Factors , South Africa/epidemiology , South America/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
CONTEXT: The scarcity of cross-national reports and the changes in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual version 5 (DSM-5) regarding panic disorder (PD) and panic attacks (PAs) call for new epidemiological data on PD and PAs and its subtypes in the general population. OBJECTIVE: To present representative data about the cross-national epidemiology of PD and PAs in accordance with DSM-5 definitions. DESIGN AND SETTING: Nationally representative cross-sectional surveys using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview version 3.0. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents (n = 142,949) from 25 high, middle, and lower-middle income countries across the world aged 18 years or older. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PD and presence of single and recurrent PAs. RESULTS: Lifetime prevalence of PAs was 13.2% (SE 0.1%). Among persons that ever had a PA, the majority had recurrent PAs (66.5%; SE 0.5%), while only 12.8% fulfilled DSM-5 criteria for PD. Recurrent PAs were associated with a subsequent onset of a variety of mental disorders (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.8-2.2) and their course (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.2-2.4) whereas single PAs were not (OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.9-1.3 and OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.8). Cross-national lifetime prevalence estimates were 1.7% (SE 0.0%) for PD with a median age of onset of 32 (IQR 20-47). Some 80.4% of persons with lifetime PD had a lifetime comorbid mental disorder. CONCLUSIONS: We extended previous epidemiological data to a cross-national context. The presence of recurrent PAs in particular is associated with subsequent onset and course of mental disorders beyond agoraphobia and PD, and might serve as a generic risk marker for psychopathology.