TY - JOUR
T1 - Cultural concepts of distress and psychiatric disorders
T2 - Literature review and research recommendations for global mental health epidemiology
AU - Kohrt, Brandon A.
AU - Rasmussen, Andrew
AU - Kaiser, Bonnie N.
AU - Haroz, Emily E.
AU - Maharjan, Sujen M.
AU - Mutamba, Byamah B.
AU - De Jong, Joop T.V.M.
AU - Hinton, Devon E.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health [U19 MH095687-01S1, South Asian Hub for Advocacy, Research & Education on Mental Health (SHARE), Principal Investigators: Vikram Patel and Atif Rahman] supplement for continuity of research experience during clinical training provided to the first author (BAK). Author BNK is supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [Grant No. 0234618].
PY - 2014/4
Y1 - 2014/4
N2 - Background: Burgeoning global mental health endeavors have renewed debates about cultural applicability of psychiatric categories. This study's goal is to review strengths and limitations of literature comparing psychiatric categories with cultural concepts of distress (CCD) such as cultural syndromes, culture-bound syndromes, and idioms of distress. Methods: The Systematic Assessment of Quality in Observational Research (SAQOR) was adapted based on cultural psychiatry principles to develop a Cultural Psychiatry Epidemiology version (SAQOR-CPE), which was used to rate quality of quantitative studies comparing CCD and psychiatric categories. A meta-analysis was performed for each psychiatric category. Results: Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria, with 18 782 unique participants. Primary objectives of the studies included comparing CCD and psychiatric disorders (51%), assessing risk factors for CCD (18%) and instrument validation (16%). Only 27% of studies met SAQOR-CPE criteria for medium quality, with the remainder low or very low quality. Only 29% of studies employed representative samples, 53% used validated outcome measures, 44% included function assessments and 44% controlled for confounding. Meta-analyses for anxiety, depression, PTSD and somatization revealed high heterogeneity (I2 > 75%). Only general psychological distress had low heterogeneity (I2 = 8%) with a summary effect odds ratio of 5.39 (95% CI 4.71-6.17). Associations between CCD and psychiatric disorders were influenced by methodological issues, such as validation designs (β = 16.27, 95%CI 12.75-19.79) and use of CCD multi-item checklists (β = 6.10, 95%CI 1.89-10.31). Higher quality studies demonstrated weaker associations of CCD and psychiatric disorders. Conclusions: Cultural concepts of distress are not inherently unamenable to epidemiological study. However, poor study quality impedes conceptual advancement and service application. With improved study design and reporting using guidelines such as the SAQOR-CPE, CCD research can enhance detection of mental health problems, reduce cultural biases in diagnostic criteria and increase cultural salience of intervention trial outcomes.
AB - Background: Burgeoning global mental health endeavors have renewed debates about cultural applicability of psychiatric categories. This study's goal is to review strengths and limitations of literature comparing psychiatric categories with cultural concepts of distress (CCD) such as cultural syndromes, culture-bound syndromes, and idioms of distress. Methods: The Systematic Assessment of Quality in Observational Research (SAQOR) was adapted based on cultural psychiatry principles to develop a Cultural Psychiatry Epidemiology version (SAQOR-CPE), which was used to rate quality of quantitative studies comparing CCD and psychiatric categories. A meta-analysis was performed for each psychiatric category. Results: Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria, with 18 782 unique participants. Primary objectives of the studies included comparing CCD and psychiatric disorders (51%), assessing risk factors for CCD (18%) and instrument validation (16%). Only 27% of studies met SAQOR-CPE criteria for medium quality, with the remainder low or very low quality. Only 29% of studies employed representative samples, 53% used validated outcome measures, 44% included function assessments and 44% controlled for confounding. Meta-analyses for anxiety, depression, PTSD and somatization revealed high heterogeneity (I2 > 75%). Only general psychological distress had low heterogeneity (I2 = 8%) with a summary effect odds ratio of 5.39 (95% CI 4.71-6.17). Associations between CCD and psychiatric disorders were influenced by methodological issues, such as validation designs (β = 16.27, 95%CI 12.75-19.79) and use of CCD multi-item checklists (β = 6.10, 95%CI 1.89-10.31). Higher quality studies demonstrated weaker associations of CCD and psychiatric disorders. Conclusions: Cultural concepts of distress are not inherently unamenable to epidemiological study. However, poor study quality impedes conceptual advancement and service application. With improved study design and reporting using guidelines such as the SAQOR-CPE, CCD research can enhance detection of mental health problems, reduce cultural biases in diagnostic criteria and increase cultural salience of intervention trial outcomes.
KW - Culture
KW - Developing countries
KW - Epidemiologic methods
KW - Global mental health
KW - Mental disorders
KW - Meta-analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899808905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899808905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/ije/dyt227
DO - 10.1093/ije/dyt227
M3 - Article
C2 - 24366490
AN - SCOPUS:84899808905
SN - 0300-5771
VL - 43
SP - 365
EP - 406
JO - International journal of epidemiology
JF - International journal of epidemiology
IS - 2
M1 - dyt227
ER -