↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Prevalence of major depressive disorder among hemodialysis patients compared with healthy people in Japan using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence of major depressive disorder among hemodialysis patients compared with healthy people in Japan using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, September 2016
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s106817
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tetsu Tomita, Norio Yasui-Furukori, Norio Sugawara, Kohei Ogasawara, Koki Katagai, Hisao Saito, Kaori Sawada, Ippei Takahashi, Kazuhiko Nakamura

Abstract

We investigated the prevalence of depression in hemodialysis (HD) patients using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies for Depression (CES-D) scale and the Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (SCID) and compared the rates with those of community dwelling people in Japan. A total of 99 patients undergoing HD were recruited. Blood sampling was performed no later than 2 weeks prior to assessment. As a reference group for SCID and CES-D evaluation, 404 age- and sex-matched healthy controls who had participated in the Iwaki Health Promotion Project were included in this study. The SCID and the CES-D scale were administered to all participants to diagnose their depression. Participants who met the criteria of a major depressive episode according to the SCID were classified as SCID depression and the participants whose CES-D score was 16 or higher were classified as CES-D depression. Ninety-nine HD patients completed the evaluation and data collection. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or CES-D scores between HD patients and controls. There were 12 cases of SCID depression in HD patients and four cases in controls. There was a significant difference between HD patients and controls in the prevalence of SCID depression. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to demographic or clinical data. There were 19 HD patients and 24 controls who showed CES-D depression. There was no significant difference between HD patients and controls in the prevalence of CES-D depression. There was a significant difference in potassium level between the two groups, but there were no significant differences in any of the other items. There were significantly more HD patients showing SCID depression than controls in the present study. In clinical settings, the SCID might be useful in surveying cases of depression detected by screening tools among HD patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 11 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Unknown 10 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,901
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,246
of 348,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#68
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.