The Role of Socioeconomic Position in the Association Between Mental Disorders and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Studies are lacking summarizing how the association between mental disorders and mortality varies by socioeconomic position (SEP), particularly considering different aspects of SEP, specific types of mental disorders, and causes of death. Objective: To investigate the role of SEP in the association between mental disorders and mortality and the association between SEP and mortality among people with mental disorders. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched from January 1, 1980, through April 3, 2023, and a snowball search of reference and citation lists was conducted. Study Selection: Inclusion criteria were observational studies estimating the associations between different types of mental disorders and mortality, stratified by SEP and between SEP and mortality in people with mental disorders. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form and assessed the risk of bias using the adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Graphical analyses of the dose-response associations and random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Heterogeneity was explored through meta-regressions and sensitivity analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause and cause-specific mortality. Results: Of 28 274 articles screened, 71 including more than 4 million people with mental disorders met the inclusion criteria (most of which were conducted in high-income countries). The relative associations between mental disorders and mortality were similar across SEP levels. Among people with mental disorders, belonging to the highest rather than the lowest SEP group was associated with lower all-cause mortality (pooled relative risk [RR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.86) and mortality from natural causes (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85) and higher mortality from external causes (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.99-1.41). Heterogeneity was high (I2 = 83% to 99%). Results from subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were consistent with those from the main analyses. Evidence on absolute scales, specific diagnoses, and specific causes of death was scarce. Conclusion and Relevance: This study did not find a sufficient body of evidence that SEP moderated the relative association between mental disorders and mortality, but the underlying mortality rates may differ by SEP group, despite having scarcely been reported. This information gap, together with our findings related to SEP and a possible differential risk between natural and external causes of death in individuals with specific types of mental disorders, warrants further research.

Reliability and structural validity of the Danish Short 4-item version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale for Children (CES-DC4) in adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The 4-item version of the Center of Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-DC4) is a self-reported questionnaire used to measure depressive symptoms in adolescents, but the psychometric properties of the scale have been tested to only a limited extent. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and structural validity of the Danish CES-DC4 in 9th graders. METHODS: Using a sample of 72 adolescents 15 to 17 years of age from five 9th grade classes, the reliability of the CES-DC4 was determined by a test-retest study at a 2-week interval. Descriptive statistics of the adolescents were presented, and internal consistency, structural validity, reliability, and agreement between tests were evaluated. The structural validity of the scale was tested by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the sumscores of the test and retest were presented. RESULTS: The estimated Cronbach's α was 0.61 (95% CI 0.50; 0.71). Inter-item and item-rest correlations indicated that one of the four items (item 20) did not fit well on the scale. CFA found a one-factor model suited for the scale, but the factor loadings indicated that item 20 contributed the least to measure the factor (0.29). Sum scores ranged from 0-9 within a possible interval of 0-12. There were no signs of systematic error of the scale. Limits of Agreement (-3.01; 3.79) were broad. The standard error of measurement (SEM = 1.25 point (95% CI.1.05; 1.47)) and intraclass correlation (ICC(2,1) = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.44; 0.73)) calculations showed low reliability of the CES-DC4. CONCLUSION: This study found low reliability of the CES-DC4 with low estimates of ICC and Cronbach's α. The CES-DC4 needs revision, and removal of item 20 and adding more items from the CES-DC should be considered.