Reavley Nicola, Jorm Anthony, Carbone Stephen, Tsiamis Ellie, Morgan Amy Joanna
Centre for Mental Health and Community Wellbeing, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Prevention United, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
BMJ Public Health. 2025 Sep 9;3(2):e003040. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2025-003040. eCollection 2025.
There is growing concern about the increasing use of psychiatric terminology to describe behaviours and experiences that do not meet criteria for diagnosis of a mental illness. We aimed to conduct a nationally representative online cross-sectional survey exploring diagnostic labelling of vignettes describing a person with different levels of depression symptoms or risk and whether this was associated with mental health-related intended actions and psychological distress.
Australian respondents (n=6142) were randomly assigned to read one of five vignettes describing a person in the following situations: (1) currently well (family history of depression), (2) currently well (own history of depression), (3) subthreshold depressive symptoms, (4) major depressive disorder (MDD) and (5) MDD with suicidal thoughts. They were asked what, if anything, was wrong with this person. Further questions covered intentions to seek professional help or take self-help actions; psychological distress and personal experience of depression.
Labelling non-clinical or subthreshold vignettes with diagnostic labels was relatively common, with a depression label applied by 19.8% [99% CI 16.6, 23.6], 31.3% [99% CI 27.4, 35.6], 47.7% [99% CI 43.4, 52.0], 68.6 [99% CI 64.5, 72.5] and 77.2 [99% CI 73.1, 80.7] of respondents to vignettes 1 to 5 respectively. Younger people were more likely to give a depression label. Across all vignettes, labelling was associated with a greater likelihood of intentions to speak to a health professional or take medication but not with psychological distress or reductions in effective self-help.
Findings suggest that public messages should have a more nuanced approach, making it clear that, for some mental health difficulties, non-medical solutions may be more appropriate, while also taking care not to increase the proportion of people with more severe problems who meet diagnostic criteria but do not seek help.
人们越来越担心精神科术语被越来越多地用于描述不符合精神疾病诊断标准的行为和经历。我们旨在开展一项具有全国代表性的在线横断面调查,探究对描述具有不同程度抑郁症状或风险的人物的 vignette 的诊断标签,以及这是否与心理健康相关的预期行动和心理困扰有关。
澳大利亚受访者(n = 6142)被随机分配阅读五个 vignette 中的一个,这些 vignette 描述了处于以下情况的人物:(1)目前健康(有抑郁症家族史),(2)目前健康(有自身抑郁症病史),(3)亚阈值抑郁症状,(4)重度抑郁症(MDD),(5)有自杀念头的 MDD。他们被问及这个人有什么问题(如果有的话)。进一步的问题涉及寻求专业帮助或采取自助行动的意图;心理困扰和抑郁症的个人经历。
用诊断标签标记非临床或亚阈值 vignette 相对常见, vignette 1 至 5 的受访者中分别有 19.8% [99% CI 16.6, 23.6]、31.3% [99% CI 27.4, 35.6]、47.7% [99% CI 43.4, 52.0]、68.6 [99% CI 64.5, 72.5] 和 77.2 [99% CI 73.1, 80.7] 应用了抑郁标签。年轻人更有可能给出抑郁标签。在所有 vignette 中,贴标签与更有可能打算与健康专业人员交谈或服药相关,但与心理困扰或有效的自助减少无关。
研究结果表明,公共信息应该采用更细致入微的方法,明确指出,对于一些心理健康问题,非医疗解决方案可能更合适,同时也要注意不要增加符合诊断标准但不寻求帮助的更严重问题人群的比例。