Suppr超能文献

美国的职业与重度抑郁症、酗酒和药物滥用的患病率

Occupation and the prevalence of major depression, alcohol, and drug abuse in the United States.

作者信息

Roberts R E, Lee E S

机构信息

School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston 77225.

出版信息

Environ Res. 1993 May;61(2):266-78. doi: 10.1006/enrs.1993.1071.

Abstract

These data from the ECA research program clearly indicate considerable variation in prevalence among different occupational groups in the United States for major depression, alcohol abuse/dependence, and drug abuse/dependence. For example, the crude lifetime prevalences for depression ranged from 0.7 to 8.6 per 100; for alcohol it was 7.5 to 32.6, and for drugs it was 3.1 to 10.5. The results also indicate that some occupations are associated with much higher rates of ADM problems. By way of illustration, the 6-month crude prevalence of major depression for the total sample of employed persons 18-64 years of age was 2.9. Six of the occupational groups had prevalences which exceeded this rate. The overall 6-month prevalence of alcohol abuse/dependence was 5.8, and six occupational groups had prevalences in excess of this. Similarly, the overall 6-month prevalence was 2.6 for drug abuse/dependence, and five occupational groups had prevalences which exceeded this. Translated into terms of relative risk, it is clear that among the occupational groups some are at markedly increased risk of ADM disorders. For these comparisons, we used as the baseline group in logistic regression analyses, Job 1, composed of executive, administrative, and managerial occupations. This group is the first in the Census classification, had crude rates near the overall prevalence rates for depression, alcohol, and drugs, and is also one of the occupational categories with the highest prestige. Logistic regression analyses were done with and without controls for differences among occupational groups in gender, age, and educational level. As might be expected, adjustment in general narrowed differences in prevalence among occupational groups, and even on occasion, changed the rank order of groups slightly. However, in general, those groups with higher odds ratios based on crude rates also had higher adjusted odds ratios. Table 6 summarizes our findings, based on the adjusted odds ratios. In this table, we list occupational groups which had a relative risk of 30% or greater above baseline (Job 1), for both 6 month and lifetime prevalences, for each of the three ADM disorders. As can be seen, there is virtually no overlap between risk of depression, on the one hand, and risk of alcohol or drug abuse. The exceptions are Job 4 (sales) which ranked third for major depression and second for alcohol abuse in terms of 6-month prevalence, and Job 9 (farming, fishing, forestry), which had the [table: see text] highest lifetime risk for major depression and the second-highest 6-month risk for drug abuse/dependence.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

摘要

来自ECA研究项目的这些数据清楚地表明,在美国,不同职业群体中重度抑郁症、酒精滥用/依赖和药物滥用/依赖的患病率存在相当大的差异。例如,抑郁症的终生粗患病率每100人中有0.7至8.6人;酒精为7.5至32.6人,药物为3.1至10.5人。结果还表明,某些职业与更高的ADM问题发生率相关。举例来说,18至64岁就业人员总样本中重度抑郁症的6个月粗患病率为2.9。六个职业群体的患病率超过了这一比率。酒精滥用/依赖的总体6个月患病率为5.8,六个职业群体的患病率超过了这一数字。同样,药物滥用/依赖的总体6个月患病率为2.6,五个职业群体的患病率超过了这一数字。换算成相对风险来看,很明显在职业群体中,有些群体患ADM疾病的风险显著增加。在这些比较中,我们在逻辑回归分析中使用由行政、管理和经理职业组成 的工作1组作为基线组。该组在人口普查分类中排第一,抑郁症、酒精和药物的粗发病率接近总体患病率,并且也是声望最高的职业类别之一。在有和没有控制职业群体在性别、年龄和教育水平方面差异的情况下进行了逻辑回归分析。不出所料,一般来说,调整缩小了职业群体间患病率的差异,甚至有时还略微改变了群体的排名顺序。然而,总体而言,那些基于粗发病率具有较高比值比的群体,其调整后的比值比也较高。表6总结了基于调整后比值比的我们的研究结果。在该表中,我们列出了在三种ADM疾病的6个月和终生患病率方面,相对风险比基线(工作1组)高出30%或更多的职业群体。可以看出,抑郁症风险与酒精或药物滥用风险之间几乎没有重叠。例外情况是工作4组(销售),在6个月患病率方面,重度抑郁症排第三,酒精滥用排第二;以及工作9组(农业、渔业、林业),其重度抑郁症的终生风险最高,药物滥用/依赖的6个月风险排第二高。(摘要截选至400字)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验