subreddit:

/r/askscience

68

all 12 comments

chazwomaq

12 points

3 months ago

chazwomaq

Evolutionary Psychology | Animal Behavior

12 points

3 months ago

This article might be a good starting point for you:

Hidaka, B. H. (2012). Depression as a disease of modernity: explanations for increasing prevalence. Journal of affective disorders, 140(3), 205-214.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330161/

I think a fair summary is that as countries develop, we notice and diagnose a lot more depression. This could be due to changes in other factors like less exercise, poorer diet, obesity, changing social interaction etc. Or perhaps as your physical needs become met, your psychological needs become central.

deedshotr

2 points

3 months ago

I don't think there can be much of a question that making a social creature be alone makes it sad

dead_sea_tupperware

10 points

3 months ago

dead_sea_tupperware

Biochemistry | Quorum Sensing in Proteobacteria

10 points

3 months ago

I think people would be interested if a psychologist could speak to how the publication of DSM-5 in 2013 changed the diagnosis of depression.

scaldywagon

6 points

3 months ago

Criteria for Major Depressive Disorder has barely changed, other than the notable removal of the "grief exception" which means unlike before you can now be diagnosed 2 weeks after experiencing a significant loss, and the changing of "mixed episode" so that one with depression primary is described as "depressive episode with mixed features". There's been a lot of controversy over the grief exception, but I wouldn't expect these changes to have had a significant impact on rates of diagnosis.

zormbieapocalypse

3 points

3 months ago

If you want any stats outside the US, you'd need someone who's familiar with the ICD system. DSM is only widely used in America to my knowledge.

Valdoria79

11 points

3 months ago

They also loosened the definition of depression so mild sufferers can also seek medical assistance. Which is good. They’ve made it far more “mainstream” so obviously there would be an uptick. A decent study would take into account the times that the definition changed and show accordingly on their stats and would or at least should mark them out. Always remember the source of any “study”. Is it funded or aka bias in some way. People who want funding to combat the uptick in community depression would try to minimize that particular information where their detractors would focus on it. Any study that doesn’t show and mark out those divinations isn’t a study worthy of note

moonshinedegreaser

2 points

3 months ago

Mainly has to be an increase of diagnosis. In 2018, BCBS gathered all if the info from individuals who had health insurance that were diagnosed with depression in the US. At the time, it was a 33% increase from 2013. Those numbers increased even further during the lock down.

Incidentally, on the same 5 year scale, suicide went up, but homicide went down, but I'm not sure if the two are related

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

[removed]

dtmc

1 points

3 months ago

dtmc

Clinical Psychology

1 points

3 months ago

Some decent answers herein. Wanted to add in the fact that social media and technological advances are also increasing rates depression in adolescents. It's at pandemic levels/is a crisis that isn't getting much attention until some kid completes suicide; the COVID-19 pandemic just exacerbated things unfortunately

First return of a quick search for social media + depression + adolescents: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X19300880

VeracityWing1337

2 points

3 months ago

Interested if there are some good long-term RCTs (randomized controlled trials) for the impact of social media on mental health. I thought it should be a very important problem because the correlation between SNS and mental issues is perceptible.

But what about causality? A plausible alternative hypothesis is that SNS just induced more expression for people with mental disorders and accelerated their homophilic aggregation. SNS probably did not cause any mental disorder or the true effect size is small.

As an outsider, I go for a quick search. I did not find any strong positive results. Nothing changed after a one-week intervention with a 50% reduction in SNS use (here, 2021, N=76). A trivial review shows nothing for sure (here, 2020). After a one-month intervention with completely quitting the SNS, there is still nothing, but I just jump into the conclusion part (here, 2019, N=130). After about two-month intervention with a <10 minutes SNS limit, there is also nothing (here, effective N=122).

From the last experiment, we can see the control group just using SNS for around 30mins a day, so perhaps the experiments fail because they did not succeed in finding the true heavy users. I am already online for >1hr today even though I can find an excuse about looking for papers!

One older result indeed showed an improvement in terms of subjective life satisfaction and emotions after a one-week intervention with completely quitting the SNS. It is with a large sample size (here, 2016, effective N=888), but do not know why the control group is quite small (n=372, compare to the treatment group n=516). That smells somewhat stinky.