RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 How is the distribution of psychological distress changing over time? Who is driving these changes? Analysis of the 1958 and 1970 British birth cohorts
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.05.31.21257562
DO 10.1101/2021.05.31.21257562
A1 Gondek, Dawid
A1 Lacey, Rebecca E.
A1 Blanchflower, Dawid G.
A1 Patalay, Praveetha
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/15/2021.05.31.21257562.abstract
AB Aims The main objective of this study was to investigate distributional shifts underlying observed age and cohort differences in mean levels of psychological distress in the 1958 and 1970 British birth cohorts.Methods This study used data from the 1958 National Child Development Study and 1970 British birth cohort (n=24,707). Psychological distress was measured by the Malaise Inventory at ages 23, 33, 42 and 50 in the 1958 cohort and 26, 34, 42 and 46-48 in the 1970 cohort.Results The shifts in the distribution across age appear to be mainly due to changing proportion of those with moderate symptoms, except for midlife (age 42-50) when we observed polarisation in distress – increased proportions of people with no or multiple symptoms. The elevated levels of distress in the 1970 cohort, compared with the 1958 cohort, appeared to be due to an increase in the proportion of individuals with both moderate and high symptoms. For instance, at age 33/34 34.2% experienced no symptoms in 1970 compared with 54.0% in the 1958 cohort, whereas 42.3% endorsed at least two symptoms in the 1970 cohort vs 24.7% in 1958.Conclusions Our study demonstrates the importance of studying not only mean levels of distress over time, but also the underlying shifts in its distribution. Due to the large dispersion of distress scores at any given measurement occasion, understanding the underlying distribution provides a more complete picture of population trends.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (RL & DG, grant number ESP010229/1).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:the National Health Service Research Ethics CommitteeI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesCohort data comply with ESRC data sharing policies, readers can access data via the UK Data Archive (www.data-archive.ac.uk), through a formal request.