Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28614385›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Adaptive and non-adaptive models of depression: A comparison using register data on antidepressant medication during divorce.

Tom Rosenström, Tim W Fawcett, Andrew D Higginson, Niina Metsä-Simola, Edward H Hagen, Alasdair I Houston, Pekka Martikainen

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Mood Disorders in Levothyroxine-Treated Hypothyroid Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Tom RosenströmSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8277-3776
Tim W FawcettSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Andrew D HigginsonSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Niina Metsä-SimolaPopulation Research Unit, Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Edward H HagenDepartment of Anthropology, Washington State University, Vancouver, Washington, United States of America.
Alasdair I HoustonSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Pekka MartikainenPopulation Research Unit, Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Exeter · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBWashington State University Vancouver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Divorce is associated with an increased probability of a depressive episode, but the causation of events remains unclear. Adaptive models of depression propose that depression is a social strategy in part, whereas non-adaptive models tend to propose a diathesis-stress mechanism. We compare an adaptive evolutionary model of depression to three alternative non-adaptive models with respect to their ability to explain the temporal pattern of depression around the time of divorce. Register-based data (304,112 individuals drawn from a random sample of 11% of Finnish people) on antidepressant purchases is used as a proxy for depression. This proxy affords an unprecedented temporal resolution (a 3-monthly prevalence estimates over 10 years) without any bias from non-compliance, and it can be linked with underlying episodes via a statistical model. The evolutionary-adaptation model (all time periods with risk of divorce are depressogenic) was the best quantitative description of the data. The non-adaptive stress-relief model (period before divorce is depressogenic and period afterwards is not) provided the second best quantitative description of the data. The peak-stress model (periods before and after divorce can be depressogenic) fit the data less well, and the stress-induction model (period following divorce is depressogenic and the preceding period is not) did not fit the data at all. The evolutionary model was the most detailed mechanistic description of the divorce-depression link among the models, and the best fit in terms of predicted curvature; thus, it offers most rigorous hypotheses for further study. The stress-relief model also fit very well and was the best model in a sensitivity analysis, encouraging development of more mechanistic models for that hypothesis.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalAlgorithmsModels, PsychologicalAdultAntidepressive AgentsDepressive DisorderDivorceDrug TherapyFemaleFinlandHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesYoung AdultAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID28614385
PMCPMC5470737
OpenAlexW2625861242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.