ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2026
Global and regional burden of major depressive disorder and associated risk factors: analysis from the Global Burden of disease study, 1990-2021.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability worldwide, placing a heavy burden on individuals and healthcare systems. Understanding global and regional epidemiological patterns is essential for designing effective interventions. This study aims to evaluate the burden of MDD and its major risk factors globally and in China, offering evidence for targeted mental health strategies.
methodsWe extracted data on MDD prevalence, incidence, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and selected attributable risk factors between 1990 and 2021 from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) database. Temporal trends were assessed through estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To evaluate the association between socio-demographic development and MDD burden, natural cubic spline regression was fitted, with Spearman rank correlation applied as a sensitivity analysis.
resultsIn 2021, the global MDD incidence rate reached 4,322.65 per 100,000 population, with the highest rate in High-income North America; China's rate (2,717.26 per 100,000) remained below the global average. Between 1990 and 2021, global age-standardized incidence and DALY rates rose slightly (EAPC 0.35% and 0.34%), more slowly in China (0.31% and 0.22%), while absolute case counts increased, strongly influenced by population growth and aging. The SDI-MDD burden association was weak and non-linear. Natural cubic spline analyses indicated non-linear relationships between SDI and age-standardized prevalence, incidence, and DALY rates, while Spearman rank analyses yielded weak positive ecological correlations (all P < 0.001). East Asia and Eastern Europe remained above the fitted SDI-burden trend, whereas Sub-Saharan Africa remained below it. Within the GBD comparative risk assessment framework, childhood maltreatment and intimate partner violence accounted for a substantial proportion of attributable MDD DALY burden, particularly among women.
conclusionThe global MDD burden has remained substantial and has risen gradually, with marked age, gender, and regional disparities. The SDI-burden association appears weak and non-linear, suggesting that socioeconomic development alone does not adequately explain this cross-national variation.These findings highlight the urgent need for region-specific, evidence-based mental health policies focused on prevention and support for vulnerable populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42154271What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.