Lifetime prevalence estimates of major depression: An indirect estimation method and a quantification of recall bias

The measurement of lifetime prevalence of depression in cross-sectional surveys is biased by recall problems. We estimated it indirectly for two countries using modelling, and quantified the underestimation in the empirical estimate for one. A microsimulation model was used to generate population-based epidemiological measures of depression. We fitted the model to 1-and 12-month prevalence data from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS) and the Australian Adult Mental Health and Wellbeing Survey. The lowest proportion of cases ever having an episode in their life is 30% of men and 40% of women, for both countries. This corresponds to a lifetime prevalence of 20 and 30%, respectively, in a cross-sectional setting (aged 15-65). The NEMESIS data were 38% lower than these estimates. We conclude that modelling enabled us to estimate lifetime prevalence of depression indirectly. This method is useful in the absence of direct measurement, but also showed that direct estimates are underestimated by recall bias and by the cross-sectional setting.

Bias, precision and heritability of self-reported and clinically measured height in Australian twins

Many studies of quantitative and disease traits in human genetics rely upon self-reported measures. Such measures are based on questionnaires or interviews and are often cheaper and more readily available than alternatives. However, the precision and potential bias cannot usually be assessed. Here we report a detailed quantitative genetic analysis of stature. We characterise the degree of measurement error by utilising a large sample of Australian twin pairs (857 MZ, 815 DZ) with both clinical and self-reported measures of height. Self-report height measurements are shown to be more variable than clinical measures. This has led to lowered estimates of heritability in many previous studies of stature. In our twin sample the heritability estimate for clinical height exceeded 90%. Repeated measures analysis shows that 2-3 times as many self-report measures are required to recover heritability estimates similar to those obtained from clinical measures. Bivariate genetic repeated measures analysis of self-report and clinical height measures showed an additive genetic correlation > 0.98. We show that the accuracy of self-report height is upwardly biased in older individuals and in individuals of short stature. By comparing clinical and self-report measures we also showed that there was a genetic component to females systematically reporting their height incorrectly; this phenomenon appeared to not be present in males. The results from the measurement error analysis were subsequently used to assess the effects of error on the power to detect linkage in a genome scan. Moderate reduction in error (through the use of accurate clinical or multiple self-report measures) increased the effective sample size by 22%; elimination of measurement error led to increases in effective sample size of 41%.