DESIGN: A 2 (Culture; Malay, British) × 2 (Mood; depressed, control) cross-sectional design using a card sort task and self-report measures was used.
METHODS: Malay individuals with MDD or no history of MDD completed the life-structure card-sorting task, which provided a novel method for investigating organizational structure of the life narrative. These data were compared to previously collected data in which British individuals with MDD or without MDD had completed the same task within the same experimental protocol.
RESULTS: Pan-culturally those with MDD had greater negativity (i.e., used more negative attributes), negative redundancy (i.e., used the same negative attributes repeatedly across life chapters) and negative emodiversity (i.e., had greater variety and relative abundance of negative attributes), and reduced positive redundancy (i.e., used the same positive attributes repeatedly across chapters) in their structuring relative to controls. While the British MDD group had greater compartmentalization (i.e., the negative and positive attributes were clustered separately across different chapters) than British controls, the Malay MDD group had lower levels of compartmentalization than Malay controls.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest culture may shape aspects of the autobiographical life structure in MDD.
PRACTITIONER POINTS: The majority of the literature investigating depression pertains to individuals from European Western cultures, despite recognition that depression ranks as one of the most debilitating diseases worldwide. This raises questions as to whether current depression models and interventions can be applied universally or whether they are limited to European Western groups. The current study found that pan-culturally those with MDD had similar structuring of their life story relative to controls. However, there were some cultural differences that need to be considered (e.g., Malay individuals provided less detailed, less elaborate and less emotionally diverse life stories and while the British MDD group had greater compartmentalization than British controls, the Malay MDD group had lower levels of compartmentalization than Malay controls). Limitations of the study included group differences in gender and mood at the time of testing. Cultural differences in the number of attributes used may have influenced findings. Only the Malay group completed the individualism-collectivism measure.
DESIGN AND METHODS: Four PPSs, including headache, chest pain, low back pain, and muscle pain, and subjective depressive symptoms were assessed using the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised.
FINDINGS: Out of 528 participants, 390 (73.9%) had at least one PPS. After adjusting for sex, depression severity, disability, fatigue, physical health status, and mental health status, PPSs were found to be associated with crying easily, blaming oneself, feeling lonely, feeling blue, and worrying too much.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Almost three-quarters of Asian patients with MDD experience PPSs. PPSs are associated with some subjective feelings of depression.
METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of the Cognitive Dysfunction in Asian patients with Depression (CogDAD) study. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the most common cognitive complaints by patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine variables associated with perceived cognitive dysfunction (Perceived Deficit Questionnaire-Depression, PDQ-D).
RESULTS: The CogDAD study population is comprised of MDD patients with mild-to-moderate depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item [PHQ-9]: 11.3 ± 6.9) who reported perceived cognitive dysfunction (PDQ-D = 22.6 ± 16.2). The most common cognitive complaints were: mind drifting (42.3%), trouble making decision (39.6%) and trouble concentrating (38.0%). Predictors of perceived cognitive dysfunction were: being Southeast Asians (vs. Taiwanese) (p
METHOD: Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) were conducted in Australian (between 1988 and 1990 and between 2010 and 2013) and Amish (between May 2010 and December 2011) samples in whom the Seasonal Pattern Assessment Questionnaire (SPAQ) had been administered, and the results were meta-analyzed in a total sample of 4,156 individuals. Genetic risk scores based on results from prior large GWAS studies of bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder (MDD), and schizophrenia were calculated to test for overlap in risk between psychiatric disorders and seasonality.
RESULTS: The most significant association was with rs11825064 (P = 1.7 × 10⁻⁶, β = 0.64, standard error = 0.13), an intergenic single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) found on chromosome 11. The evidence for overlap in risk factors was strongest for schizophrenia and seasonality, with the schizophrenia genetic profile scores explaining 3% of the variance in log-transformed global seasonality scores. Bipolar disorder genetic profile scores were also associated with seasonality, although at much weaker levels (minimum P value = 3.4 × 10⁻³), and no evidence for overlap in risk was detected between MDD and seasonality.
CONCLUSIONS: Common SNPs of large effect most likely do not exist for seasonality in the populations examined. As expected, there were overlapping genetic risk factors for bipolar disorder (but not MDD) with seasonality. Unexpectedly, the risk for schizophrenia and seasonality had the largest overlap, an unprecedented finding that requires replication in other populations and has potential clinical implications considering overlapping cognitive deficits in seasonal affective disorders and schizophrenia.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind RCT (October 2017 -May 2019) with Chin (39.3%), Kachin (15.7%), and Rohingya (45%) refugees living in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The trial included 170 participants receiving six 45-minute weekly sessions of IAT (97.6% retention, 4 lost to follow-up) and 161 receiving a multicomponent CBT also involving six 45-minute weekly sessions (96.8% retention, 5 lost to follow-up). Participants (mean age: 30.8 years, SD = 9.6) had experienced and/or witnessed an average 10.1 types (SD = 5.9, range = 1-27) of traumatic events. We applied a single-blind design in which independent assessors of pre- and posttreatment indices were masked in relation to participants' treatment allocation status. Primary outcomes were symptom scores of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Complex PTSD (CPTSD), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the 5 scales of the Adaptive Stress Index (ASI), and a measure of resilience (the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale [CDRS]). Compared to CBT, an intention-to-treat analysis (n = 331) at 6-week posttreatment follow-up demonstrated greater reductions in the IAT arm for all common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms and ASI domains except for ASI-3 (injustice), as well as increases in the resilience scores. Adjusted average treatment effects assessing the differences in posttreatment scores between IAT and CBT (with baseline scores as covariates) were -0.08 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.02, p = 0.012) for PTSD, -0.07 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.01) for CPTSD, -0.07 for MDD (95% CI: -0.13 to -0.01, p = 0.025), 0.16 for CDRS (95% CI: 0.06-0.026, p ≤ 0.001), -0.12 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p ≤ 0.001) for ASI-1 (safety/security), -0.10 for ASI-2 (traumatic losses; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02, p = 0.02), -0.03 for ASI-3 (injustice; (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.06, p = 0.513), -0.12 for ASI-4 (role/identity disruptions; 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.04, p ≤ 0.001), and -0.18 for ASI-5 (existential meaning; 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.05, p ≤ 0.001). Compared to CBT, the IAT group had larger effect sizes for all indices (except for resilience) including PTSD (IAT, d = 0.93 versus CBT, d = 0.87), CPTSD (d = 1.27 versus d = 1.02), MDD (d = 1.4 versus d = 1.11), ASI-1 (d = 1.1 versus d = 0.85), ASI-2 (d = 0.81 versus d = 0.66), ASI-3 (d = 0.49 versus d = 0.42), ASI-4 (d = 0.86 versus d = 0.67), and ASI-5 (d = 0.72 versus d = 0.53). No adverse events were recorded for either therapy. Limitations include a possible allegiance effect (the authors inadvertently conveying disproportionate enthusiasm for IAT in training and supervision), cross-over effects (counsellors applying elements of one therapy in delivering the other), and the brief period of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBT, IAT showed superiority in improving mental health symptoms and adaptative stress from baseline to 6-week posttreatment. The differences in scores between IAT and CBT were modest and future studies conducted by independent research teams need to confirm the findings.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered under Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (http://www.anzctr.org.au/). The trial registration number is: ACTRN12617001452381.