The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2008
Do women express and experience psychosis differently from men? Epidemiological evidence from the Australian National Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morgan Vera A, Castle David J, Jablensky Assen V
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine how women differ from men in their expression and experience of psychosis.
METHOD: Using an epidemiological sampling frame, 1090 cases of psychosis (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, affective psychoses, and other psychoses) were randomly selected from a catchment of 1.1 million people as part of the Australian Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders. Women and men were compared with respect to their premorbid functioning, onset and course of illness, symptomatology, levels of disability and service utilization.
RESULTS: Results within diagnostic groupings confirm differences in how men and women experience and express their illness. Within each diagnostic group, women reported better premorbid functioning, a more benign illness course, lower levels of disability and better integration into the community than men. They were also less likely to have a chronic course of illness. There were no significant differences in age at onset. Differences between women across the diagnostic groups were more pronounced than differences between women and men within a diagnostic group. In particular, women with schizophrenia were severely disabled compared to other women.
CONCLUSIONS: These comparisons across diagnostic groupings are among the most systematic and comprehensive in the literature. It is likely that several mechanisms are needed to explain the differences. Greater social integration and functioning in women across diagnostic groups may well reflect culturally and socially determined gender differences. In contrast, variability and attenuated findings with respect to symptom profiles beg the question of biological mechanisms with some degree of specificity.
METHOD: Using an epidemiological sampling frame, 1090 cases of psychosis (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, affective psychoses, and other psychoses) were randomly selected from a catchment of 1.1 million people as part of the Australian Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders. Women and men were compared with respect to their premorbid functioning, onset and course of illness, symptomatology, levels of disability and service utilization.
RESULTS: Results within diagnostic groupings confirm differences in how men and women experience and express their illness. Within each diagnostic group, women reported better premorbid functioning, a more benign illness course, lower levels of disability and better integration into the community than men. They were also less likely to have a chronic course of illness. There were no significant differences in age at onset. Differences between women across the diagnostic groups were more pronounced than differences between women and men within a diagnostic group. In particular, women with schizophrenia were severely disabled compared to other women.
CONCLUSIONS: These comparisons across diagnostic groupings are among the most systematic and comprehensive in the literature. It is likely that several mechanisms are needed to explain the differences. Greater social integration and functioning in women across diagnostic groups may well reflect culturally and socially determined gender differences. In contrast, variability and attenuated findings with respect to symptom profiles beg the question of biological mechanisms with some degree of specificity.