Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330:705-706 (26 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.38377.616921.F7 (published 31 January 2005)
Debbie A Lawlor, senior lecturer in epidemiology and public health1, Yoav Ben-Shlomo, senior lecturer in clinical epidemiology1, Shah Ebrahim, professor in epidemiology of ageing1, George Davey Smith, professor of clinical epidemiology1, Stephen A Stansfeld, professor of psychiatry2, John W G Yarnell, reader in epidemiology and public health3, John E J Gallacher, senior lecturer in environmental epidemiology4
1 Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR, 2 Centre for Psychiatry, Barts and the London, Queen Mary, University of London, 3 Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, The Queen's University of Belfast, 4 Department of Epidemiology, Statistics and Public Health, University of Wales College of Medicine
Correspondence to: D A Lawlor d.a.lawlor{at}bristol.ac.uk
7.0 mmol/l). In phases II (1984-88), III (1989-93), and IV (1993-7), depressive symptoms were measured by the 30 item general household questionnaire (GHQ). This was validated at phase II in a subgroup (n = 97) by comparison with a clinical interview schedule given by a psychiatrist blinded to the GHQ score.4 Based on receiver operating characteristics, we defined men scoring five or above as having mild to moderate psychological distress.4
At phase I, 2203 (88%) of the men had assessment of insulin resistance or diabetes status. Of the surviving men, the numbers with GHQ data at phases II, III, and IV were 1619/2025 (80%), 1236/1845 (67%), and 1088/1675 (65%).
Insulin resistance and high GHQ score were not associated at any phase of follow up (table). Diabetes at baseline was associated with a tendency to reduced odds of high GHQ at follow up, but, owing to small numbers, these estimates are imprecise. Additional adjustment for smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and adult and childhood social class did not substantively alter any of the findings.
|
Insulin resistance and GHQ scores were not associated in linear regression models with GHQ as a continuous outcome (all P values > 0.2). When fasting insulin was used there was no evidence of an association with GHQ. In cross sectional analyses (exposures and outcomes measured at phase II) there was no association between any HOMA scores, fasting insulin, or diabetes and GHQ score. We also found no associations between body mass index, systolic blood pressure, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, or (logged) triglyceride concentration and GHQ in either prospective or cross sectional analyses (all P values > 0.3).
Our assessment of depression was based on GHQ rather than clinical assessment, and if insulin resistance is only protective against severe depression then this measure may be inadequate to detect an association. Also, any measurement error in our assessment of depression would tend to dilute the results. We validated the score, however, against a clinical interview in a subgroup.4
The contradictory results concerning the association of insulin resistance with depression and suicide warrant further research. Future studies might include trials of the effects on insulin resistance of treating depression. Observational studies should ideally use standardised diagnostic criteria for depression and prospectively assess the association of insulin resistance with differing severities.
|
The Caerphilly study was done by the former Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit (South Wales) and was funded by the Medical Research Council of the United Kingdom. The department of social medicine, University of Bristol, is custodian for the Caerphilly database. We thank the men who participated in the study.
Contributors: YB-S, GDS, SE, and DAL developed the study idea. SAS validated the GHQ data. JY initiated the Caerphilly study, and YB-S, JEJG, and JWGY are responsible for the continued management of the study. DAL did the analysis and wrote the first draft of the paper, and all authors contributed to the final version. DAL and YB-S are guarantors.
Funding: DAL receives a UK Department of Health Career Scientist Award.
Competing interests: None declared.
Ethical approval: Phases I-III of the Caerphilly study were approved by Cardiff Local Research Ethics Committee and later phases by Gwent Research Ethics Committee.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?