Gender-related explanatory models of depression: A critical evaluation of medical articles

被引:51
作者
Hammarstrom, A. [1 ]
Lehti, A. [1 ]
Danielsson, U. [1 ]
Bengs, C. [2 ]
Johansson, E. E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Umea Univ, Div Family Med, Dept Publ Hlth & Clin Med, SE-90185 Umea, Sweden
[2] Umea Univ, Umea Ctr Gender Studies Med, Res Programme Challenging Gender, SE-90185 Umea, Sweden
关键词
Public health; Depression; Gender; Explanatory models; Bibliometric methods; Intersectionality; Multifactoriality; COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENTAL MODEL; MAJOR DEPRESSION;
D O I
10.1016/j.puhe.2009.09.010
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
100235 [预防医学];
摘要
Objectives: Although research has consistently shown a higher prevalence of depression among women compared with men, there is a lack of consensus regarding explanatory factors for these gender-related differences. The aim of this paper was to analyse the scientific quality of different gender-related explanatory models of depression in the medical database PubMed. Study design: Qualitative and quantitative analyses of PubMed articles. Methods: In a database search in PubMed for 2002, 82 articles on gender and depression were selected and analysed with qualitative and quantitative content analyses. In total, 10 explanatory factors and four explanatory models were found. The ISI Web of Science database was searched in order to obtain the citation number and journal impact factor for each article. Results: The most commonly used gender-related explanatory model for depression was the biomedical model (especially gonadal hormones), followed by the sociocultural and psychological models. Compared with the other models, the biomedical model scored highest on bibliometric measures but lowest on measures of multifactorial dimensions and differences within the group of men/women. Conclusion: The biomedical model for explaining gender-related aspects of depression had the highest quality when bibliometric methods were used. However, the sociocultural and psychological models had higher quality than the biomedical model when multifactoriality and intersectionality were analysed. There is a need for the development of new methods in order to evaluate the scientific quality of research. (C) 2009 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:689 / 693
页数:5
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]
What's in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research(ers) [J].
Cheek, J ;
Garnham, B ;
Quan, J .
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2006, 16 (03) :423-435
[2]
Conrad P, 2004, J HEALTH SOC BEHAV, V45, P158
[3]
The demise of the randomised controlled trial: Bibliometric study of the German-language health care literature, 1948 to 2004 [J].
Galandi D. ;
Schwarzer G. ;
Antes G. .
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6 (1)
[4]
Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness [J].
Graneheim, UH ;
Lundman, B .
NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2004, 24 (02) :105-112
[5]
Halcomb E.J., 2005, Nurse Researcher, V13, P71
[6]
The integration of gender in medical research and education-obstacles and possibilities from a Nordic perspective [J].
Hammarström, A .
WOMEN & HEALTH, 2003, 37 (04) :121-133
[7]
HAMMARSTROM A, 2002, GENDER SOCIAL INEQUA
[8]
Gender and bipolar illness [J].
Hendrick, V ;
Altshuler, LL ;
Gitlin, MJ ;
Delrahim, S ;
Hammen, C .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2000, 61 (05) :393-396
[9]
Toward a comprehensive developmental model for major depression in men [J].
Kendler, KS ;
Gardner, CO ;
Prescott, CA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2006, 163 (01) :115-124
[10]
Toward a comprehensive developmental model for major depression in women [J].
Kendler, KS ;
Gardner, CO ;
Prescott, CA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2002, 159 (07) :1133-1145