↓ Skip to main content

Social determinants of depression and suicidal behaviour in the Caribbean: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Social determinants of depression and suicidal behaviour in the Caribbean: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4371-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine R Brown, Ian R Hambleton, Natasha Sobers-Grannum, Shawn M Hercules, Nigel Unwin, E Nigel Harris, Rainford Wilks, Marlene MacLeish, Louis Sullivan, Madhuvanti M Murphy, The U.S. Caribbean Alliance for Health Disparities Research Group (USCAHDR)

Abstract

Depressive disorder is the largest contributor to years lived with disability in the Caribbean, adding 948 per 100,000 in 2013. Depression is also a major risk factor for suicidal behaviour. Social inequalities influence the occurrence of depression, yet little is known about the social inequalities of this condition in the Caribbean. In support of the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of the role of social determinants on depression and its suicidal behaviours in the Caribbean. Eight databases were searched for observational studies reporting associations between social determinants and depression frequency, severity, or outcomes. Based on the PROGRESS-plus checklist, we considered 9 social determinant groups (of 15 endpoints) for 6 depression endpoints, totalling 90 possible ways ('relationship groups') to explore the role of social determinants on depression. Studies with ≥50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2014 were eligible. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines. Results were planned as a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if possible. From 3951 citations, 55 articles from 45 studies were included. Most were classified as serious risk of bias. Fifty-seven relationship groups were reported by the 55 included articles, leaving 33 relationship groups (37%) without an evidence base. Most associations were reported for gender, age, residence, marital status, and education. Depression, its severity, and its outcomes were more common among females (except suicide which was more common among males), early and middle adolescents (among youth), and those with lower levels of education. Marriage emerged as both a risk and protective factor for depression score and prevalence, while several inequality relationships in Haiti were in contrast to typical trends. The risk of bias and few numbers of studies within relationship groups restricted the synthesis of Caribbean evidence on social inequalities of depression. Along with more research focusing on regional social inequalities, attempts at standardizing reporting guidelines for observational studies of inequality and studies examining depression is necessitated. This review offers as a benchmark to prioritize future research into the social determinants of depression frequency and outcomes in the Caribbean.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 190 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Researcher 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 70 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 13%
Social Sciences 19 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 25 13%
Unknown 75 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2017.
All research outputs
#8,452,325
of 25,382,250 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,100
of 17,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,096
of 322,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#157
of 260 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,250 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,077 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 260 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.