Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Including information about co-morbidity in estimates of disease burden: results from the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys

  • J. Alonso (a1) (a2), G. Vilagut (a1) (a2), S. Chatterji (a3), S. Heeringa (a4), M. Schoenbaum (a5), T. Bedirhan Üstün (a6), S. Rojas-Farreras (a1), M. Angermeyer (a7), E. Bromet (a8), R. Bruffaerts (a9), G. de Girolamo (a10), O. Gureje (a11), J. M. Haro (a12), A. N. Karam (a13), V. Kovess (a14), D. Levinson (a15), Z. Liu (a16), M. E. Medina-Mora (a17), J. Ormel (a18), J. Posada-Villa (a19), H. Uda (a20) and R. C. Kessler (a21)...

The methodology commonly used to estimate disease burden, featuring ratings of severity of individual conditions, has been criticized for ignoring co-morbidity. A methodology that addresses this problem is proposed and illustrated here with data from the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Although the analysis is based on self-reports about one's own conditions in a community survey, the logic applies equally well to analysis of hypothetical vignettes describing co-morbid condition profiles.


Face-to-face interviews in 13 countries (six developing, nine developed; n=31 067; response rate=69.6%) assessed 10 classes of chronic physical and nine of mental conditions. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess overall perceived health. Multiple regression analysis with interactions for co-morbidity was used to estimate associations of conditions with VAS. Simulation was used to estimate condition-specific effects.


The best-fitting model included condition main effects and interactions of types by numbers of conditions. Neurological conditions, insomnia and major depression were rated most severe. Adjustment for co-morbidity reduced condition-specific estimates with substantial between-condition variation (0.24–0.70 ratios of condition-specific estimates with and without adjustment for co-morbidity). The societal-level burden rankings were quite different from the individual-level rankings, with the highest societal-level rankings associated with conditions having high prevalence rather than high individual-level severity.


Plausible estimates of disorder-specific effects on VAS can be obtained using methods that adjust for co-morbidity. These adjustments substantially influence condition-specific ratings.

Corresponding author
*Address for correspondence: R. C. Kessler, Ph.D., Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA. (Email:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

L Marquie , E Raufaste , D Lauque , C Marine , M Ecoiffier , P Sorum (2003). Pain rating by patients and physicians: evidence of systematic pain miscalibration. Pain 102, 289296.

PS Wang , GE Simon , RC Kessler (2008). Making the business case for enhanced depression care: the National Institute of Mental Health-Harvard Work Outcomes Research and Cost-effectiveness Study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 50, 468475.

JG Young , MA Hernan , S Picciotto , JM Robins (2010). Relation between three classes of structural models for the effect of a time-varying exposure on survival. Lifetime Data Analysis 16, 7184.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Psychological Medicine
  • ISSN: 0033-2917
  • EISSN: 1469-8978
  • URL: /core/journals/psychological-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 42 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 220 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.