Darcy J Coulter, Lindsay A Pearce, Matthew Legge, Jesse T Young, David B Preen, Ed Heffernan, Jocelyn Jones, Stuart A Kinner
{"title":"在押成人中精神疾病、物质使用障碍和双重诊断的患病率。","authors":"Darcy J Coulter, Lindsay A Pearce, Matthew Legge, Jesse T Young, David B Preen, Ed Heffernan, Jocelyn Jones, Stuart A Kinner","doi":"10.1186/s12963-025-00408-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorders, and their dual diagnosis is disproportionately high among people in prisons compared to the community. Accurate prevalence estimates are required to inform resourcing of prison health services and reduce the risk of harm to people experiencing these conditions. Existing estimates, where available, often rely on only one data source.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used three data sources - self-reported history of diagnoses, in-prison medical records, and administrative data to estimate the prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis among two large cohorts of non-Indigenous and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australian prisons. We calculated population-weighted proportions of the samples with each condition. Inter-rater reliability metrics inform data source agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The prevalence of mental illness only, substance use disorder only, and dual diagnosis was 17.0% (95%CI 12.0-24.5), 14.8% (95%CI 9.6-18.1), and 44.2% (95%CI 33.2-54.7), respectively, for incarcerated, non-Indigenous adults. For incarcerated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, our corresponding estimates were 7.0% (95%CI 4.3-11.5), 26.8% (95%CI 18.9-33.5), and 40.9% (95%CI 30.1-48.2). These estimates differed significantly from those derived from singular data sources. Individual data sources' agreement was weakest for substance use disorder diagnoses and strongest for dual diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Individual data sources likely have high specificity and low sensitivity, thus under-ascertaining diagnoses. We recommend using multiple data sources to estimate prevalence to ensure adequate ascertainment of these conditions among people in prison and to ensure in-prison and transitional health services are appropriately resourced.</p>","PeriodicalId":51476,"journal":{"name":"Population Health Metrics","volume":"23 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12326852/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis among adults in custody.\",\"authors\":\"Darcy J Coulter, Lindsay A Pearce, Matthew Legge, Jesse T Young, David B Preen, Ed Heffernan, Jocelyn Jones, Stuart A Kinner\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12963-025-00408-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorders, and their dual diagnosis is disproportionately high among people in prisons compared to the community. Accurate prevalence estimates are required to inform resourcing of prison health services and reduce the risk of harm to people experiencing these conditions. Existing estimates, where available, often rely on only one data source.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used three data sources - self-reported history of diagnoses, in-prison medical records, and administrative data to estimate the prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis among two large cohorts of non-Indigenous and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australian prisons. We calculated population-weighted proportions of the samples with each condition. Inter-rater reliability metrics inform data source agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The prevalence of mental illness only, substance use disorder only, and dual diagnosis was 17.0% (95%CI 12.0-24.5), 14.8% (95%CI 9.6-18.1), and 44.2% (95%CI 33.2-54.7), respectively, for incarcerated, non-Indigenous adults. For incarcerated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, our corresponding estimates were 7.0% (95%CI 4.3-11.5), 26.8% (95%CI 18.9-33.5), and 40.9% (95%CI 30.1-48.2). These estimates differed significantly from those derived from singular data sources. Individual data sources' agreement was weakest for substance use disorder diagnoses and strongest for dual diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Individual data sources likely have high specificity and low sensitivity, thus under-ascertaining diagnoses. We recommend using multiple data sources to estimate prevalence to ensure adequate ascertainment of these conditions among people in prison and to ensure in-prison and transitional health services are appropriately resourced.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12326852/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-025-00408-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Population Health Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-025-00408-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis among adults in custody.
Background: The prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorders, and their dual diagnosis is disproportionately high among people in prisons compared to the community. Accurate prevalence estimates are required to inform resourcing of prison health services and reduce the risk of harm to people experiencing these conditions. Existing estimates, where available, often rely on only one data source.
Method: We used three data sources - self-reported history of diagnoses, in-prison medical records, and administrative data to estimate the prevalence of mental illness, substance use disorder, and dual diagnosis among two large cohorts of non-Indigenous and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australian prisons. We calculated population-weighted proportions of the samples with each condition. Inter-rater reliability metrics inform data source agreement.
Results: The prevalence of mental illness only, substance use disorder only, and dual diagnosis was 17.0% (95%CI 12.0-24.5), 14.8% (95%CI 9.6-18.1), and 44.2% (95%CI 33.2-54.7), respectively, for incarcerated, non-Indigenous adults. For incarcerated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, our corresponding estimates were 7.0% (95%CI 4.3-11.5), 26.8% (95%CI 18.9-33.5), and 40.9% (95%CI 30.1-48.2). These estimates differed significantly from those derived from singular data sources. Individual data sources' agreement was weakest for substance use disorder diagnoses and strongest for dual diagnoses.
Conclusions: Individual data sources likely have high specificity and low sensitivity, thus under-ascertaining diagnoses. We recommend using multiple data sources to estimate prevalence to ensure adequate ascertainment of these conditions among people in prison and to ensure in-prison and transitional health services are appropriately resourced.
期刊介绍:
Population Health Metrics aims to advance the science of population health assessment, and welcomes papers relating to concepts, methods, ethics, applications, and summary measures of population health. The journal provides a unique platform for population health researchers to share their findings with the global community. We seek research that addresses the communication of population health measures and policy implications to stakeholders; this includes papers related to burden estimation and risk assessment, and research addressing population health across the full range of development. Population Health Metrics covers a broad range of topics encompassing health state measurement and valuation, summary measures of population health, descriptive epidemiology at the population level, burden of disease and injury analysis, disease and risk factor modeling for populations, and comparative assessment of risks to health at the population level. The journal is also interested in how to use and communicate indicators of population health to reduce disease burden, and the approaches for translating from indicators of population health to health-advancing actions. As a cross-cutting topic of importance, we are particularly interested in inequalities in population health and their measurement.