Depression treatment
Do daily-living limits track depression in older Chinese adults?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Among 9,789 CHARLS adults ≥60, ~43.5% had high-risk CES-D scores; BADL and IADL limitations roughly tripled adjusted depression odds.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
ADL limits track higher late-life depression risk.
In CHARLS older adults, BADL/IADL limitations associated with roughly 2.7× adjusted odds of high-risk depressive symptoms—functional health alongside digital access.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Digital-access disparities, ADL–depression associations, and connectivity maintenance speak to related aging problems without proving one common intervention.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Open questions
Tensions this paper is part of
From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.
Digital-access disparities, ADL–depression associations, and connectivity maintenance speak to related aging problems without proving one common intervention.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — CHARLS wave 4; BADL/IADL limitations vs CES-D-10 depressive symptoms
- N
- N=9789 · Chinese adults aged ≥60 years
- Population
- Community-dwelling older adults in CHARLS
- Outcome
- High-risk depressive symptoms (CES-D-10 ≥10) associated with BADL/IADL limits
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Do daily-living limits track depression in older Chinese adults?
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
9,789 older adults screened from CHARLS wave 4.
Data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS, wave 4) were used, and 9,789 older adults aged 60 years and above were screened.
43.5% high-risk depression; BADL 19.02%; IADL 25.29%.
The prevalence of high-risk depression among older adults was 43.5%, and the rates of limitation in BADL and IADL were 19.02 and 25.29%, respectively.
Key findings
High-risk depression prevalence 43.5%; BADL limitation 19.02%; IADL limitation 25.29%. Limited BADL (OR-adjusted 2.71) and IADL (2.68) associated with higher depression risk vs no limitation.
Methodology
Used CHARLS wave 4 to relate 12-item ADL (BADL/IADL) limitations to CES-D-10 depressive symptoms with generalized linear mixed-effect models.
Limitations
Cross-sectional CHARLS data cannot establish whether disability causes depression or the reverse; residual confounding remains.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.