Current Number of People Receiving Pharmacological Treatment for Mental Disorders

#MentalHealth #PublicHealth #CDC #DataAnalysis #Wellbeing

A significant portion of Americans receive medical treatment for mental health conditions. In 2020, approximately 16.5% of U.S. adults — about 1 in 6 — were taking prescription medication for mental health reasons (e.g., antidepressants, anxiolytics, or other psychiatric drugs). This translates to roughly 40 million people.

More recently, in 2023, data showed that 11.4% of all U.S. adults (15.3% of women and 7.4% of men) were specifically taking antidepressants for depression. In other words, more than 1 in 10 adults in the U.S. is under pharmacological treatment for mood disorders.

These figures highlight the widespread use of medication as part of the mental health approach in the U.S., backed by official agencies like the CDC and NCHS. Among those with a mental illness, about half receive some form of treatment (medication and/or therapy) within a year — demonstrating both high treatment prevalence and persistent care gaps.

Recent Increase in Mental Health Disorders

In recent years, there has been a significant rise in the national prevalence of mental health conditions. For instance:

• The proportion of adults reporting anxiety symptoms rose from 15.6% in 2019 to 18.2% in 2022.
• Those reporting depressive symptoms increased from 18.5% to 21.4% over the same period.

This represents a 15–17% relative increase in just three years. This surge has affected a wide range of demographic groups (by age, gender, socioeconomic level, and region), indicating that the problem is broad-based rather than isolated to any one segment of the population.

Another key indicator, Frequent Mental Distress (FMD) — defined as experiencing 14 or more mentally unhealthy days per month — has also worsened recently. Nationally, FMD prevalence rose from 14.7% in 2021 to 15.9% in 2022. That means about 1 in 6 U.S. adults now experiences frequent or persistent psychological distress, a slight increase from the previous year.

The COVID-19 pandemic greatly exacerbated these issues. CDC studies showed a dramatic spike in anxiety and depression symptoms during 2020. By the end of that year, about 4 in 10 adults reported signs of depression or anxiety — nearly triple the pre-pandemic level. Although the peak levels have somewhat receded, 2022 data confirms that mental health disorders remain elevated compared to the pre-pandemic baseline.

Prevalence Compared to Other Common Chronic Diseases

Comparison of the prevalence of mental health conditions versus other chronic illnesses among U.S. adults (latest data):

• Mental Illnesses: About 23% of adults (nearly 1 in 4) experience some form of mental illness annually. This ranges from mild to severe conditions, illustrating the high psychiatric burden on the population.
• Diabetes: Roughly 11% of Americans (37.3 million people) have diabetes. Among adults, that’s around 14.7% of those aged 18 and over. In comparison, the prevalence of any mental disorder is nearly twice as high as that of diabetes.
• High Blood Pressure (Hypertension): Between 47% and 49% of U.S. adults — almost 1 in 2 — have high blood pressure. Hypertension is extremely common (many cases are managed with medication). While mental health issues are widespread, hypertension still surpasses them in overall adult prevalence.
• Cardiovascular Disease: Around 5–6% of adults have been diagnosed with heart disease (e.g., coronary artery disease). This is significantly lower than the prevalence of mental illness. Even when combining multiple types of heart conditions, the affected share of the population remains well below the prevalence of mental health disorders.

Final Insight

In summary, mental illnesses in the U.S. affect a substantial portion of the population annually — on par with or exceeding several major chronic illnesses such as diabetes and cardiovascular conditions. Only hypertension clearly exceeds mental health issues in terms of sheer prevalence.

This comparison underscores the urgency of prioritizing mental health in public policy. Psychiatric disorders are as common (or more common) than many traditional physical illnesses, reinforcing the need to expand epidemiological monitoring, public education, and system-wide treatment efforts.

CDC Mental Health Indicators (2020–2024)

Mental health is a critical component of public health, influencing quality of life, physical health, and societal well-being. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) tracks key mental health indicators through its Chronic Disease Indicators (CDI) surveillance system, drawing on data from large surveys. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of recent (2020–2024) data on major mental health indicators — such as Frequent Mental Distress, Average Mentally Unhealthy Days, Depression Prevalence, and youth and maternal mental health measures — to illuminate current trends and disparities. We examine data primarily from CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) for adults, the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) for adolescents, and the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) for maternal mental health. Key indicators are explained, recent patterns and changes are highlighted, and differences across sex, age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, disability status, and geography are discussed. Finally, we consider the public health implications of these findings and their relevance for policy and interventions.

Data Sources and Key Indicators

CDC’s Chronic Disease Indicators provide standardized definitions for mental health metrics and offer data at national and state levels (and modelled local estimates). Below we summarize the primary mental health indicators of interest and their definitions:

• Frequent Mental Distress (FMD) — Adult indicator (BRFSS): The percentage of adults (≥18 years) reporting that their mental health was “not good” on 14 or more days in the past 30 days. This threshold (≥14 days) serves as a marker for frequent or persistent mental health problems (e.g. frequent anxiety or depression symptoms). FMD is one of CDC’s Health-Related Quality of Life measures and identifies individuals with more severe recent mental distress.
• Average Mentally Unhealthy Days — Adult indicator (BRFSS): The mean number of days in the past 30 days that adults report their mental health was not good (including stress, depression, or emotional problems). This metric captures the overall mental health burden in terms of days affected. Even though it is based on self-reported health, it has demonstrated good reliability and validity in population surveys.
• Depression Prevalence (Lifetime Diagnosis) — Adult indicator (BRFSS): The percentage of adults who have ever been told by a health professional that they have a depressive disorder (including depression, major depression, dysthymia, or minor depression). This lifetime prevalence reflects diagnosed depression at any point in one’s life, not necessarily current depression. (It does not capture undiagnosed cases or current symptom severity.)
• Current Poor Mental Health (Youth) — Youth indicator (YRBSS): The percentage of high school students (grades 9–12) reporting poor mental health “most of the time or always” during the past 30 days. This is a self-rated mental wellness measure among adolescents, introduced in recent YRBSS surveys to gauge the frequency of feeling mentally unwell. YRBSS also tracks related indicators like persistent feelings of sadness/hopelessness in the past year and suicidal behaviors, which provide additional context on youth mental health.
• Postpartum Depressive Symptoms (PDS) — Maternal indicator (PRAMS): The percentage of women with a recent live birth who report often or always feeling down, depressed, or hopeless, or having little interest or pleasure in doing things since the birth of their child. This reflects self-reported depressive symptoms in the postpartum period (typically within a few months after delivery). It is assessed via PRAMS surveys in participating states. Importantly, this measures symptoms, not a clinical diagnosis, and cannot distinguish new onset versus continuation of pre-pregnancy depression.
• Postpartum Depression Screening — Maternal care indicator (PRAMS): The percentage of women with a recent live birth who report that a healthcare provider assessed their mental well-being (asked if they were feeling down, depressed, anxious, or irritable) since the birth. This indicator reflects the reach of postpartum mental health screening. Screening is recommended by clinical guidelines to identify at-risk mothers. High screening rates are desirable; lower rates may indicate missed opportunities for early intervention.

These indicators are measured via large-scale surveys: BRFSS provides annual data for adults at national- and state-level (with over 400,000 adults surveyed by phone each year), YRBSS provides biennial data on high school students nationally and by state, and PRAMS provides state-level data on postpartum women. Data are typically age-adjusted for comparisons, and where available, CDC’s CDI data portal provides breakdowns by sex, age, and race/ethnicity. In the following sections, we delve into each set of indicators (youth, adult, maternal), highlighting the most recent data (primarily 2020–2022) and notable trends or disparities.

Youth Mental Health Indicators (High School Students)

Adolescent mental health has emerged as a major concern in recent years, with multiple data sources indicating worsening trends. The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) 2021 survey results (released in 2023) underscored an “urgent mental health crisis” among youth. According to YRBSS, 29% of U.S. high school students in 2021 reported poor mental health (felt mentally unwell most of the time or always) in the past 30 days. This was the first time this metric was assessed nationally, providing a baseline amid the COVID-19 pandemic. While mental health challenges affect adolescents of all backgrounds, certain groups are disproportionately impacted:

• Sex: Female students are far more likely to report poor mental health than male students. In 2021, nearly 3 in 5 high school girls (57%) reported persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in the past year, a record high, compared to about 1 in 3 male students. Girls also had higher rates of poor mental health in the past 30 days than boys. This gender gap has widened over the past decade — the prevalence of persistent depressive feelings among teen girls increased by ~60% from 2011 to 2021. Hormonal, social, and psychosocial factors may contribute to girls’ greater vulnerability, and the data signal a need for targeted interventions for adolescent females.
• Race/Ethnicity: Overall prevalence of poor mental health varies by race/ethnicity. In 2021, Asian and Black high school students were less likely to report frequent poor mental health (past 30 days) compared to their Hispanic and multiracial peers. For example, Hispanic and multiracial students had some of the highest reports of poor mental health, whereas Asian-American students reported the lowest. These differences could relate to cultural factors in reporting, exposure to discrimination or stressors, and access to support. It’s noteworthy that while some minority groups report lower frequent distress, other data show that racial minority youth still face significant mental health burdens — for instance, suicide attempt rates are disproportionately high among Black youth in some areas. Thus, all communities require attention, even if the patterns differ by measure.
• Other Groups: Although not explicitly asked in the CDI system, sexual orientation and gender identity are important factors in youth mental health. The 2021 CDC report highlighted extremely high levels of sadness and suicide risk in LGBTQ+ youth (e.g. 22% of LGBQ students reported a suicide attempt in the past year). Socioeconomic status can also impact youth mental health: students from low-income households or unstable home environments are at greater risk of depression and anxiety. A Surgeon General’s advisory (2021) on youth mental health emphasized that children growing up in poverty are 2–3 times more likely to develop mental health conditions than their more affluent peers.

Trends: The YRBSS data indicate a worsening trend in adolescent mental health over the past decade. Persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness among high schoolers increased from roughly 28% in 2011 to over 40% in 2021. This trend accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, which introduced isolation, grief, and school disruptions that exacerbated stress and depression in youth. While 2021 saw record-high levels of poor mental health across the board, the declines in mental well-being have been most pronounced for girls and certain minority groups. On a somewhat positive note, YRBSS and other studies have identified protective factors — for example, youth who feel connected to others at school report better mental health and less risk behavior. This highlights the importance of supportive school environments and social connections as buffers against mental distress.

Implications: The high prevalence of depressive symptoms among youth has serious implications. Poor mental health in adolescence can impact academic achievement, social development, and risk of self-harm. The data have prompted calls for action: schools, communities, and policymakers are urged to expand mental health resources for youth, implement evidence-based programs (such as school counseling, social-emotional learning, and trauma-informed care), and address upstream factors (like bullying and social media influences). The CDC’s Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) has recommended strategies to improve school connectedness and access to mental health services in educational settings. Additionally, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force now recommends screening for depression in adolescents, which could help early identification and treatment. The strong gender and demographic disparities observed suggest that tailored interventions — for example, programs specifically supporting girls’ mental health, or culturally appropriate services for different communities — are needed to equitably address this growing crisis.

Adult Mental Health Indicators (General Adult Population)

Mental health indicators among adults provide insight into the overall well-being of the adult population and can signal emerging public health issues. The BRFSS-based indicators of Frequent Mental Distress and Mentally Unhealthy Days serve as barometers of population mental health, while the prevalence of diagnosed depression indicates the burden of clinical depression. Recent data (2020–2022) show concerning levels of mental distress among U.S. adults, with some worsening during the pandemic. We examine these indicators in turn:

Frequent Mental Distress (≥14 Poor Mental Health Days)

Frequent Mental Distress (FMD) is defined as having 14 or more mentally unhealthy days in the last 30 days. Essentially, an adult with FMD has struggled with their mental health (stress, depression, or emotional problems) at least half of the time in the past month — a sign of significant, ongoing distress. According to the most recent data, 14.7% of U.S. adults reported frequent mental distress in 2021. In other words, about 1 in 7 adults were experiencing poor mental health on a frequent basis. This was higher in 2021 than pre-pandemic levels, and data suggest the trend continued into 2022. The CDC’s model-based estimates for 2022 show FMD rising to 15.9% of adults nationally, indicating a continued increase in the prevalence of frequent mental distress. Several patterns are evident:

• Sex: Women consistently report higher frequent mental distress than men. In 2021, FMD was more common in women than men; other analyses have found this gap to be significant (e.g. among adults with arthritis in 2017, 19.9% of women had FMD vs 14.6% of men). Women’s greater FMD may reflect higher rates of depression and anxiety disorders, greater caregiving burdens, and sociocultural factors that affect mental health. Men, while reporting lower FMD, may under-report mental health struggles due to stigma.
• Age: Young adults have the highest levels of frequent distress. Recent analyses indicate adults aged 18–24 have FMD rates over twice as high as seniors. For instance, in 2021 an estimated 24% of adults under 25 experienced frequent mental distress — a striking figure that aligns with the broader trend of worsening mental health in younger generations. Adults in their mid-20s to mid-30s also had elevated FMD (~19% in ages 26–34). Middle-aged adults have intermediate levels, while older adults (65+) report the lowest frequent distress (often under 10%). This age gradient may stem from younger adults facing more financial stress, uncertainty, and the long-term impacts of events like the pandemic, whereas older adults might have more resilience or stable support networks (though it’s worth noting older adults can face loneliness as well).
• Race/Ethnicity: There are racial and ethnic differences in FMD, although all groups are affected to some extent. Historically, American Indian/Alaska Native populations have reported the highest FMD prevalence (in earlier data, unadjusted FMD among AI/AN was ~14% vs ~6–10% in other groups). Non-Hispanic white and Black adults had significant increases in FMD from the 1990s to early 2000s, and today, white adults continue to have a substantial burden of frequent distress. Asian Americans tend to report the lowest FMD (possibly ~half the national average), which could be due to cultural response patterns or community protective factors. Recent BRFSS data by race show women have higher FMD than men in each group. Also, multiracial individuals often report high levels of mental distress. These disparities highlight the need for culturally tailored mental health supports.
• Socioeconomic Status: Socioeconomic disadvantage is strongly linked to frequent mental distress. Adults with lower income or education have markedly higher FMD rates. The CDC reported that adults living below the federal poverty level experience mental distress ~70% more often than those with higher incomes. Unemployment and food insecurity are also associated with poor mental health. Conversely, higher SES can be a protective factor, though not immunity, against frequent distress. This SES gradient underscores that addressing social determinants — like poverty, education, housing stability — is integral to improving mental health outcomes.
• Disability Status: Adults with disabilities bear a disproportionate mental health burden. An analysis of 2018 BRFSS found that 32.9% of adults with any disability had frequent mental distress, compared to just 7.2% of adults without disabilities. In other words, people with disabilities were 4.6 times more likely to experience frequent distress. Those with both cognitive and mobility impairments had especially high FMD (over 50%). This highlights the interplay between physical health limitations, disability-related stress or discrimination, and mental health. It also signals a need for integrated care and support services for individuals with disabilities.

Trends and Context: The proportion of adults with frequent mental distress has been rising over time. Back in the 1990s, national FMD prevalence was around 8–10%; by the late 2010s it had climbed into the low teens. The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 was a significant stressor that further elevated mental distress due to social isolation, health fears, and economic disruptions. Data from 2020–2022 show higher averages of mentally unhealthy days and FMD compared to prior years. While some of the acute stress of the pandemic has since abated, ongoing challenges (e.g. economic uncertainty, long-term health effects, societal polarization) keep distress levels high. It is notable that FMD is correlated with physical health risk factors and outcomes: people with frequent mental distress are more likely to engage in behaviors like smoking and physical inactivity, and FMD is linked to shorter life expectancy as well. This underlines the importance of FMD as not just a mental health metric, but a predictor of broader health issues.

Average Number of Mentally Unhealthy Days

Another lens on adult mental health is the average number of “mentally unhealthy days” in a month. In 2021, U.S. adults reported an average of 4.7 days in the past 30 days when their mental health was not good. This is an aggregate measure: across all adults, roughly 5 days a month (on average) were impacted by stress, depression, or emotional problems. Not everyone has exactly 5 bad days; rather, some have 0, some have many — this average captures the population burden. The average in 2021 was higher in women than in men, mirroring the FMD sex difference. It also likely varies by age (younger adults averaging more poor mental health days, as suggested by their higher FMD). By comparison, a decade or two ago the average was lower (often around 3–4 days). The increase to 4.7 days suggests Americans’ mental well-being has declined. Five poor mental health days a month can significantly affect productivity, relationships, and chronic disease management.

It’s useful to note that the distribution of mentally unhealthy days is skewed — most adults report only a few, while a smaller percentage (captured by FMD) report very many. Public health uses both the average and the FMD threshold: the former for overall burden, the latter for severe distress. Both measures are part of CDC’s Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) survey module. The data reinforces that mental health is an integral component of quality of life. High averages of unhealthy days can signal societal stressors that need addressing (for example, economic downturns or collective traumas tend to raise these numbers). Continuous surveillance allows public health officials to detect shifts — for instance, if the average mentally unhealthy days spikes in a particular year or region, it may prompt investigation and response (such as mental health crisis support).

Depression Prevalence (Lifetime Diagnosis in Adults)

BRFSS data also shed light on the cumulative impact of depression by asking adults if they have ever been diagnosed with a depressive disorder. This lifetime prevalence is quite high. In the most recent pre-pandemic estimate (2019), approximately 19% of U.S. adults — about 47 million people — reported having been diagnosed with depression at some point in their life. Put differently, nearly one in five adults has been told by a healthcare provider that they have depression (including major or minor depression). Depression is one of the most common chronic conditions. By 2020, this prevalence was still around 18.4% nationally (age-adjusted), with some indications of increase in certain populations in recent years.

Geographic variability in lifetime depression is especially pronounced. A 2023 CDC analysis of 2020 data found state-level rates ranging from 12.7% in Hawaii up to 27.5% in West Virginia — over a twofold difference between the lowest and highest states. Generally, Appalachian and southern states (e.g., West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama) had the highest depression prevalence, whereas states in the West and Northeast tended to be lower. Even within states, county-level estimates varied widely: some U.S. counties had as low as ~10% of adults ever diagnosed with depression, while others exceeded 30%. For example, counties in West Virginia all ranked in the highest quartile nationally (with one county at nearly 32% adult depression prevalence). This geographic disparity suggests that local factors — economic conditions, healthcare access, the opioid epidemic, and cultural attitudes — influence the burden of depression.

In terms of demographics, the lifetime depression data show patterns consistent with the current distress measures: women have higher depression prevalence than men, and younger adults have higher rates than older adults. The CDC reported that in 2020, the highest prevalence of diagnosed depression was among young adults 18–24 years old. This aligns with data from other surveys (e.g., National Survey on Drug Use and Health) that found rapid increases in depression among adolescents and young adults in the last decade. Middle-aged adults (mid-40s to 60s) also have substantial lifetime depression burden (often due to mid-life stressors and accumulated risk), while the oldest adults (65+) have lower reported rates — though note that older generations might be less likely to report or have been diagnosed despite experiencing depression. Additionally, adults with less than a high school education or lower income have significantly higher lifetime depression rates than those with college education. Racial/ethnic patterns in diagnosed depression can be complex: some data show higher diagnosed depression among white and Native American populations, and lower among Black and Asian populations, but this may partly reflect disparities in healthcare access and diagnosis rather than true prevalence of depressive illness.

Recent Changes: It’s important to recognize that these lifetime figures don’t capture the immediate surges in current depression symptoms that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, CDC and Census Bureau rapid surveys in 2020 found elevated rates of adults reporting current anxiety or depressive symptoms (in spring 2020, over 1 in 3 adults reported such symptoms as per the Household Pulse Survey). However, the lifetime diagnosis measure will only incrementally increase over time as more people eventually get diagnosed. The 18.4% in 2020 may rise in coming years — in fact, a notable statistic is that by 2020, roughly 1 in 5 adults have been diagnosed with depression, hitting that 20% mark. This reflects both an increase in underlying depression and improved screening/diagnosis. Public health surveillance is now focusing on both lifetime and current depression. For instance, the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) tracks the prevalence of depressive symptoms in the past 2 weeks (using PHQ-9 scales), and in 2019 found about 7% of adults had moderate to severe depressive symptoms at any given time. That 7% experiencing active depression symptoms is likely higher in 2021–2022. In summary, depression remains a leading cause of disability and is very common, with indications that the pandemic and associated stressors have further increased its prevalence and severity in the population.

Public Health Impact: The high burden of depression among adults has wide-ranging impacts — depression is associated with increased risk of suicide, worse outcomes for other chronic diseases (e.g., it co-occurs with conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and arthritis and can complicate their management), greater healthcare utilization, and significant economic costs (through lost productivity). The data showing regional clustering of depression in economically disadvantaged areas (like Appalachia) underscores that social determinants of health play a big role. Areas with high unemployment, poverty, and limited healthcare access see higher depression rates. This calls for place-based interventions and resource allocation to high-need communities. Health officials can use maps and data (such as the CDC’s interactive PLACES local data platform for mental health) to identify communities at risk and tailor interventions.

Maternal Mental Health Indicators (Perinatal)

Mental health during and after pregnancy is a critical concern for maternal and infant health. The CDI system includes indicators focusing on the postpartum period, when women can be vulnerable to depression. Postpartum depressive symptoms (PDS) and screening for perinatal depression are two key measures tracked via PRAMS in many states. Recent data highlight that postpartum depression is common and that there are gaps in screening.

Postpartum Depressive Symptoms

Postpartum depressive symptoms refer to a mother frequently feeling down, depressed, or losing interest in activities following a recent birth. A CDC Vital Signs analysis of 2018 data found that about 13% of women with a recent live birth reported depressive symptoms in the postpartum period. This translates to approximately 1 in 8 new mothers experiencing significant depressive feelings. There is considerable variation by geography and subgroup. In 2018, the prevalence of reported PDS ranged from about 9.7% in Illinois to 23.5% in Mississippi across states studied. Generally, several southern states had higher rates of postpartum depression symptoms, whereas some northern states had lower rates.

Disparities: Certain groups of women face higher rates of postpartum mental health issues:

• Age: Younger mothers are at increased risk. PDS prevalence was higher among teenage mothers (≤19 years) and those in their early 20s compared to mothers 25 and older. Younger women may have less social support and more life stress (and possibly unintended pregnancies), contributing to depression risk.
• Race/Ethnicity: Non-Hispanic Black and American Indian/Alaska Native women have elevated rates of postpartum depressive symptoms. In the 2018 data, Black and AI/AN mothers reported PDS more frequently than white mothers. Somewhat unexpectedly, Asian/Pacific Islander mothers also had higher reported PDS than whites in that analysis, though other studies often show Asians with lower depression (cultural factors in reporting could play a role). Hispanic women’s rates were intermediate. These disparities may reflect systemic inequities — for example, women of color often face greater stress, discrimination, and less access to maternal mental health care, which can heighten postpartum depression risk.
• Socioeconomic Status: Socioeconomic and social factors weigh heavily. PDS was more common in women with ≤12 years of education, those who were not married, those on Medicaid insurance, and those who participated in WIC (a nutrition assistance program) during pregnancy. Each of these factors is a marker of socioeconomic challenge. For instance, financial stress or single parenthood can worsen postpartum stress, and having Medicaid (vs private insurance) might limit access to certain postpartum services. Other risk factors included smoking during or after pregnancy and exposure to intimate partner violence, which greatly increase the risk of postpartum depression.

It’s important to note that postpartum depressive symptoms are not rare or trivial — they can have serious consequences for both mother and child. Depression can impair a mother’s ability to care for her infant, affect bonding, and is associated with shorter duration of breastfeeding and worse developmental outcomes for the baby. In fact, studies show maternal depression can negatively influence infant cognitive and language development and the safety of the infant’s environment. Therefore, identifying and treating PDS is a high priority.

Trends: Evidence suggests that postpartum depression may be increasing over time in the U.S. One study using medical records found that diagnosis rates of postpartum depression nearly doubled from 2010 (9.4%) to 2021 (19%) across all racial/ethnic groups. This could be due to a true increase and/or better screening and diagnosis. The COVID-19 pandemic likely added new stressors for pregnant and postpartum people (isolation, fear of infection, economic hardship), potentially raising PDS incidence during 2020–2021. As of the latest data available, we can say roughly 1 in 8 to 1 in 5 new mothers experience postpartum depression or depressive symptoms, depending on the population and measure. This is a substantial public health burden.

Postpartum Depression Screening

Given the high prevalence of PDS, screening for perinatal depression by healthcare providers is crucial. Clinical guidelines (from ACOG, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) recommend universal screening of pregnant and postpartum women for depression and anxiety. The CDI indicator monitors the percentage of women who report their provider asked about their mental health during prenatal and postpartum visits. According to 2018 PRAMS data, screening was far from universal: about 1 in 5 women were not asked about depression during prenatal care, and 1 in 8 were not asked during their postpartum check-up. In other words, 87.4% of women reported being asked about depression at their postpartum visit (meaning ~12.6% were not), and the postpartum screening rates ranged widely by state — from only ~51% in the lowest state to ~100% in the highest. Some states and providers have nearly full compliance with screening recommendations, while others lag significantly.

These gaps in screening are concerning because detection is the first step to care. Undiagnosed postpartum depression can silently continue and even worsen. The Vital Signs report noted that although 13% of women had PDS, a substantial fraction had no documented screening or discussion with providers. This highlights missed opportunities to identify depression. Improving screening rates requires healthcare system support (e.g., training providers to use standardized tools like the PHQ-2/PHQ-9, which are validated 2- and 9-item questionnaires, and ensuring reimbursement for screening).

It’s worth noting that screening alone is not enough — when a woman screens positive or expresses depressive symptoms, there must be follow-up: diagnostic assessment, referral and access to treatment (therapy, support groups, or medications as appropriate). However, ensuring every new mother is at least asked about her mental health is a minimum standard that many advocate to make universal. The data showing variability by state might correlate with differing healthcare policies or initiatives. For instance, some states have enacted laws requiring perinatal depression screening or have quality improvement projects to boost screening, whereas others have not.

Implications: Overall, maternal mental health indicators point to a need for stronger support systems around the time of childbirth. Strategies include: improving screening and referral in obstetric and pediatric settings; integrating mental health check-ups into routine prenatal/postpartum care; and addressing risk factors such as young maternal age and economic strain through targeted programs (for example, providing postpartum nurse home visits or support groups for young mothers). The public health impact is significant because treating maternal depression can improve outcomes for children and families. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and other bodies emphasize perinatal depression screening and have developed toolkits to help providers implement it. As data systems like PRAMS continue to monitor these indicators, there is hope that increased awareness leads to improved screening rates and ultimately better management of postpartum depression.

Disparities in Mental Health Indicators

Across all the above indicators — youth, adult, and maternal — certain disparities consistently emerge. Understanding these differences is essential for tailoring public health interventions and policies. Below we summarize major disparities by category, as illuminated by recent CDC data:

• Sex (Gender): Females tend to report worse mental health outcomes than males in many categories. Adolescent girls have far higher rates of depressive symptoms than boys, and adult women have higher prevalence of frequent mental distress and depression diagnoses than men. For instance, women are ~1.5 times as likely as men to experience frequent mental distress or to have a history of depression. The causes may include hormonal influences, higher exposure to certain stressors (e.g., caregiving, gender-based violence), and greater willingness to report mental health issues. Men have substantial mental health burdens too, but may under-report distress and are at higher risk for suicide in many age groups (a paradox that underscores the need to engage men in mental health care despite lower self-reported distress).
• Age: Mental distress and depression are disproportionately affecting young people. Teens and young adults (late adolescence into 20s) show the highest levels of poor mental health. The transition to adulthood in the current era has been marked by high stress, uncertainty, and now two years of a pandemic. Middle-aged adults also report considerable stress, often balancing work and family pressures. Older adults (seniors) report better mental health on surveys (lower depression and distress rates), but this could be influenced by survivor bias (those with severe mental illness may not reach old age) and under-detection among older adults. It is nonetheless heartening that many older adults maintain good mental well-being; lessons from resilience in older populations could inform strategies for younger groups.

• Race/Ethnicity: No racial or ethnic group is untouched by mental health challenges, but the prevalence can differ. White and Native American populations often have high reported rates of depression and suicide, whereas Asian Americans often have lower reported rates of frequent distress (though this may mask issues due to stigma in reporting). Black Americans have similar or slightly higher rates of frequent distress than whites, yet they are less likely to have a recorded depression diagnosis — pointing to possible gaps in care or cultural differences in help-seeking. Hispanic adults have intermediate depression rates but may experience unique stressors (e.g., immigration-related). Among youth, we see that Hispanic and multiracial students report poorer mental health than some of their peers, and Black youth have had rising suicide attempt rates. Racial disparities often tie back to socioeconomic disparities and discrimination. Efforts to improve mental health equity need to be culturally sensitive and address barriers like lack of minority mental health providers and distrust of healthcare due to historical inequities.
• Socioeconomic Status: Perhaps the clearest gradient in mental health is by socioeconomic status. Poverty is a strong risk factor for mental distress. Adults with lower income have significantly higher odds of frequent mental distress and depression. Living in poverty can cause chronic stress, insecurity, and reduced access to healthcare and healthy coping resources. Educational attainment also plays a role: those with less education often face more economic hardship and may have less health literacy to navigate mental health care, correlating with worse outcomes. In youth, growing up in low-income households multiplies the risk of mental health problems. On the positive side, improving social conditions (through employment opportunities, housing, education) can yield mental health benefits. Public health approaches like “health in all policies” advocate that policies which reduce poverty and income inequality can in turn reduce population levels of depression and distress.

• Disability: Individuals with disabilities (physical, cognitive, or developmental) experience dramatically higher mental health challenges. The isolation, pain, or discrimination that often accompany disabilities contribute to elevated depression and anxiety. CDC data illustrate this starkly: nearly one-third of adults with a disability reported frequent mental distress, far above the general population rate. This calls for integrated care models where mental health support is offered as part of routine care for those with chronic disabilities. It also points to the need for community inclusion and reducing stigma; when people with disabilities have strong social support and accessible environments, their mental health outcomes improve.

• Geography: Where one lives influences mental health risk. There are regional patterns, with Appalachian states and parts of the rural South showing higher adult depression rates and frequent mental distress. These areas often have economic hardship (e.g., decline of coal and manufacturing industries in Appalachia) and fewer mental health resources (mental health provider shortages in rural counties). Conversely, some states like Hawaii and California report lower averages, potentially due to community and cultural factors or more robust public health infrastructure. Urban vs. rural differences can cut both ways: urban areas have more services but also more social stressors at times; rural areas have close-knit communities but also isolation and scarce care options. The CDC’s PLACES project provides local data showing mental health disparities at county and city levels, revealing that even within a state, certain counties (often those that are economically disadvantaged or very remote) have much higher prevalence of mental health problems. Recognizing these geographic disparities is important for targeting resources — for example, expanding tele-mental health services in rural high-need areas, or community mental health programs in hard-hit regions.

These disparities demonstrate that mental health is not experienced equally by all segments of the population. Interactions between these factors also matter (for instance, young women of color in poverty may face compounding stressors). Public health surveillance of mental health indicators helps identify vulnerable groups. It is crucial that policies and programs prioritize these disparities: equity-focused approaches can include increasing insurance coverage for mental health (especially in states with poorer populations), culturally competent care for minorities, poverty reduction and job programs, disability inclusion initiatives, and school-based interventions in low-resource school districts.

In conclusion, the CDC’s mental health indicators from 2020–2024 paint a picture of a nation facing substantial mental health challenges, some exacerbated by recent events. The data show rising distress among both youth and adults, persistent and widening disparities, and significant portions of the population affected by depression and poor mental health days. However, these indicators also provide valuable guidance on where to focus efforts. Public health authorities and policymakers can leverage this information to implement targeted interventions, allocate resources wisely, and enact policies that foster mental well-being. Improving mental health in the U.S. will require a multi-faceted approach — integrating services, reducing stigma, bolstering preventive factors, and addressing the social and economic determinants that underlie poor mental health. The payoff of such efforts would be substantial: better quality of life, improved physical health outcomes, and stronger communities resilient in the face of stress. Continuous monitoring through CDC’s surveillance systems will be crucial to track progress and adapt strategies in the years ahead.

The recent analysis of CDC mental health indicators from 2020 to 2024 reveals a concerning and sustained rise in psychological distress across the U.S. population. Data shows that nearly 1 in 4 adults experience a mental illness each year, with symptoms of anxiety, depression, and frequent mental distress significantly increasing — particularly among young adults, women, and low-income populations. The use of antidepressants remains widespread, with over 11% of adults using them as of 2023, and disparities are stark: youth, postpartum women, racial minorities, and individuals with disabilities face disproportionately high risks. When compared to other chronic diseases, mental health conditions are now more prevalent than diabetes and cardiovascular disease, second only to hypertension in adult population burden.

This growing crisis has deepened in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and underscores the urgent need for a comprehensive public health response. Evidence suggests that mental health must be treated with the same priority as physical health — through expanded access to care, community-based prevention programs, better screening systems, and targeted interventions for at-risk groups. Investments in social determinants — such as education, income security, and disability inclusion — are equally vital. As mental distress continues to rise, the CDC’s surveillance tools offer invaluable insights to guide action. A coordinated national strategy focused on equity, early intervention, and resilience-building is essential to reverse the trajectory and improve long-term outcomes for millions of Americans.

Sources Consulted:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and other official reports. All statistics are drawn from recent national surveys (such as the National Health Interview Survey, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, and CDC surveillance systems) and from public health dashboards available online. The data primarily covers the 2020–2023 period and may evolve as new surveys and reports emerge in upcoming years.

• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
  Mental Health — National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).
  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/mental-health.htm
• CDC — Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).
  Prevalence & Trends Data Tools.
  https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/brfssprevalence/
• CDC — Chronic Disease Indicators (CDI).
  https://www.cdc.gov/cdi/index.html
• CDC — PLACES: Local Data for Better Health.
  https://www.cdc.gov/places/
• CDC — Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).
  https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/
• CDC — Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS).
  https://www.cdc.gov/prams/
• CDC — Mental Health Surveillance Among Adults in the United States.
  MMWR Supplements (2021).
  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/su/su7005a1.htm
• CDC — Vital Signs: Depression Among Adults in the United States.
  https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/depression/
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).
  National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH).
  https://www.samhsa.gov/data/data-we-collect/nsduh-national-survey-drug-use-and-health
• National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH).
  Statistics on Mental Illness.
  https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness
• U.S. Census Bureau — Household Pulse Survey (Mental Health).
  https://www.census.gov/data/experimental-data-products/household-pulse-survey.html
• CDC COVID-19 Household Pulse Survey Data Tables.
  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/mental-health.htm
• CDC — Depression Prevalence State-Level Maps.
  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6932a1.htm