Although the general population often thinks that hoarding disorder (HD) is common, it is not. As a collector, I often have to make that distinction. I am not a hoarder, but a collector. I have addressed the differentiating factors between the two in some of my previous posts on this subject. Here, I clarify just how common hoarding is based on scientific evidence.
Hoarding disorder is characterized by persistent difficulties discarding or parting with possessions, leading to significant clutter that impairs the intended use of living spaces. This behavior often results in substantial distress and functional impairment. Estimates of HD prevalence have varied widely, ranging from 1.5 percent to 6 percent. To provide a more precise estimate, Postlethwaite, Kellett, and Mataix-Cols conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, aiming to summarize and reliably estimate the prevalence of HD by employing strict inclusion criteria and analyzing studies with sufficiently large samples.
Methodology
The authors conducted an extensive and systematic literature search across multiple databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase, aiming to identify high-quality prevalence studies focused specifically on hoarding disorder (HD). Their inclusion criteria were notably stringent: Each study had to explicitly report prevalence rates of HD among adults within working age ranges and possess a minimum sample size of 1,009 participants. The authors established this sizable minimum to ensure adequate statistical power, thereby increasing the reliability and generalizability of their conclusions. Additionally, the selected studies needed to utilize recognized diagnostic or screening measures consistent with the DSM-5 criteria for hoarding disorder to ensure methodological consistency. From the initial broad search, a rigorous screening process identified 11 studies meeting all specified criteria. These studies collectively encompassed 53,378 participants, thus offering a robust dataset for analysis. Notably, all included studies originated from developed nations, predominantly from North America and Europe, and were rigorously assessed for quality, being judged as having a low risk of bias due to their careful methodological standards and clearly articulated diagnostic criteria.
Results
The meta-analysis synthesized data from the 11 carefully selected studies and found a pooled estimated prevalence of HD at 2.5 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval ranging from 1.7 percent to 3.6 percent. This finding suggests that approximately 1 in every 40 adults in the general population experiences clinically significant hoarding behaviors meeting diagnostic thresholds. Importantly, subgroup analyses exploring gender differences revealed no significant variance between males and females in prevalence rates, highlighting that HD affects both genders similarly. This contradicts certain prior assumptions or smaller-scale studies suggesting possible gender disparities in hoarding behaviors. The narrow confidence interval reflects a high degree of precision in the pooled estimate, underscoring the reliability of these findings. This robust analysis clarifies previous inconsistencies in the literature, establishing a clearer epidemiological understanding of HD’s widespread impact across the general adult population.
Discussion
The findings of this meta-analysis provide a more precise estimate of HD prevalence compared to previous reports. The pooled prevalence of 2.5 percent underscores that HD is a relatively common Mental health condition, affecting a substantial portion of the population. The lack of significant gender differences aligns with some prior research but contrasts with studies suggesting higher prevalence in males. This discrepancy may be due to methodological differences across studies or cultural factors influencing help-seeking behaviors.
Conclusion
These findings highlight the importance of recognizing HD as a common and impactful Mental health disorder, necessitating appropriate clinical attention and resource allocation.
