Search

Background: Perceived discrimination is associated with worse mental health. Few studies have assessed whether perceived discrimination (i) is associated with the risk of psychotic disorders and (ii) contributes to an increased risk among minority ethnic groups relative to the ethnic majority. Methods: We used data from the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions Work Package 2, a population-based case−control study of incident psychotic disorders in 17 catchment sites across six countries. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the associations between perceived discrimination and psychosis using mixed-effects logistic regression models. We used stratified and mediation analyses to explore differences for minority ethnic groups. Results: Reporting any perceived experience of major discrimination (e.g. unfair treatment by police, not getting hired) was higher in cases than controls (41.8% v. 34.2%). Pervasive experiences of discrimination (≥3 types) were also higher in cases than controls (11.3% v. 5.5%). In fully adjusted models, the odds of psychosis were 1.20 (95% CI 0.91–1.59) for any discrimination and 1.79 (95% CI 1.19–1.59) for pervasive discrimination compared with no discrimination. In stratified analyses, the magnitude of association for pervasive experiences of discrimination appeared stronger for minority ethnic groups (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.12–2.68) than the ethnic majority (OR = 1.42, 95% CI 0.65–3.10). In exploratory mediation analysis, pervasive discrimination minimally explained excess risk among minority ethnic groups (5.1%). Conclusions: Pervasive experiences of discrimination are associated with slightly increased odds of psychotic disorders and may minimally help explain excess risk for minority ethnic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychosis rates are higher among some migrant groups. We hypothesized that psychosis in migrants is associated with cumulative social disadvantage during different phases of migration. Methods: We used data from the EUropean Network of National Schizophrenia Networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) case–control study. We defined a set of three indicators of social disadvantage for each phase: pre-migration, migration and post-migration. We examined whether social disadvantage in the pre- and post-migration phases, migration adversities, and mismatch between achievements and expectations differed between first-generation migrants with first-episode psychosis and healthy first-generation migrants, and tested whether this accounted for differences in odds of psychosis in multivariable logistic regression models. Results: In total, 249 cases and 219 controls were assessed. Pre-migration (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.06–2.44, p = 0.027) and post-migration social disadvantages (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.02–3.51, p = 0.044), along with expectations/achievements mismatch (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03–1.26, p = 0.014) were all significantly associated with psychosis. Migration adversities (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.672–2.06, p = 0.568) were not significantly related to the outcome. Finally, we found a dose–response effect between the number of adversities across all phases and odds of psychosis (⩾6: OR 14.09, 95% CI 2.06–96.47, p = 0.007). Conclusions: The cumulative effect of social disadvantages before, during and after migration was associated with increased odds of psychosis in migrants, independently of ethnicity or length of stay in the country of arrival. Public health initiatives that address the social disadvantages that many migrants face during the whole migration process and post-migration psychological support may reduce the excess of psychosis in migrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundDo DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for major depression (MD) in Chinese and Western women perform in a similar manner?MethodThe CONVERGE study included interview-based assessments of women of Han Chinese descent with treated recurrent MD. Using Mplus software, we investigated the overall degree of between-sample measurement invariance (MI) for DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for MD in the CONVERGE sample and samples selected from four major Western studies from the USA and Europe matched to the inclusion criteria of CONVERGE. These analyses were performed one pair at a time. We then compared the results from CONVERGE paired with Western samples to those obtained when examining levels of MI between pairs of the Western samples.ResultsAssuming a single factor model for the nine diagnostic criteria for MD, the level of MI based on global fit indexes observed between the CONVERGE and the four Western samples was very similar to that seen between the Western samples. Comparable results were obtained when using a two-factor structure for MI testing when applied to the 14 diagnostic criteria for MD disaggregated for weight, appetite, sleep, and psychomotor changes.ConclusionsDespite differences in language, ethnicity and culture, DSM criteria for MD perform similarly in Chinese women with recurrent MD and comparable subjects from the USA and Europe. The DSM criteria for MD may assess depressive symptoms that are relatively insensitive to cultural and ethnic differences. These results support efforts to compare findings from depressed patients in China and Western countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundSeveral studies have reported weak associations between religious or spiritual belief and psychological health. However, most have been cross-sectional surveys in the USA, limiting inference about generalizability. An international longitudinal study of incidence of major depression gave us the opportunity to investigate this relationship further.MethodData were collected in a prospective cohort study of adult general practice attendees across seven countries. Participants were followed at 6 and 12 months. Spiritual and religious beliefs were assessed using a standardized questionnaire, and DSM-IV diagnosis of major depression was made using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Logistic regression was used to estimate incidence rates and odds ratios (ORs), after multiple imputation of missing data.ResultsThe analyses included 8318 attendees. Of participants reporting a spiritual understanding of life at baseline, 10.5% had an episode of depression in the following year compared to 10.3% of religious participants and 7.0% of the secular group (p < 0.001). However, the findings varied significantly across countries, with the difference being significant only in the UK, where spiritual participants were nearly three times more likely to experience an episode of depression than the secular group [OR 2.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59–4.68]. The strength of belief also had an effect, with participants with strong belief having twice the risk of participants with weak belief. There was no evidence of religion acting as a buffer to prevent depression after a serious life event.ConclusionsThese results do not support the notion that religious and spiritual life views enhance psychological well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

BackgroundPredictD is a risk algorithm that was developed to predict risk of onset of major depression over 12 months in general practice attendees in Europe and validated in a similar population in Chile. It was the first risk algorithm to be developed in the field of mental disorders. Our objective was to extend predictD as an algorithm to detect people at risk of major depression over 24 months.MethodParticipants were 4190 adult attendees to general practices in the UK, Spain, Slovenia and Portugal, who were not depressed at baseline and were followed up for 24 months. The original predictD risk algorithm for onset of DSM-IV major depression had already been developed in data arising from the first 12 months of follow-up. In this analysis we fitted predictD to the longer period of follow-up, first by examining only the second year (12–24 months) and then the whole period of follow-up (0–24 months).ResultsThe instrument performed well for prediction of major depression from 12 to 24 months [c-index 0.728, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.675–0.781], or over the whole 24 months (c-index 0.783, 95% CI 0.757–0.809).ConclusionsThe predictD risk algorithm for major depression is accurate over 24 months, extending it current use of prediction over 12 months. This strengthens its use in prevention efforts in general medical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThere are no risk models for the prediction of anxiety that may help in prevention. We aimed to develop a risk algorithm for the onset of generalized anxiety and panic syndromes.MethodFamily practice attendees were recruited between April 2003 and February 2005 and followed over 24 months in the UK, Spain, Portugal and Slovenia (Europe4 countries) and over 6 months in The Netherlands, Estonia and Chile. Our main outcome was generalized anxiety and panic syndromes as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire. We entered 38 variables into a risk model using stepwise logistic regression in Europe4 data, corrected for over-fitting and tested it in The Netherlands, Estonia and Chile.ResultsThere were 4905 attendees in Europe4, 1094 in Estonia, 1221 in The Netherlands and 2825 in Chile. In the algorithm four variables were fixed characteristics (sex, age, lifetime depression screen, family history of psychological difficulties); three current status (Short Form 12 physical health subscale and mental health subscale scores, and unsupported difficulties in paid and/or unpaid work); one concerned country; and one time of follow-up. The overall C-index in Europe4 was 0.752 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.724–0.780]. The effect size for difference in predicted log odds between developing and not developing anxiety was 0.972 (95% CI 0.837–1.107). The validation of predictA resulted in C-indices of 0.731 (95% CI 0.654–0.809) in Estonia, 0.811 (95% CI 0.736–0.886) in The Netherlands and 0.707 (95% CI 0.671–0.742) in Chile.ConclusionsPredictA accurately predicts the risk of anxiety syndromes. The algorithm is strikingly similar to the predictD algorithm for major depression, suggesting considerable overlap in the concepts of anxiety and depression. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]