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: In Europe, the incidence of psychotic disorder is high in certain migrant and minority ethnic groups (hence: 'minorities'). However, it is unknown how the incidence pattern for these groups varies within this continent. Our objective was to compare, across sites in France, Italy, Spain, the UK and the Netherlands, the incidence rates for minorities and the incidence rate ratios (IRRs, minorities v. the local reference population). Methods: The European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study was conducted between 2010 and 2015. We analyzed data on incident cases of non-organic psychosis (International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, codes F20–F33) from 13 sites. Results: The standardized incidence rates for minorities, combined into one category, varied from 12.2 in Valencia to 82.5 per 100 000 in Paris. These rates were generally high at sites with high rates for the reference population, and low at sites with low rates for the reference population. IRRs for minorities (combined into one category) varied from 0.70 (95% CI 0.32–1.53) in Valencia to 2.47 (95% CI 1.66–3.69) in Paris (test for interaction: p = 0.031). At most sites, IRRs were higher for persons from non-Western countries than for those from Western countries, with the highest IRRs for individuals from sub-Saharan Africa (adjusted IRR = 3.23, 95% CI 2.66–3.93). Conclusions: Incidence rates vary by region of origin, region of destination and their combination. This suggests that they are strongly influenced by the social context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is a 42-item self-report questionnaire that has been developed and validated to measure the dimensions of psychosis in the general population. The CAPE has a three-factor structure with dimensions of positive, negative and depression. Assessing the cross-national equivalence of a questionnaire is an essential prerequisite before pooling data from different countries. In this study, our aim was to investigate the measurement invariance of the CAPE across different countries. Methods: Data were drawn from the European Union Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) study. Participants (incident cases of psychotic disorder, controls and siblings of cases) were recruited in Brazil, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and UK. To analyse the measurement invariance across these samples, we tested configural invariance (i.e. identical structures of the factors), metric invariance (i.e. equivalence of the factor loadings) and scalar invariance (i.e. equivalence of the thresholds) of the three CAPE dimensions using multigroup categorical confirmatory factor analysis methods. Results: The configural invariance model fits well, providing evidence for identical factorial structure across countries. In comparison with the configural model invariance, the fit indices were very similar in the metric and scalar invariance models, indicating that factor loadings and thresholds did not differ across the six countries. Conclusion: We found that, across six countries, the CAPE showed equivalent factorial structure, factor loadings and thresholds. Thus, differences observed in scores between individuals from different countries should be considered as reflecting different levels of psychosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Psychotic disorders contribute significantly to the global disease burden, yet the latest international incidence study of psychotic disorders was conducted in the 1980s., Objectives: To estimate the incidence of psychotic disorders using comparable methods across 17 catchment areas in 6 countries and to examine the variance between catchment areas by putative environmental risk factors., Design, Setting, and Participants: An international multisite incidence study (the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions) was conducted from May 1, 2010, to April 1, 2015, among 2774 individuals from England (2 catchment areas), France (3 catchment areas), Italy (3 catchment areas), the Netherlands (2 catchment areas), Spain (6 catchment areas), and Brazil (1 catchment area) with a first episode of nonorganic psychotic disorders (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] codes F20-F33) confirmed by the Operational Criteria Checklist. Denominator populations were estimated using official national statistics., Exposures: Age, sex, and racial/ethnic minority status were treated as a priori confounders. Latitude, population density, percentage unemployment, owner-occupied housing, and single-person households were treated as catchment area-level exposures., Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of nonorganic psychotic disorders (ICD-10 codes F20-F33), nonaffective psychoses (ICD-10 codes F20-F29), and affective psychoses (ICD-10 codes F30-F33) confirmed by the Operational Criteria Checklist., Results: A total of 2774 patients (1196 women and 1578 men; median age, 30.5 years [interquartile range, 23.0-41.0 years]) with incident cases of psychotic disorders were identified during 12.9 million person-years at risk (crude incidence, 21.4 per 100 000 person-years; 95% CI, 19.4-23.4 per 100 000 person-years). A total of 2183 patients (78.7%) had nonaffective psychotic disorders. After direct standardization for age, sex, and racial/ethnic minority status, an 8-fold variation was seen in the incidence of all psychotic disorders, from 6.0 (95% CI, 3.5-8.6) per 100 000 person-years in Santiago, Spain, to 46.1 (95% CI, 37.3-55.0) per 100 000 person-years in Paris, France. Rates were elevated in racial/ethnic minority groups (incidence rate ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.5-1.7), were highest for men 18 to 24 years of age, and were lower in catchment areas with more owner-occupied homes (incidence rate ratio, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7-0.8). Similar patterns were observed for nonaffective psychoses; a lower incidence of affective psychoses was associated with higher area-level unemployment (incidence rate ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5)., Conclusions and Relevance: This study confirmed marked heterogeneity in risk for psychotic disorders by person and place, including higher rates in younger men, racial/ethnic minorities, and areas characterized by a lower percentage of owner-occupied houses.