Roshni Mangalore1, Martin Knapp. 1. Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, UK. R.K.Mangalore@lse.ac.uk
Abstract
PURPOSE: The relative prevalence of common mental health problems among different ethnic groups in Britain is one of the least researched topics in health variations research. We calculate and compare income-related inequalities in common mental disorders among ethnic groups in Britain. METHOD: Data from a nationally representative survey of ethnic minorities (the EMPIRIC survey) were used to calculate concentration index values to indicate the extent of income-related inequalities within and across ethnic groups. RESULTS: Looking at income-related inequalities in common mental disorders within each of the ethnic groups, it was found that the burden of these disorders were greater for the lower income groups among the Irish, White and African Caribbean communities. Within-group inequality was less clearly defined for each of the three Asian communities: Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani. However, when the data were pooled and individuals were assigned income ranks in the pooled set (not within their own ethnic group), the relative position of those in lower income groups among the different groups was striking. The poor among the Bangladeshi, Pakistani and the African Caribbean groups clearly suffered both from low income and a greater burden of mental health morbidity than the other three groups. The effect of lower income is thus worse for the mental health of populations if they are African Caribbean, Pakistani or Bangladeshi than if they are White, Irish or Indian. CONCLUSION: Inequality in mental health morbidity between and within ethnic groups is at least partly linked to income, and thus to employment and education. Tackling disadvantage and discrimination in these areas could help to tackle the challenge of mental ill-health.
PURPOSE: The relative prevalence of common mental health problems among different ethnic groups in Britain is one of the least researched topics in health variations research. We calculate and compare income-related inequalities in common mental disorders among ethnic groups in Britain. METHOD: Data from a nationally representative survey of ethnic minorities (the EMPIRIC survey) were used to calculate concentration index values to indicate the extent of income-related inequalities within and across ethnic groups. RESULTS: Looking at income-related inequalities in common mental disorders within each of the ethnic groups, it was found that the burden of these disorders were greater for the lower income groups among the Irish, White and African Caribbean communities. Within-group inequality was less clearly defined for each of the three Asian communities: Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani. However, when the data were pooled and individuals were assigned income ranks in the pooled set (not within their own ethnic group), the relative position of those in lower income groups among the different groups was striking. The poor among the Bangladeshi, Pakistani and the African Caribbean groups clearly suffered both from low income and a greater burden of mental health morbidity than the other three groups. The effect of lower income is thus worse for the mental health of populations if they are African Caribbean, Pakistani or Bangladeshi than if they are White, Irish or Indian. CONCLUSION: Inequality in mental health morbidity between and within ethnic groups is at least partly linked to income, and thus to employment and education. Tackling disadvantage and discrimination in these areas could help to tackle the challenge of mental ill-health.
Authors: Kamaldeep Bhui; Stephen Stansfeld; Kwame McKenzie; Saffron Karlsen; James Nazroo; Scott Weich Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Ulrich A Reininghaus; Craig Morgan; Jayne Simpson; Paola Dazzan; Kevin Morgan; Gillian A Doody; Dinesh Bhugra; Julian Leff; Peter Jones; Robin Murray; Paul Fearon; Tom K J Craig Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2008-05-16 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Richard Gater; Barbara Tomenson; Carol Percival; Nasim Chaudhry; Waquas Waheed; Graham Dunn; Gary Macfarlane; Francis Creed Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2008-08-23 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: M Martin-Carrasco; S Evans-Lacko; G Dom; N G Christodoulou; J Samochowiec; E González-Fraile; P Bienkowski; M Gómez-Beneyto; M J H Dos Santos; D Wasserman Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Parker Magin; Anousha Victoire; Xi May Zhen; John Furler; Marie Pirotta; Daniel S Lasserson; Christopher Levi; Amanda Tapley; Mieke van Driel Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-07-30 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Tobias K van Dijk; Henriëtte Dijkshoorn; Ad van Dijk; Stephan Cremer; Charles Agyemang Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Esmaeil Khedmati Morasae; Ameneh Setareh Forouzan; Reza Majdzadeh; Mohsen Asadi-Lari; Ahmad Ali Noorbala; Ahmad Reza Hosseinpoor Journal: Int J Equity Health Date: 2012-03-26
Authors: Christian Loret de Mola; Fernando Pires Hartwig; Helen Gonçalves; Luciana de Avila Quevedo; Ricardo Pinheiro; Denise Petrucci Gigante; Janaína Vieira Dos Santos Motta; Alexandre C Pereira; Fernando C Barros; Bernardo Lessa Horta Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2016-09-05 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Stephanie L Prady; Kate E Pickett; Tim Croudace; Lesley Fairley; Karen Bloor; Simon Gilbody; Kathleen E Kiernan; John Wright Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-04-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kamaldeep S Bhui; Rabeea'h W Aslam; Andrea Palinski; Rose McCabe; Mark R D Johnson; Scott Weich; Swaran P Singh; Martin Knapp; Vittoria Ardino; Ala Szczepura Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 9.319