Laia Bécares1, Michael E Dewey2, Jayati Das-Munshi2. 1. Department of Social Statistics,University of Manchester,Manchester,UK. 2. Department of Health Services & Population Research,King's College London,Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience,London,UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite increased ethnic diversity in more economically developed countries it is unclear whether residential concentration of ethnic minority people (ethnic density) is detrimental or protective for mental health. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis covering the international literature, assessing ethnic density associations with mental health outcomes. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science from inception to 31 March 2016. We obtained additional data from study authors. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis taking into account clustering of estimates within datasets. Meta-regression assessed heterogeneity in studies due to ethnicity, country, generation, and area-level deprivation. Our main exposure was ethnic density, defined as the residential concentration of own racial/ethnic minority group. Outcomes included depression, anxiety and the common mental disorders (CMD), suicide, suicidality, psychotic experiences, and psychosis. RESULTS: We included 41 studies in the review, with meta-analysis of 12 studies. In the meta-analyses, we found a large reduction in relative odds of psychotic experiences [odds ratio (OR) 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89)] and suicidal ideation [OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.98)] for each 10 percentage-point increase in own ethnic density. For CMD, depression, and anxiety, associations were indicative of protective effects of own ethnic density; however, results were not statistically significant. Findings from narrative review were consistent with those of the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support consistent protective ethnic density associations across countries and racial/ethnic minority populations as well as mental health outcomes. This may suggest the importance of the social environment in patterning detrimental mental health outcomes in marginalized and excluded population groups.
BACKGROUND: Despite increased ethnic diversity in more economically developed countries it is unclear whether residential concentration of ethnic minority people (ethnic density) is detrimental or protective for mental health. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis covering the international literature, assessing ethnic density associations with mental health outcomes. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science from inception to 31 March 2016. We obtained additional data from study authors. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis taking into account clustering of estimates within datasets. Meta-regression assessed heterogeneity in studies due to ethnicity, country, generation, and area-level deprivation. Our main exposure was ethnic density, defined as the residential concentration of own racial/ethnic minority group. Outcomes included depression, anxiety and the common mental disorders (CMD), suicide, suicidality, psychotic experiences, and psychosis. RESULTS: We included 41 studies in the review, with meta-analysis of 12 studies. In the meta-analyses, we found a large reduction in relative odds of psychotic experiences [odds ratio (OR) 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89)] and suicidal ideation [OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.98)] for each 10 percentage-point increase in own ethnic density. For CMD, depression, and anxiety, associations were indicative of protective effects of own ethnic density; however, results were not statistically significant. Findings from narrative review were consistent with those of the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support consistent protective ethnic density associations across countries and racial/ethnic minority populations as well as mental health outcomes. This may suggest the importance of the social environment in patterning detrimental mental health outcomes in marginalized and excluded population groups.
Authors: Inma Jarrín; Ana García-Fulgueiras; Vicente Ibáñez-Rojo; Débora Alvarez; Rocío García-Pina; Alberto Fernández-Liria; Visitación García-Ortúzar; Domingo Díaz; Maria Angeles Rodríguez-Arenas; Lucía Mazarrasa; Maria Victoria Zunzunegui; Alicia Llácer; Julia Del Amo Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Wim Veling; Ezra Susser; Jim van Os; Johan P Mackenbach; Jean-Paul Selten; Hans W Hoek Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2007-12-17 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Scott D Emerson; Monique Gagné Petteni; Joseph H Puyat; Martin Guhn; Katholiki Georgiades; Constance Milbrath; Magdalena Janus; Anne M Gadermann Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Laia Bécares; Richard J Shaw; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Patricia Irizar; Sarah Amele; Dharmi Kapadia; James Nazroo; Harry Taylor Journal: SSM Popul Health Date: 2022-06-24
Authors: Mario Maj; Dan J Stein; Gordon Parker; Mark Zimmerman; Giovanni A Fava; Marc De Hert; Koen Demyttenaere; Roger S McIntyre; Thomas Widiger; Hans-Ulrich Wittchen Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Kristina Conroy; Natalie Frech; Amanda L Sanchez; Mary B Hagan; Daniel M Bagner; Jonathan S Comer Journal: Infant Ment Health J Date: 2021-05-07