We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
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.
To provide an overview of epidemiological studies of dementia among migrant groups in Europe and to estimate their pooled odds ratio (OR) v. the reference population.
Methods
Search for articles reporting on incidence or prevalence of dementia among ethnic minorities and migrants in Europe, published before 21 December 2018. We performed several meta-analyses, using a random-effects model, and, when there was no evidence of heterogeneity, a fixed-effects model. We distinguished between all migrants, African-Europeans and Asian-Europeans.
Results
We retrieved five population-based surveys and two health care record studies. The latter included one incidence study, the remainder were prevalence studies. The meta-analysis of all studies yielded a pooled OR, adjusted for age and sex, of 1.73 (95% CI 1.42–2.11) for dementia in all migrant groups. However, the pooled OR of population surveys (3.10; 95% CI 2.12–4.51) was significantly higher than that for the health care record studies (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.80–1.11). The pooled ORs for African-Europeans and Asian-Europeans, based on population surveys, were 2.54 (95% CI 1.70–3.80) and 5.36 (95% CI 2.78–10.31), respectively.
Conclusions
The discrepancy between health care record studies and population surveys suggests that many migrants remain undiagnosed. Migrants from Asia and Africa seem to be at significantly increased risk of dementia in Europe. Since the prevalence rates in their countries of origin are generally not higher than those for natives in Europe, there may be a parallel with the epidemiology of schizophrenia.
The aims of this meta-analysis are (i) to estimate the pooled relative risk (RR) of developing non-affective psychotic disorder (NAPD) and affective psychotic disorder (APD) among migrants and their children; (ii) to adjust these results for socioeconomic status (SES); (iii) to examine the sources of heterogeneity that underlie the risk of NAPD.
Methods
We included population-based incidence studies that reported an age-adjusted RR with 95% confidence interval (CI) published 1 January 1977–12 October 2017 and used a random-effects model.
Results
We retrieved studies performed in Europe (n = 43), Israel (n = 3), Canada (n = 2) and Australia (n = 1). The meta-analysis yielded a RR, adjusted for age and sex, of 2.13 (95% CI 1.99–2.27) for NAPD and 2.94 (95% CI 2.28–3.79) for APD. The RRs diminished, but persisted after adjustment for SES. With reference to NAPD: a personal or parental history of migration to Europe from countries outside Europe was associated with a higher RR (RR = 2.94, 95% CI 2.63–3.29) than migration within Europe (RR = 1.88, 95% 1.62–2.18). The corresponding RR was lower in Israel (RR = 1.22; 0.99–1.50) and Canada (RR = 1.21; 0.85–1.74). The RR was highest among individuals with a black skin colour (RR = 4.19, 95% CI 3.42–5.14). The evidence of a difference in risk between first and second generation was insufficient.
Conclusions
Positive selection may explain the low risk in Canada, while the change from exclusion to inclusion may do the same in Israel. Given the high risks among migrants from developing countries in Europe, social exclusion may have a pathogenic role.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.