Dataset Information

A systematic review of personality disorder, race and ethnicity: prevalence, aetiology and treatment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although psychoses and ethnicity are well researched, the importance of culture, race and ethnicity has been overlooked in Personality Disorders (PD) research. This study aimed to review the published literature on ethnic variations of prevalence, aetiology and treatment of PD.

Method

A systematic review of studies of PD and race, culture and ethnicity including a narrative synthesis of observational data and meta-analyses of prevalence data with tests for heterogeneity.

Results

There were few studies with original data on personality disorder and ethnicity. Studies varied in their classification of ethnic group, and few studies defined a specific type of personality disorder. Overall, meta-analyses revealed significant differences in prevalence between black and white groups (OR 0.476, CIs 0.248 - 0.915, p = 0.026) but no differences between Asian or Hispanic groups compared with white groups. Meta-regression analyses found that heterogeneity was explained by some study characteristics: a lower prevalence of PD was reported among black compared with white patients in UK studies, studies using case-note diagnoses rather than structured diagnostic interviews, studies of borderline PD compared with the other PD, studies in secure and inpatient compared with community settings, and among subjects with co-morbid disorders compared to the rest. The evidence base on aetiology and treatment was small.

Conclusion

There is some evidence of ethnic variations in prevalence of personality disorder but methodological characteristics are likely to account for some of the variation. The findings may indicate neglect of PD diagnosis among ethnic groups, or a true lower prevalence amongst black patients. Further studies are required using more precise cultural and ethnic groups.

SUBMITTER: McGilloway A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2882360 | biostudies-literature | 2010 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review of personality disorder, race and ethnicity: prevalence, aetiology and treatment.

McGilloway Angela A Hall Ruth E RE Lee Tennyson T Bhui Kamaldeep S KS

BMC psychiatry 20100511

<h4>Background</h4>Although psychoses and ethnicity are well researched, the importance of culture, race and ethnicity has been overlooked in Personality Disorders (PD) research. This study aimed to review the published literature on ethnic variations of prevalence, aetiology and treatment of PD.<h4>Method</h4>A systematic review of studies of PD and race, culture and ethnicity including a narrative synthesis of observational data and meta-analyses of prevalence data with tests for heterogeneity ...[more]

PMID: 20459788

Similar Datasets

Project description:UnlabelledPOLICY POINTS: Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care (specifically, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes) have received little scholarly attention. Our systematic review of the literature (59 studies) found that the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, but when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. The absence of established subject terms in PubMed for the overuse of care or inappropriate care impedes the ability of researchers or policymakers to synthesize prior scientific or policy efforts.ContextThe literature on disparities in health care has examined the contrast between white patients receiving needed care, compared with racial/ethnic minority patients not receiving needed care. Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care, that is, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes, have received less attention. We systematically reviewed the literature regarding race/ethnicity and the overuse of care.MethodsWe searched the Medline database for US studies that included at least 2 racial/ethnic groups and that examined the association between race/ethnicity and the overuse of procedures, diagnostic (care) or therapeutic care. In a recent review, we identified studies of overuse by race/ethnicity, and we also examined reference lists of retrieved articles. We then abstracted and evaluated this information, including the population studied, data source, sample size and assembly, type of care, guideline or appropriateness standard, controls for clinical confounding and financing of care, and findings.FindingsWe identified 59 unique studies, of which 11 had a low risk of methodological bias. Studies with multiple outcomes were counted more than once; collectively they assessed 74 different outcomes. Thirty-two studies, 6 with low risks of bias (LRoB), provided evidence that whites received more inappropriate or nonrecommended care than racial/ethnic minorities did. Nine studies (2 LRoB) found evidence of more overuse of care by minorities than by whites. Thirty-three studies (6 LRoB) found no relationship between race/ethnicity and overuse.ConclusionsAlthough the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. Clinicians and researchers should try to understand how and why race/ethnicity might be associated with overuse and to intervene to reduce it.

Project description:ImportanceRepresentativeness of populations within neonatal clinical trials is crucial to moving the field forward. Although racial and ethnic disparities in research inclusion are well documented in other fields, they are poorly described within neonatology.ObjectiveTo describe the race and ethnicity of infants included in a sample of recent US neonatal clinical trials and the variability in this reporting.Evidence reviewA systematic search of US neonatal clinical trials entered into Cochrane CENTRAL 2017 to 2021 was conducted. Two individuals performed inclusion determination, data extraction, and quality assessment independently with discrepancies adjudicated by consensus.FindingsOf 120 studies with 14 479 participants that met the inclusion criteria, 75 (62.5%) included any participant race or ethnicity data. In the studies that reported race and ethnicity, the median (IQR) percentage of participants of each background were 0% (0%-1%) Asian, 26% (9%-42%) Black, 3% (0%-12%) Hispanic, 0% (0%-0%) Indigenous (eg, Alaska Native, American Indian, and Native Hawaiian), 0% (0%-0%) multiple races, 57% (30%-68%) White, and 7% (1%-21%) other race or ethnicity. Asian, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous participants were underrepresented, while White participants were overrepresented compared with a reference sample of the US clinical neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) population from the Vermont Oxford Network. Many participants were labeled as other race or ethnicity without adequate description. There was substantial variability in terms and methods of reporting race and ethnicity data. Geographic representation was heavily skewed toward the Northeast, with nearly one-quarter of states unrepresented.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that neonatal research may perpetuate inequities by underrepresenting Asian, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous neonates in clinical trials. Studies varied in documentation of race and ethnicity, and there was regional variation in the sites included. Based on these findings, funders and clinical trialists are advised to consider a 3-point targeted approach to address these issues: prioritize identifying ways to increase diversity in neonatal clinical trial participation, agree on a standardized method to report race and ethnicity among neonatal clinical trial participants, and prioritize the inclusion of participants from all regions of the US in neonatal clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundThe consistency of cardiovascular risk reduction by antidiabetes medications across racial and ethnic groups remains unclear. The aim of this study was to analyze racial/ethnic patterns in the results of cardiovascular outcomes trials of antidiabetes medications in people with type 2 diabetes.MethodPubMed and Cochrane library databases were searched from the inception dates to December 2020. Cardiovascular outcome trials in type 2 diabetes that randomized participants to antidiabetes medication or control treatment and reported results by race/ethnic groups or region were included.ResultsA total of 19 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Among White participants, treatment with antidiabetes medications significantly decreased the risk of composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with placebo treatment (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.94, p < 0.05). Among Asian participants, antidiabetes medications also significantly decreased the risk of composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with control treatment (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.86, p < 0.05). A similar pattern was found when analyzing the effects of antidiabetes medications vs. control treatment in other racial/ethnic groups comprising mostly Hispanics and Pacific Islanders (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.98, p < 0.05). However, among Black participants, treatment with antidiabetes medications resulted in nominal but non-significant decreases in the composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with control treatment (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.62-1.14, p = 0.26).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis showed cardiovascular safety of antidiabetes medications in people with type 2 diabetes from all racial/ethnic groups studied; however, significant composite cardiovascular risk reductions were demonstrated only in White and Asian participants. To determine whether antidiabetes drugs confer consistent cardiovascular benefits in Black and other racial/ethnic participants requires more investigations in the future.

Project description:AimBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a common mental health condition with high patterns of service utilisation of inpatient and community treatment. Over the past five years there has been significant growth in research with economic data, making this systematic review a timely update.MethodsEmpirical studies written in English or German, published up to December 2015, and cited in major electronic databases were examined using the PRISMA systematic review method. Papers were included that had one of the following: data related to cost of BPD to society, the individual, the carer or families; cost benefits of interventions. Reported cost data were inflated to the year 2015 and converted into US- dollars (USD $) using purchasing power parities.ResultsWe identified 30 economic evaluations providing cost data related to interventions for BPD across 134,136 patients. The methodological quality was good, almost all studies fulfilled ≥ 50% of the quality criteria. The mean cost saving for treating BPD with evidence-based psychotherapy across studies was USD $2,987.82 per patient per year. A further mean weighted reduction of USD $1,551 per patient per year (range $83 - $29,392) was found compared to treatment as usual. Evidence-based psychological treatment was both less expensive as well as more effective, despite considerable differences in health cost arrangements between individual studies and countries. Where it was able to be calculated, a significant difference in cost-savings between different types of evidence-based psychotherapies was found.DiscussionIndividuals with BPD consistently demonstrate high patterns of service utilization and therefore high costs. The findings of this review present a strong argument in favour of prioritizing BPD treatments in reimbursement decisions, both for the affected individual and the family. The provision of evidence based treatment, irrespective of the type of psychological treatment, may lead to widespread reductions in healthcare costs.

Dataset Information

A systematic review of personality disorder, race and ethnicity: prevalence, aetiology and treatment.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A systematic review of personality disorder, race and ethnicity: prevalence, aetiology and treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets