Dataset Information

Do social interactions explain ethnic differences in psychological distress and the protective effect of local ethnic density? A cross-sectional study of 226 487 adults in Australia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A frequently proposed, but under-researched hypothesis is that ethnic density benefits mental health through increasing social interactions. We examined this hypothesis in 226 487 adults from 19 ethnic groups aged 45 years and older in Australia.

Methods

Multilevel logit regression was used to measure the association between ethnicity, social interactions, own-group ethnic density and scores of 22+ on the Kessler scale of psychological distress. Self-reported ancestry was used as a proxy for ethnicity. Measures of social interactions included a number of times in the past week were (i) spent with friends or family participants did not live with; (ii) talked to someone on the telephone; (iii) attended meetings of social groups and (iv) how many people could be relied upon outside their home, but within 1 h of travel. Per cent own-group ethnic density was measured at the Census Collection District scale.

Results

Psychological distress was reported by 11% of Australians born in Australia. The risk of experiencing psychological distress varied among ethnic minorities and by country of birth (eg, 33% for the Lebanese born in Lebanon and 4% for the Swiss born in Switzerland). These differences remained after full adjustment. Social interactions varied between ethnic groups and were associated with lower psychological distress and ethnic density. Ethnic density was associated with reduced psychological distress for some groups. This association, however, was explained by individual and neighbourhood characteristics and not by social interactions.

Conclusions

Social interactions are important correlates of mental health, but fully explain neither the ethnic differences in psychological distress nor the protective effect of own-group density.

SUBMITTER: Feng X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3646175 | biostudies-literature | 2013 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do social interactions explain ethnic differences in psychological distress and the protective effect of local ethnic density? A cross-sectional study of 226 487 adults in Australia.

Feng Xiaoqi X Astell-Burt Thomas T Kolt Gregory S GS

BMJ open 20130502 5

<h4>Background</h4>A frequently proposed, but under-researched hypothesis is that ethnic density benefits mental health through increasing social interactions. We examined this hypothesis in 226 487 adults from 19 ethnic groups aged 45 years and older in Australia.<h4>Methods</h4>Multilevel logit regression was used to measure the association between ethnicity, social interactions, own-group ethnic density and scores of 22+ on the Kessler scale of psychological distress. Self-reported ancestry w ...[more]

PMID: 23645917

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsRural and remote regions tend to be characterised by poorer socioeconomic conditions than urban areas, yet findings regarding differences in mental health between rural and urban areas have been inconsistent. This suggests that other features of these areas may reduce the impact of hardship on mental health. Little research has explored the relationship of financial hardship or deprivation with mental health across geographical areas.MethodsData were analysed from a large longitudinal Australian study of the mental health of individuals living in regional and remote communities. Financial hardship was measured using items from previous Australian national population research, along with measures of psychological distress (Kessler-10), social networks/support and community characteristics/locality, including rurality/remoteness (inner regional; outer regional; remote/very remote). Multilevel logistic regression modelling was used to examine the relationship between hardship, locality and distress. Supplementary analysis was undertaken using Australian Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey data.Results2161 respondents from the Australian Rural Mental Health Study (1879 households) completed a baseline survey with 26% from remote or very remote regions. A significant association was detected between the number of hardship items and psychological distress in regional areas. Living in a remote location was associated with a lower number of hardships, lower risk of any hardship and lower risk of reporting three of the seven individual hardship items. Increasing hardship was associated with no change in distress for those living in remote areas. Respondents from remote areas were more likely to report seeking help from welfare organisations than regional residents. Findings were confirmed with sensitivity tests, including replication with HILDA data, the use of alternative measures of socioeconomic circumstances and the application of different analytic methods.ConclusionsUsing a conventional and nationally used measure of financial hardship, people residing in the most remote regions reported fewer hardships than other rural residents. In contrast to other rural residents, and national population data, there was no association between such hardship and mental health among residents in remote areas. The findings suggest the need to reconsider the experience of financial hardship across localities and possible protective factors within remote regions that may mitigate the psychological impact of such hardship.

Dataset Information

Do social interactions explain ethnic differences in psychological distress and the protective effect of local ethnic density? A cross-sectional study of 226 487 adults in Australia.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Do social interactions explain ethnic differences in psychological distress and the protective effect of local ethnic density? A cross-sectional study of 226 487 adults in Australia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets