Centre for Health Research, School of Medicine, University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2013 May 2;3(5):e002713. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002713.
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.
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.
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.
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.
一个经常被提出但研究不足的假设是,族裔密度通过增加社会互动有益于心理健康。我们在澳大利亚的 19 个族裔的 226487 名 45 岁及以上成年人中检验了这一假设。
使用多层次逻辑回归来衡量族裔、社会互动、自身族裔密度与 Kessler 心理困扰量表 22+分之间的关联。自我报告的祖先被用作族裔的替代指标。社会互动的衡量指标包括过去一周内与(i)不住在一起的朋友或家人共度的次数;(ii)与电话中的某人交谈的次数;(iii)参加社交团体会议的次数;以及(iv)可以依靠的人,这些人不在家,但在 1 小时的行程内。自身族裔密度以人口普查收集区的比例来衡量。
在澳大利亚出生的人中,有 11%报告有心理困扰。心理困扰的风险在少数民族和出生地之间存在差异(例如,出生在黎巴嫩的黎巴嫩人有 33%,出生在瑞士的瑞士人有 4%)。这些差异在充分调整后仍然存在。社会互动在族裔群体之间存在差异,与较低的心理困扰和族裔密度相关。族裔密度与一些群体的心理困扰减少有关。然而,这种关联可以通过个体和社区特征来解释,而不是通过社会互动来解释。
社会互动是心理健康的重要相关因素,但既不能完全解释心理困扰的族裔差异,也不能解释自身族裔密度的保护作用。