Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Economics, National Taipei University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.
Psychol Med. 2023 Dec;53(16):7666-7676. doi: 10.1017/S0033291723001496. Epub 2023 Jun 5.
Prevalence of (PLEs) - reports of hallucinations and delusional thinking not meeting criteria for psychotic disorder - varies substantially across ethnoracial groups. What explains this range of PLE prevalence? Despite extensive research, the clinical significance of PLEs remains unclear. Are PLE prevalence and clinical severity differentially associated across ethnoracial groups?
We examined the lifetime prevalence and clinical significance of PLEs across ethnoracial groups in the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys ( = 11 139) using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) psychosis symptom screener. Outcomes included mental healthcare use (inpatient, outpatient), mental health morbidity (self-perceived poor/fair mental health, suicidal ideation or attempts), and impairment (role interference). Individuals with outcome onsets prior to PLE onset were excluded. We also examined associations of PLEs with CIDI diagnoses. Cox proportional-hazards regression and logistic regression modeling identified associations of interest.
Contrary to previous reports, only Asian Americans differed significantly from other U.S. ethnoracial groups, reporting lower lifetime prevalence (6.7% 8.0-11.9%) and mean number (0.09 0.11-0.18) of PLEs. In multivariate analyses, PLE clinical significance showed limited ethnoracial variation among Asian Americans, non-Caribbean Latinos, and Afro-Caribbeans. In other groups, mental health outcomes showed significant ethnoracial clustering by outcome (e.g. hospitalization and role interference with Caribbean-Latino origin), possibly due to underlying differences in psychiatric disorder chronicity or treatment barriers.
While there is limited ethnoracial variation in U.S. PLE prevalence, PLE clinical significance varies across U.S. ethnoracial groups. Clinicians should consider this variation when assessing PLEs to avoid exaggerating their clinical significance, contributing to mental healthcare disparities.
(PLEs)——即不符合精神病障碍标准的幻觉和妄想思维报告——在不同的族裔群体中差异很大。是什么解释了这种 PLE 患病率的范围?尽管进行了广泛的研究,但 PLE 的临床意义仍不清楚。PLE 患病率和临床严重程度是否在不同的族裔群体中存在差异?
我们使用复合国际诊断访谈(CIDI)精神病症状筛查器,在协作性精神流行病学调查(n=11139)中检查了不同族裔群体的 PLE 终生患病率和临床意义。结果包括精神保健的使用(住院、门诊)、心理健康发病(自我感知的心理健康状况不佳/一般、自杀意念或企图)和障碍(角色干扰)。在 PLE 发病之前有发病的个体被排除在外。我们还检查了 PLE 与 CIDI 诊断之间的关联。Cox 比例风险回归和逻辑回归模型确定了感兴趣的关联。
与之前的报告相反,只有亚裔美国人与其他美国族裔群体显著不同,报告的终生患病率较低(6.7%8.0-11.9%)和平均数量(0.090.11-0.18)PLEs。在多变量分析中,亚裔美国人、非加勒比裔拉丁裔和非加勒比裔黑人的 PLE 临床意义显示出有限的族裔差异。在其他群体中,心理健康结果因结果(例如与加勒比裔拉丁裔有关的住院和角色干扰)而表现出明显的族裔聚类,这可能是由于精神障碍的慢性或治疗障碍的潜在差异。
虽然美国 PLE 的患病率存在有限的族裔差异,但 PLE 的临床意义在不同的美国族裔群体中有所不同。临床医生在评估 PLE 时应考虑到这种差异,以避免夸大其临床意义,从而导致精神保健的差异。