4.4 Article

A comparison of single and intersectional social identities associated with discrimination and mental health service use: data from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey in England

Journal

SOCIAL PSYCHIATRY AND PSYCHIATRIC EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 57, Issue 10, Pages 2049-2063

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00127-022-02259-1

Keywords

Inequalities; Discrimination; Mental health; Latent class analysis; Intersectionality

Categories

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [203380/Z/16/Z]
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  3. Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Centre for Society and Mental Health at King's College London (ESRC) [ES/S012567/1]
  4. ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health at King's College London (ESRC) [ES/S012567/1]
  5. ESRC [ES/S002715/1]
  6. Health Foundation
  7. Academy of Medical Sciences
  8. King's College London
  9. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  10. ESRC PhD studentship, via the London Interdisciplinary Social Science Doctoral Training Partnership, (ESRC) [ES/P000703/1]
  11. UKRI [MR-VO49879/1]
  12. Wellcome Trust [203380/Z/16/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Inequities in mental health service use and treatment are influenced by social stratification processes, and discrimination is one important mechanism influencing such differences. Single and intersectional status analyses detected different inequity patterns, and past-year discrimination was associated with certain disadvantaged social statuses and greater mental health service use and treatment. The latent class approach offers policy-relevant insights into inequity patterns and mechanisms but may mask other key intersectional patterns.
Inequities in mental health service use (MHSU) and treatment are influenced by social stratification processes linked to socially contextualised interactions between individuals, organisations and institutions. These complex relations underpin observed inequities and their experience by people at the intersections of social statuses. Discrimination is one important mechanism influencing such differences. We compared inequities in MHSU/treatment through single and intersectional status analyses, accounting for need. We assessed whether past-year discrimination differentially influences MHSU/treatment across single and intersecting statuses. Data came from a population survey (collected 2014-2015) nationally representative of English households (N = 7546). We used a theory and datadriven approach (latent class analysis) which identified five intersectional groups in the population comprising common combinations of social statuses. Single status analyses identified characteristics associated with MHSU/treatment (being a sexual minority (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.65 95% CI:1.09-2.50), female (AOR 1.71, 95% CI:1.45-2.02), economically inactive (AOR 2.02, 95% CI:1.05-3.90), in the most deprived quintile (AOR 1.33, 95% CI:1.02-1.74), and Black (AOR 0.36 95% CI:0.20-0.66)). Intersectional analyses detected patterns not apparent from single status analyses. Compared to the most privileged group (White British, highly educated, employed, high social class), Retired White British had greater odds of MHSU/treatment (AOR 1.88, 95% CI:1.53-2.32) while Employed migrants had lower odds (AOR 0.39, 95% CI:0.27-0.55). Past-year discrimination was associated with certain disadvantaged social statuses and greater MHSU/treatment but-except for sexual minorities-adjusting for discrimination had little influence using either analytic approach. Observing patterns only by single social statuses masks potentially unanticipated and contextually varying inequities. The latent class approach offers policy-relevant insights into patterns and mechanisms of inequity but may mask other key intersectional patterns by statuses less common or under represented in surveys (e.g. UK-born ethnic minority groups). We propose multiple, context-relevant, theory-driven approaches to intersectional understanding of mental health inequalities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available