4.6 Article

Ethnicity and long-term course and outcome of psychotic disorders in a UK sample: the AESOP-10 study

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Volume 211, Issue 2, Pages 88-+

Publisher

ROYAL COLL PSYCHIATRISTS
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.193342

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. UK Medical Research Council [G0500817]
  2. Department of Health via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London
  3. Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM)
  4. King's College London
  5. MRC [MR/K013807/1, G106/1148, G1100583, G0700995, G0600972] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Medical Research Council [G0600972, MR/K013807/1, G1100583, G0700995] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0512-10110, RP-PG-0606-1049] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The incidence of psychotic disorders s elevated in some minority ethnic populations. However, we know little about the outcome of psychoses in these populations. Alms To investigate patterns and determinants of long-term course and outcome of psychoses by ethnic group following a first episode. method SOP-10 is a 10-year follow-up of an ethnically diverse cohort of 532 individuals with first-episode psychosis identified in the UK. Information was collected, at baseline, on clinical presentation and neurodevelopmental and social factors and, at follow-up, on course and outcome. Results There was evidence that, compared with White British, Black Caribbean patients experienced worse clinical, social and service use outcomes and Black African patients experienced worse social and service use outcomes. There was evidence that baseline social disadvantage contributed to these disparities. Conclusions These findings suggest ethnic disparities in the incidence of psychoses extend, for some groups, to worse outcomes in multiple domains.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available