MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388234137 · doi:10.1101/2023.11.01.23297942

Mental disorders and discrimination: a prospective cohort study of young twin pairs in Germany

2023· preprint· en· W4388234137 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas Calais‐Ferreira, Gregory Armstrong, Elisabeth Hahn, Giles Newton‐Howes, James Foulds, John L. Hopper, Frank M. Spinath, Paul Kurdyak, Jesse T Young

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Health and Medical Research CouncilSuicide Prevention AustraliaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsConfoundingDemographyOdds ratioTwin studyPsychologyConfidence intervalPopulationPsychiatryMedicineHeritabilityInternal medicineGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Mental disorders and discrimination share common risk factors. The association between having a mental disorder and experiencing discrimination is well-known, but the extent to which familial factors, such as genetic and shared environmental factors, might confound this association, including gender differences in familial confounding, remains unexplored. Aims We investigated potential unmeasured familial confounding in the relationship between mental disorders and discrimination. Method We examined 2,044 same-sex twin pairs aged 16–25 years from the German population-based study ’TwinLife’ . We used a matched design and random-effects regression applied to within-individual and within-and-between pair models for the association between mental disorder and discrimination, and used likelihood ratio tests (LRTs) to compare these models. Multivariable models were adjusted for body-mass-index, educational attainment, and global life satisfaction. Results Mental disorder and discrimination were associated in the adjusted within-individual model (adjusted odds ratio=2.19, 95% Confidence Interval:1.42–3.39, P <0.001). However, the within-and-between pair model showed that this association was explained by the within-pair mean (aOR=4.24, 95%CI:2.17–8.29, P <0.001) and not the within-pair difference (aOR=1.26, 95%CI:0.70–2.28, P =0.4) of mental disorder. Therefore, this association was mostly explained by familial confounding, which is also supported by the LRTs for the unadjusted and adjusted models ( P <0.001 and P =0.03, respectively). This familial confounding was more prominent for males than females. Conclusions Our findings show that the association between mental disorder and discrimination is almost fully explained by unmeasured familial factors. Incorporating family members in interventions targeted at ameliorating mental ill-health and experiences of discrimination among adolescents may improve efficacy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development→French-language works237,207→