MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391616503 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2024.101622

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

2024· article· en· W4391616503 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas Calais‐Ferreira, Gregory T. Armstrong, Elisabeth Hahn, Giles Newton‐Howes, James Foulds, John L. Hopper, Frank M. Spinath, Paul Kurdyak, Jesse T Young

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Health and Medical Research CouncilSuicide Prevention AustraliaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsProspective cohort studyTwin studyCohortPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicineGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental disorders and perceived 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 sex differences in familial confounding, remains unexplored. We investigated potential unmeasured familial confounding in the association between mental disorders and perceived discrimination using a matched twin study design. We examined data from 2044 same-sex twin pairs (n = 4088) aged 16–25 years from the German population-based study ‘TwinLife'. We applied random-effects logistic regression to within-individual and within-and-between pair models of the association between mental disorder and perceived discrimination, and used likelihood ratio tests (LRTs) to compare these models. Multivariable models were adjusted for body mass index, educational attainment, and life satisfaction. There were 322 (8.1%) participants with a diagnosed mental disorder, and 15% (n = 604) of the cohort reported having experienced discrimination in the previous 12 months. 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. Our findings show that the association between mental disorder and discrimination is at least partially explained by unmeasured familial factors. Designing family-based healthcare models and 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207