MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407687725 · doi:10.1186/s13034-025-00864-x

Multiple forms of discrimination and obsessive-compulsive disorder: a prospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4407687725 on OpenAlexaff
Jason M. Nagata, Jonanne Talebloo, T.S. Diep, Joan Shim, Abubakr A A Al-Shoaibi, Kyle T. Ganson, Alexander Testa, Jinbo He, Jason M. Lavender, Fiona C. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteDoris Duke Charitable Foundation
KeywordsSexual orientationProspective cohort studyDemographyEthnic groupLogistic regressionPsychologyCohortBody mass indexCohort studyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Discrimination increases the risk for adverse mental health in minority populations, with studies showing elevated rates of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in Black adults facing racial discrimination. Yet, there is a lack of longitudinal research on the different forms of discrimination in relation to OCD risk in early adolescence. The objective of this study was to examine the prospective associations between multiple forms of discrimination and OCD in a national sample of U.S. early adolescents. METHODS: We examined prospective cohort data from Year 2 (2018-2020, ages 10-13) and Year 3 (2019-2021) of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (N = 7,983). Multiple logistic regression models were used to analyze associations between Year 2 past 12-month experiences of discrimination (based on race and ethnicity, country of origin, sexual orientation, weight, and combined multi-discrimination) and Year 3 probable OCD (Child Behavior Checklist; based on dichotomized t-score indicating high risk), adjusting for theoretically relevant covariates including age, sex, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, country of origin, household income, parent education, depression, body mass index category, study site, and Year 2 probable OCD. RESULTS: Adjusting for all covariates, multi-discrimination (OR = 1.67; 95% CI 1.23, 2.27), racial discrimination (OR = 2.77; 95% CI 1.32, 5.80), sexual orientation discrimination (OR = 2.51; 95% CI 1.11, 5.64), and weight discrimination (OR = 2.51; 95% CI 1.13, 5.59) at Year 2 were prospectively associated with developing probable OCD at Year 3. There were no significant findings for discrimination based on country of origin. CONCLUSIONS: Early adolescents who have experienced several forms of discrimination have higher odds of developing probable OCD, suggesting the utility of screening for OCD in even younger adolescents who have encountered discrimination. Educators can play a role in guiding adolescents experiencing discrimination to appropriate resources for accessing mental healthcare.

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)0.000
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental HealthSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207