CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Mental Health Treatment and AccessRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchHealth disparities and outcomes

Racial/ethnic differences in 12-month prevalence and persistence of mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders: Variation by nativity and socioeconomic status

Open access
Vilsaint, Corrie L., NeMoyer, Amanda, Fillbrunn, Mirko, Sadikova, Ekaterina, Kessler, Ronald C., Sampson, Nancy A., Alvarez, Kiara, Green, Jennifer Greif +5 more·2019·Comprehensive Psychiatry
DOI 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.12.008PMC PMC6421861
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite equivalent or lower lifetime and past-year prevalence of mental disorder among racial/ethnic minorities compared to non-Latino Whites in the United States, evidence suggests that mental disorders are more persistent among minorities than non-Latino Whites. But, it is unclear how nativity and socioeconomic status contribute to observed racial/ethnic differences in prevalence and persistence of mood, anxiety, and substance disorders. METHOD: Data were examined from a coordinated series of four national surveys that together assessed 21,024 Asian, non-Latino Black, Latino, and non-Latino White adults between 2001 and 2003. Common DSM-IV mood, anxiety, and substance disorders were assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Logistic regression analyses examined how several predictors (e.g., race/ethnicity, nativity, education, income) and the interactions between those predictors were associated with both 12-month disorder prevalence and 12-month prevalence among lifetime cases. For the second series of analyses, age of onset and time since onset were used as additional control variables to indirectly estimate disorder persistence. RESULTS: Non-Latino Whites demonstrated the highest unadjusted 12-month prevalence of all disorder types (p < 0.001), though differences were also observed across minority groups. In contrast, Asian, Latino, and Black adults demonstrated higher 12-month prevalence of mood disorders among lifetime cases than Whites (p < 0.001) prior to adjustments Once we introduced nativity and other relevant controls (e.g., age, sex, urbanicity), US-born Whites with at least one US-born parent demonstrated higher 12-month mood disorder prevalence than foreign-born Whites or US-born Whites with two foreign parents (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = [0.36, 0.73]); this group also demonstrated higher odds of past-year mood disorder than Asian (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = [0.42, 0.82]) and Black (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = [0.58, 0.83]) adults, but not Latino adults (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = [0.74, 1.06]). Racial/ethnic differences in 12-month mood and substance disorder prevalence were moderated by educational attainment, especially among adults without a college education. Additionally, racial/ethnic minority groups with no more than a high school education demonstrated more persistent mood and substance disorders than non-Latino Whites; these relationships reversed or disappeared at higher education levels. CONCLUSION: Nativity may be a particularly relevant consideration for diagnosing mood disorder among non-Latino Whites; additionally, lower education appears to be associated with increased relative risk of persistent mood and substance use disorders among racial/ethnic minorities compared to non-Latino Whites.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.12.008

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Disproportionate exposure to race-related stressors may partly explain the higher prevalence and persistence rates of mood and anxiety disorders among Black, Asian, and Latinx groups compared with non-Latinx White groups.

    “This disproportionate exposure to race-related stressors may partly explain the higher prevalence and persistence rates of mood and anxiety disorders among Black, Asian, and Latinx groups compared with non-Latinx White groups [12,13].”

    From App-Based Mindfulness Meditation for People of Color Who Experience Race-Related Stress: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Results (Unadjusted 12-month prevalence and persistence; page not provided) report lower mood and anxiety disorder prevalence among racial/ethnic minorities than among non-Latino Whites, not higher prevalence. They report higher mood disorder persistence but equal anxiety disorder persistence. The Discussion mentions greater exposure to discrimination, but does not link it to the higher prevalence and persistence asserted here. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [25]Saenz R Population bulletin update: Latinos in the United States 2010. Population Reference Bureau; 2010.
  2. [52]Myers HF, Lewis TT, Parker-Dominguez T. Handbook of racial and ethnic minority psychology Stress, coping and minority health. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2003.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Vilsaint, C. L., NeMoyer, A., Fillbrunn, M., Sadikova, E., Kessler, R. C., Sampson, N. A., Alvarez, K., Green, J. G., McLaughlin, K. A., Chen, R., Williams, D. R., Jackson, J. S., & Alegría, M.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • Institute for Social Research (US)
ORCID
Venue
Comprehensive Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
89
Pages
52-60
ISSN
0010-440X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.12.008
PMC
PMC6421861
OpenAlex
W2905128700
Cited by
127
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 4
FWCI
15.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Comprehensive Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R01MD009719)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (F32AA025823)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH019733)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
racial and ethnic disparities, nativity, socioeconomic status, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, prevalence of mental disorders, educational attainment, income, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, African Americans, immigrant mental health, age of onset, lifetime prevalence, ethnic minority mental health, United States adults, Composite International Diagnostic Interview, National Comorbidity Survey
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Ethnicity, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Social Class, United States, Prevalence, Mood Disorders, Substance-Related Disorders, Racial Groups

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review