Suchergebnisse

Background Despite an overall reduction in suicide, educational disparities in suicide have not decreased over the last decade. The mechanisms behind educational disparities in suicide, however, remain unclear: low educational status may increase the risk of suicide ("causation") or low educational status and suicide may share confounders. This paper assesses whether educational disparities in suicide (EDS) are more likely to be due to causation. Method The DEMETRIQ study collected and harmonized register-based data on mortality follow-up from forty population censuses from twelve European populations. More than 102,000 suicides were registered over 392 million person-years. Three analyses were carried out. First, we applied an instrumental variable approach that exploits changes in the legislation on compulsory educational age to instrument educational status. Second, we analyzed EDS by age under the hypothesis that increasing EDS over the life cycle supports causation. Finally, we compared EDS in men and women under the assumption that greater EDS in women would support causation. Findings The instrumental variable analysis showed no evidence for causation between higher education and suicide, for men or women. The life-cycle analysis showed that the decrease of educational inequalities in suicide between the baseline 1991 period and the 2001 follow-up period was more pronounced and statistically significant in the first three younger age groups. The gender analysis indicated that EDS were systematic and greater in men than in women: the rate ratio of suicide for men with low level of education (RR = 2.51; 95%CI:2.44–2.58) was higher than the rate ratio in women (RR = 1.32; 95CI%:1.26–1.38). Interpretation Overall, there was little support for the causation hypothesis, suggesting that the association between education and suicide is confounded. Educational inequalities in suicide should be addressed in early life by early targeting of groups who struggle to complete their education and display higher risk of mental disorder or of mental health vulnerabilities.

Background Despite an overall reduction in suicide, educational disparities in suicide have not decreased over the last decade. The mechanisms behind educational disparities in suicide, however, remain unclear: low educational status may increase the risk of suicide ("causation") or low educational status and suicide may share confounders. This paper assesses whether educational disparities in suicide (EDS) are more likely to be due to causation. Method The DEMETRIQ study collected and harmonized register-based data on mortality follow-up from forty population censuses from twelve European populations. More than 102,000 suicides were registered over 392 million person-years. Three analyses were carried out. First, we applied an instrumental variable approach that exploits changes in the legislation on compulsory educational age to instrument educational status. Second, we analyzed EDS by age under the hypothesis that increasing EDS over the life cycle supports causation. Finally, we compared EDS in men and women under the assumption that greater EDS in women would support causation. Findings The instrumental variable analysis showed no evidence for causation between higher education and suicide, for men or women. The life-cycle analysis showed that the decrease of educational inequalities in suicide between the baseline 1991 period and the 2001 follow-up period was more pronounced and statistically significant in the first three younger age groups. The gender analysis indicated that EDS were systematic and greater in men than in women: the rate ratio of suicide for men with low level of education (RR = 2.51; 95%CI:2.44–2.58) was higher than the rate ratio in women (RR = 1.32; 95CI%:1.26–1.38). Interpretation Overall, there was little support for the causation hypothesis, suggesting that the association between education and suicide is confounded. Educational inequalities in suicide should be addressed in early life by early targeting of groups who struggle to complete their education and display higher risk of mental disorder or of mental health vulnerabilities.

ePUB and EPDF available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND licence.
This book illustrates life through the COVID-19 pandemic for ethnic minorities in Britain.
Drawing from the Evidence for Equality National Survey (EVENS), the book presents new evidence of ethnic inequalities and sheds new light on underlying racisms, opening them up to debate as crucial social concerns. Written by leading international experts in the field, this is a must-read for anyone interested in contemporary ethnic inequalities and racism from academics and policy makers to voluntary and community sector organisations.

Ethnic inequities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy have been reported in the United Kingdom (UK), and elsewhere. Explanations have mainly focused on differences in the level of concern about side effects, and in lack of trust in the development and efficacy of vaccines. Here we propose that racism is the fundamental cause of ethnic inequities in vaccine hesitancy. We introduce a theoretical framework detailing the mechanisms by which racism at the structural, institutional, and interpersonal level leads to higher vaccine hesitancy among minoritised ethnic groups. We then use data from Wave 6 of the UK Household Longitudinal Study COVID-19 Survey (November to December 2020) to empirically examine these pathways, operationalised into institutional, community, and individual-level factors. We use the Karlson–Holm–Breen method to formally compare the relationship between ethnicity and vaccine hesitancy once age and gender, sociodemographic variables, and institutional, community, and individual-level factors are accounted for. Based on the Average Partial Effects we calculate the percentage of ethnic inequities explained by each set of factors. Findings show that institutional-level factors (socioeconomic position, area-level deprivation, overcrowding) explained the largest part (42%) of the inequity in vaccine hesistancy for Pakistani or Bangladeshi people, and community-level factors (ethnic density, community cohesion, political efficacy, racism in the area) were the most important factors for Indian and Black groups, explaining 35% and 15% of the inequity, respectively. Our findings suggest that if policy intervened on institutional and community-level factors – shaped by structural and institutional racism - considerable success in reducing ethnic inequities might be achieved.

ePUB and ePDF available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND licence. This book examines how ethnicity shaped experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. Drawing from the Evidence for Equality National Survey (EVENS), the book compares the experiences of ethnic and religious minority groups and White British people in work and finances, housing and communities, health and wellbeing, policing and politics, racism and discrimination in the UK. Using unrivalled data in terms of population and topic coverage and complete with bespoke graphics, contributors present new evidence of ethnic inequalities and racism, opening them up to debate as crucial social concerns. Written by leading international experts in the field, this is a must-read for anyone interested in contemporary ethnic inequalities and racism, from academics and policy makers to voluntary and community sector organisations

As debates around ethnic identity and inequality gain both political and media interest, this important book is the first to offer in-depth analysis from the last three UK population censuses focusing on the dynamics of ethnic identity and inequalities in contemporary Britain. While providing a comprehensive overview, it also clarifies concepts associated with greater ethnic diversity, increased segregation, exclusive growth of minority groups through immigration and a national identity crisis. The contributions, all from experts in the field based at or affiliated to the Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, highlight persistent inequalities in access to housing, employment, education and good health faced by some ethnic groups. The book will be a valuable resource for policy makers and researchers in national and local government, community groups, academics, students, and will act as an authoritative text to cite in reports, dissertations and funding applications