Psychosis risk for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals: systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Jean-Paul Selten, Hussam Alrashed, Hans Oh, Gabriëlla A M Blokland
{"title":"Psychosis risk for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals: systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jean-Paul Selten, Hussam Alrashed, Hans Oh, Gabriëlla A M Blokland","doi":"10.1017/S0033291724002253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The social defeat hypothesis posits that low status and repeated humiliation increase the risk for psychotic disorders (PDs) and psychotic experiences (PEs). The purpose of this paper was to provide a systematic review of studies on risk of PDs and PEs among lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) people and a quantitative synthesis of any difference in risk. PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from database inception until January 30, 2024. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility and quality of studies, extracted effect sizes, and noted the results of mediation analyses. Using a random effects model we computed pooled odds ratios (ORs). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. The search identified seven studies of PDs and six of PEs. As for PDs, the unadjusted (2.13; 95% confidence interval 0.72-6.34) and covariate-adjusted pooled OR (2.24; 1.72-3.53) were not significantly increased for LGB individuals. After exclusion of a study of limited quality, both the unadjusted pooled OR (2.77; 1.21-6.32) and the covariate-adjusted pooled OR (2.67; 1.53-4.66) were significantly increased. The pooled ORs were increased for PEs: unadjusted, pooled OR = 1.97 (1.47-2.63), covariate-adjusted, pooled OR = 1.85 (1.50-2.28). Studies of PE that examined the mediating role of several variables reported that the contribution of drug abuse was small compared to that of psychosocial stressors. The results of a study in adolescents suggested a protective effect of parental support. These findings suggest an increased psychosis risk for LGB people and support the social defeat hypothesis.</p>","PeriodicalId":20891,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11536103/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724002253","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The social defeat hypothesis posits that low status and repeated humiliation increase the risk for psychotic disorders (PDs) and psychotic experiences (PEs). The purpose of this paper was to provide a systematic review of studies on risk of PDs and PEs among lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) people and a quantitative synthesis of any difference in risk. PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from database inception until January 30, 2024. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility and quality of studies, extracted effect sizes, and noted the results of mediation analyses. Using a random effects model we computed pooled odds ratios (ORs). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. The search identified seven studies of PDs and six of PEs. As for PDs, the unadjusted (2.13; 95% confidence interval 0.72-6.34) and covariate-adjusted pooled OR (2.24; 1.72-3.53) were not significantly increased for LGB individuals. After exclusion of a study of limited quality, both the unadjusted pooled OR (2.77; 1.21-6.32) and the covariate-adjusted pooled OR (2.67; 1.53-4.66) were significantly increased. The pooled ORs were increased for PEs: unadjusted, pooled OR = 1.97 (1.47-2.63), covariate-adjusted, pooled OR = 1.85 (1.50-2.28). Studies of PE that examined the mediating role of several variables reported that the contribution of drug abuse was small compared to that of psychosocial stressors. The results of a study in adolescents suggested a protective effect of parental support. These findings suggest an increased psychosis risk for LGB people and support the social defeat hypothesis.

女同性恋者、男同性恋者和双性恋者的精神病风险:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
社会挫败假说认为,地位低下和反复受辱会增加患精神病性障碍(PDs)和精神病性经历(PEs)的风险。本文旨在对有关女同性恋者、男同性恋者或双性恋者(LGB)罹患精神病性障碍和精神病性经历风险的研究进行系统综述,并对风险差异进行定量分析。我们检索了从数据库建立之初到 2024 年 1 月 30 日的 PubMed、PsycINFO、Embase 和 Web of Science。两位独立审稿人对研究的资格和质量进行了评估,提取了效应大小,并记录了中介分析的结果。我们使用随机效应模型计算了汇总的几率比(ORs)。我们遵循了《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南。通过检索,我们发现了 7 项 PD 研究和 6 项 PE 研究。在PDs方面,LGB人群的未调整OR值(2.13;95%置信区间为0.72-6.34)和经协变量调整的汇总OR值(2.24;1.72-3.53)均无明显增加。在排除了一项质量有限的研究后,未经调整的汇总 OR(2.77;1.21-6.32)和经协变量调整的汇总 OR(2.67;1.53-4.66)均显著增加。PE的汇总OR值也有所增加:未经调整的汇总OR值=1.97(1.47-2.63),经协变因素调整的汇总OR值=1.85(1.50-2.28)。对几个变量的中介作用进行研究后发现,与社会心理压力因素相比,药物滥用的作用很小。一项针对青少年的研究结果表明,父母的支持具有保护作用。这些研究结果表明,女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和变性者患精神病的风险增加,并支持社会失败假说。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Medicine
Psychological Medicine 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
711
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Now in its fifth decade of publication, Psychological Medicine is a leading international journal in the fields of psychiatry, related aspects of psychology and basic sciences. From 2014, there are 16 issues a year, each featuring original articles reporting key research being undertaken worldwide, together with shorter editorials by distinguished scholars and an important book review section. The journal''s success is clearly demonstrated by a consistently high impact factor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信