Psychological Therapy Outcomes and Engagement in People of Different Religions.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Zainab Shafan-Azhar, Jae Won Suh, Henry Delamain, Laura-Louise Arundell, Syed Ali Naqvi, Tania Knight, Sarah Ellard, Stephen Pilling, Rob Saunders, Joshua E J Buckman
{"title":"Psychological Therapy Outcomes and Engagement in People of Different Religions.","authors":"Zainab Shafan-Azhar, Jae Won Suh, Henry Delamain, Laura-Louise Arundell, Syed Ali Naqvi, Tania Knight, Sarah Ellard, Stephen Pilling, Rob Saunders, Joshua E J Buckman","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.4026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Identifying whether people of minoritized religious identities are less likely to benefit from psychological therapy is key to tackling inequalities in mental health treatment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess inequalities in the effectiveness of routinely delivered psychological therapy across religious groups and by the intersections with ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Retrospective cohort study including all patients who completed a course of treatment at 5 London-based National Health Service Talking Therapies for anxiety and depression (NHS TTad) services between 2011 and 2020. Individuals reported their religion using routine patient records collected by the services. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to October 2024.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>Self-identified religion was categorized into (1) no religion, (2) Christian, (3) Muslim, and (4) other (which was further categorized into Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Sikh, and any other in a sensitivity analysis). Ethnicity was conceptualized as a potential confounder and separately as an effect modifier. Self-reported ethnicity was categorized based on UK Census codes into Asian, Black, mixed race, White, and other ethnic groups.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Psychological treatment outcomes used to assess NHS TTad services nationally, including reliable recovery, recovery, and reliable deterioration. Dropout from treatment was also examined. These outcomes were defined based on pre-post treatment changes in depression and anxiety symptom measures according to national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 70 098 patients with data on self-reported religion were included in the study (mean [SD] age at referral, 39.2 [14.1] years; 47 797 [68.2%] female). After adjusting for sociodemographic, treatment-related, and clinical characteristics, the odds of reliable recovery were higher in patients who did not have any religious belief (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.26-1.42) or self-reported Christian (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.31-1.48) and other religion (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.34) compared with Muslim patients. While treatment outcomes improved each year in all groups, Muslim patients remained least likely to improve and more likely to deteriorate. There were interactions between religion and ethnicity; in particular, Muslim patients of White or other ethnic backgrounds had worse outcomes than Muslim patients of Asian, Black, or mixed race ethnic backgrounds and compared with non-Muslim patients of those ethnicities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In England, patients who identified as Muslim, and particularly those of White or other ethnicities, had poorer outcomes from psychological therapies for depression and anxiety disorders than patients who reported no religion or any other religion. This may be partly due to unmeasured characteristics that warrant further investigation (eg, nationality and asylum-seeking or refugee status). Best practice guidelines on working with people of minoritized ethnicities may inform some of the changes needed to reduce inequalities, but must address religious identity separate from ethnicity, as well as their intersections.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 4","pages":"e254026"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.4026","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Identifying whether people of minoritized religious identities are less likely to benefit from psychological therapy is key to tackling inequalities in mental health treatment.

Objective: To assess inequalities in the effectiveness of routinely delivered psychological therapy across religious groups and by the intersections with ethnicity.

Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective cohort study including all patients who completed a course of treatment at 5 London-based National Health Service Talking Therapies for anxiety and depression (NHS TTad) services between 2011 and 2020. Individuals reported their religion using routine patient records collected by the services. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to October 2024.

Exposures: Self-identified religion was categorized into (1) no religion, (2) Christian, (3) Muslim, and (4) other (which was further categorized into Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Sikh, and any other in a sensitivity analysis). Ethnicity was conceptualized as a potential confounder and separately as an effect modifier. Self-reported ethnicity was categorized based on UK Census codes into Asian, Black, mixed race, White, and other ethnic groups.

Main outcomes and measures: Psychological treatment outcomes used to assess NHS TTad services nationally, including reliable recovery, recovery, and reliable deterioration. Dropout from treatment was also examined. These outcomes were defined based on pre-post treatment changes in depression and anxiety symptom measures according to national guidelines.

Results: A total of 70 098 patients with data on self-reported religion were included in the study (mean [SD] age at referral, 39.2 [14.1] years; 47 797 [68.2%] female). After adjusting for sociodemographic, treatment-related, and clinical characteristics, the odds of reliable recovery were higher in patients who did not have any religious belief (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.26-1.42) or self-reported Christian (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.31-1.48) and other religion (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.34) compared with Muslim patients. While treatment outcomes improved each year in all groups, Muslim patients remained least likely to improve and more likely to deteriorate. There were interactions between religion and ethnicity; in particular, Muslim patients of White or other ethnic backgrounds had worse outcomes than Muslim patients of Asian, Black, or mixed race ethnic backgrounds and compared with non-Muslim patients of those ethnicities.

Conclusions and relevance: In England, patients who identified as Muslim, and particularly those of White or other ethnicities, had poorer outcomes from psychological therapies for depression and anxiety disorders than patients who reported no religion or any other religion. This may be partly due to unmeasured characteristics that warrant further investigation (eg, nationality and asylum-seeking or refugee status). Best practice guidelines on working with people of minoritized ethnicities may inform some of the changes needed to reduce inequalities, but must address religious identity separate from ethnicity, as well as their intersections.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
×
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