↓ Skip to main content

‘The Healthy Migrant Effect’ for Mental Health in England: Propensity-score Matched Analysis Using the EMPIRIC Survey

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
‘The Healthy Migrant Effect’ for Mental Health in England: Propensity-score Matched Analysis Using the EMPIRIC Survey
Published in
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10903-017-0570-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amrit Dhadda, Giles Greene

Abstract

Evidence has demonstrated that immigrants have a mental health advantage over the indigenous population of developed countries. However, much of the evidence-base demonstrating this mental health advantage is susceptible to confounding and inadequate adjustment across immigrant and non-immigrant groups preventing a rigorous assessment of a 'healthy migrant effect'. To compare the risk of common mental disorders in the immigrant population compared to the non-immigrant population in ethnic minority groups in England. A propensity-score matched analysis was carried out to adequately balance immigrant and non-immigrant groups for known confounders using the EMPIRIC national survey of Black-Caribbean, Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups. The mental health of participants was assessed using the validated Revised Clinical Interview Schedule tool. Immigrant participants were significantly less likely to have a common mental disorder than non-immigrant participants; OR = 0.47, (95% CI 0.40, 0.56). The results from this study demonstrate that a mental health advantage exists in ethnic minority immigrants compared to non-immigrants when balancing the two groups for confounding factors. This may be due to immigrants possessing certain personality traits, such as "psychological hardiness", that the migration process may select for.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 34 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 19%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Psychology 11 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 43 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,965,682
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#150
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,497
of 312,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.