Refugees are at an elevated risk of some mental disorders with studies highlighting the contributing role of post-migration factors. Studies of migrant groups show neighborhood social composition, such as ethnic density, to be important. This is the first longitudinal study to examine this question for refugees and uses a novel quasi-experimental design.

We followed a cohort of 44 033 refugees from being first assigned housing under the Danish dispersal policy, operating from 1986 to 1998, until 2019. This comprised, in effect, a natural experiment whereby the influence of assigned neighborhood could be determined independently of endogenous factors. We examined three aspects of neighborhood social composition: proportion of co-nationals, refugees, and first-generation migrants; and subsequent incidence of different mental disorders.

Refugees assigned to neighborhoods with fewer co-nationals (lowest v. highest quartile) were more likely to receive a subsequent diagnosis of non-affective psychosis, incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06–1.48), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), IRR 1.21 (95% CI I.05–1.39). A comparable but smaller effect was observed for mood disorders but none observed for stress disorders overall. Neighborhood proportion of refugees was less clearly associated with subsequent mental disorders other than non-affective psychosis, IRR 1.24 (95% CI 1.03–1.50). We found no statistically significant associations with proportion of migrants.

For refugees, living in a neighborhood with a lower proportion of co-nationals is related to subsequent increased risk of diagnosed mental disorders particularly non-affective psychosis and PTSD.

Elevated risk of psychosis for ethnic minority groups has generally been shown to be mitigated by high ethnic density. However, past survey studies examining UK Pakistani populations have shown an absence of protective ethnic density effects, which is not observed in other South Asian groups.

To assess the ethnic density effect at a local neighbourhood level, in the UK Pakistani population in East Lancashire.

Data was collected by the East Lancashire Early Intervention Service, identifying all cases of first episode psychosis (FEP) within their catchment area between 2012 and 2020. Multilevel Poisson regression analyses were used to compare incidence rates between Pakistani and White majority groups, while controlling for age, gender and area-level deprivation. The ethnic density effect was also examined by comparing incidence rates across high and low density areas.

A total of 455 cases of FEP (364 White, 91 Pakistani) were identified. The Pakistani group had a higher incidence of FEP compared to the White majority population. A clear effect of ethnic density on rates of FEP was shown, with those in low density areas having higher incidence rates compared to the White majority, whereas incidence rates in high density areas did not significantly differ. Within the Pakistani group, a dose-response effect was also observed, with risk of FEP increasing incrementally as ethnic density decreased.

Higher ethnic density related to lower risk of FEP within the Pakistani population in East Lancashire, highlighting the impact of local social context on psychosis incidence.

An ‘ethnic’ or ‘group’ density effect in psychosis has been observed, whereby the risk of psychosis in minority group individuals is inversely related to neighbourhood-level proportions of others belonging to the same group. However, there is conflicting evidence over whether this effect differs between minority groups and limited investigation into other moderators.

To conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the group density effect in psychosis and examine moderators.

Four databases were systematically searched. A narrative review was conducted and a three-level meta-analysis was performed. The potential moderating effect of crudely and specifically defined minority groups was assessed. Country, time, area size and whether studies used clinical or non-clinical outcomes were also tested as moderators.

Thirty-two studies were included in the narrative review and ten in the meta-analysis. A 10 percentage-point decrease in own-group density was associated with a 20% increase in psychosis risk (OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.09−1.32, P < 0.001). This was moderated by crudely defined minority groups (F6,68 = 6.86, P < 0.001), with the strongest associations observed in Black populations, followed by a White Other sample. Greater heterogeneity was observed when specific minority groups were assessed (F25,49 = 7.26, P < 0.001).

This is the first review to provide meta-analytic evidence that the risk of psychosis posed by lower own-group density varies across minority groups, with the strongest associations observed in Black individuals. Heterogeneity in effect sizes may reflect distinctive social experiences of specific minority groups. Potential mechanisms are discussed, along with the implications of findings and suggestions for future research.

Many studies report an ethnic density effect whereby psychosis incidence among ethnic minority groups is higher in low co-ethnic density areas. It is unclear whether an equivalent density effect applies with other types of socioeconomic disadvantages.

We followed a population cohort of 2 million native Danes comprising all those born on 1st January 1965, or later, living in Denmark on their 15th birthday. Socioeconomic disadvantage, based on parents' circumstances at age 15 (low income, manual occupation, single parent and unemployed), was measured alongside neighbourhood prevalence of these indices.

Each indicator was associated with a higher incidence of non-affective psychosis which remained the same, or was slightly reduced, if neighbourhood levels of disadvantage were lower. For example, for individuals from a low-income background there was no difference in incidence for those living in areas where a low-income was least common [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93–1.10 v. those in the quintile where a low income was most common. Typically, differences associated with area-level disadvantage were the same whether or not cohort members had a disadvantaged background; for instance, for those from a manual occupation background, incidence was lower in the quintile where this was least v. most common (IRR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71–0.97), as it was for those from a non-manual background (IRR 0.77; 95% CI 0.67–0.87).

We found little evidence for group density effects in contrast to previous ethnic density studies. Further research is needed with equivalent investigations in other countries to see if similar patterns are observed.

Black, Asian and minority ethnicity groups may experience better health outcomes when living in areas of high own-group ethnic density – the so-called ‘ethnic density’ hypothesis. We tested this hypothesis for the treatment outcome of compulsory admission.

Data from the 2010–2011 Mental Health Minimum Dataset (N = 1 053 617) was linked to the 2011 Census and 2010 Index of Multiple Deprivation. Own-group ethnic density was calculated by dividing the number of residents per ethnic group for each lower layer super output area (LSOA) in the Census by the LSOA total population. Multilevel modelling estimated the effect of own-group ethnic density on the risk of compulsory admission by ethnic group (White British, White other, Black, Asian and mixed), accounting for patient characteristics (age and gender), area-level deprivation and population density.

Asian and White British patients experienced a reduced risk of compulsory admission when living in the areas of high own-group ethnic density [odds ratios (OR) 0.97, 95% credible interval (CI) 0.95–0.99 and 0.94, 95% CI 0.93–0.95, respectively], whereas White minority patients were at increased risk when living in neighbourhoods of higher own-group ethnic concentration (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.11–1.26). Higher levels of own-group ethnic density were associated with an increased risk of compulsory admission for mixed-ethnicity patients, but only when deprivation and population density were excluded from the model. Neighbourhood-level concentration of own-group ethnicity for Black patients did not influence the risk of compulsory admission.

We found only minimal support for the ethnic density hypothesis for the treatment outcome of compulsory admission to under the Mental Health Act.

Ethnic minority individuals have an increased risk of developing a psychotic disorder, particularly if they live in areas of ethnic segregation, or low own group ethnic density. The neurobiological mechanisms underlying this ethnic minority associated risk are unknown. We used functional MRI to investigate neural responses to faces of different ethnicity, in individuals of black ethnicity, and a control group of white British ethnicity individuals.

In total 20 individuals of black ethnicity, and 22 individuals of white British ethnicity underwent a 3T MRI scan while viewing faces of black and white ethnicity. Own group ethnic density was calculated from the 2011 census. Neighbourhood segregation was quantified using the Index of Dissimilarity method.

At the within-group level, both groups showed greater right amygdala activation to outgroup faces. Between groups, the black ethnicity group showed greater right amygdala activation to white faces, compared to the white ethnicity group. Within the black ethnicity group, individuals living in areas of lower own group ethnic density showed greater right amygdala reactivity to white faces (r = −0.61, p = 0.01).

This is the first time an increased amygdala response to white faces has been demonstrated in individuals of black ethnicity. In the black ethnicity group, correlations were observed between amygdala response and neighbourhood variables associated with increased psychosis risk. These results may have relevance for our understanding of the increased rates of paranoia and psychotic disorders in ethnic minority individuals.

Despite increased ethnic diversity in more economically developed countries it is unclear whether residential concentration of ethnic minority people (ethnic density) is detrimental or protective for mental health. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis covering the international literature, assessing ethnic density associations with mental health outcomes.

We systematically searched Medline, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science from inception to 31 March 2016. We obtained additional data from study authors. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis taking into account clustering of estimates within datasets. Meta-regression assessed heterogeneity in studies due to ethnicity, country, generation, and area-level deprivation. Our main exposure was ethnic density, defined as the residential concentration of own racial/ethnic minority group. Outcomes included depression, anxiety and the common mental disorders (CMD), suicide, suicidality, psychotic experiences, and psychosis.

We included 41 studies in the review, with meta-analysis of 12 studies. In the meta-analyses, we found a large reduction in relative odds of psychotic experiences [odds ratio (OR) 0.82 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76–0.89)] and suicidal ideation [OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.79–0.98)] for each 10 percentage-point increase in own ethnic density. For CMD, depression, and anxiety, associations were indicative of protective effects of own ethnic density; however, results were not statistically significant. Findings from narrative review were consistent with those of the meta-analysis.

The findings support consistent protective ethnic density associations across countries and racial/ethnic minority populations as well as mental health outcomes. This may suggest the importance of the social environment in patterning detrimental mental health outcomes in marginalized and excluded population groups.