Pharmaceutical Side Effects and Mental Health Paradoxes among Racial-Ethnic Minorities

Author:

Schnittker Jason1,Do Duy1

Affiliation:

1. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Abstract

Sociologists have long struggled to explain the minority mental health paradox: that racial-ethnic minorities often report better mental health than non-Hispanic whites despite social environments that seem less conducive to well-being. Using data from the 2008–2013 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), this study provides a partial explanation for the paradox rooted in a very different disparity. Evidence from MEPS indicates that non-Hispanic whites consume more pharmaceuticals than racial-ethnic minorities for a wide variety of medical conditions. Moreover, non-Hispanic whites consume more pharmaceuticals that although effective in treating their focal indication, include depression or suicide as a side effect. In models that adjust for the use of such medications, the minority advantage in significant distress is reduced, in some instances to statistical nonsignificance. Although a significant black and Hispanic advantage in a continuous measure of distress remains, the magnitude of the difference is reduced considerably. The relationship between the use of medications with suicide as a side effect and significant distress is especially large, exceeding, for instance, the relationship between poverty and significant distress. For some minority groups, the less frequent use of such medications is driven by better health (as in the case of Asians), whereas for others, it reflects a treatment disparity (as in the case of blacks), although the consequences for the mental health paradox are the same. The implications of the results are discussed, especially with respect to the neglect of psychological side effects in the treatment of physical disease as well as the problem of multiple morbidities.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Social Psychology

Cited by 16 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3