Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026
Migration background and specialized mental health care utilization in young adults: a register-based study in the Netherlands.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alozkan Sever Cansu, Ceccarelli Caterina, Cuijpers Pim, Mittendorfer-Rutz Ellenor, van Dam Jelger P, Akhtar Aemal, Oelrich Oscar, van der Ven Els, Witteveen Anke B, Sijbrandij Marit
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the differences in specialized mental health care utilization among young conflict-affected migrants in the Netherlands, compared to their Dutch-born and non-conflict-affected peers, and to assess the role of benefit receipt and duration of stay.
METHODS: This register-based study included 1,219,051 individuals aged 18–25 residing in the Netherlands on 1 January 2015. Participants were followed until 31 December 2018 for specialized mental health care contact. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using Cox regression. Exploratory analyses examined how benefit receipt and duration of stay relate to specialized mental health service use.
RESULTS: Compared to Dutch-born individuals, both conflict-affected (aHR 0.91, 95%CI 0.88–0.95) and non-conflict-affected migrants (aHR 0.63, 95%CI 0.61–0.65) had lower overall specialized mental health care utilization. Conflict-affected migrants showed higher utilization for psychotic (aHR 3.99, 95%CI 2.39–4.69) and anxiety disorders (aHR 1.27, 95%CI 1.17–1.38), whereas non-conflict-affected migrants had higher utilization for psychotic disorders (aHR 2.03, 95%CI 1.72–2.34) compared to Dutch-borns. Patterns of utilization also varied by benefit receipt and duration of stay, with differences across diagnostic categories.
CONCLUSION: Young migrants had lower overall use of specialized mental health care than Dutch-born peers, but higher use for psychotic, and anxiety disorders, varying by migration background. As unmet need cannot be assessed from our data, it remains unclear whether lower use reflects reduced need or access barriers. However, findings underscore persistent disparities and the need for policies ensuring equitable access.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-026-03052-0.
METHODS: This register-based study included 1,219,051 individuals aged 18–25 residing in the Netherlands on 1 January 2015. Participants were followed until 31 December 2018 for specialized mental health care contact. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using Cox regression. Exploratory analyses examined how benefit receipt and duration of stay relate to specialized mental health service use.
RESULTS: Compared to Dutch-born individuals, both conflict-affected (aHR 0.91, 95%CI 0.88–0.95) and non-conflict-affected migrants (aHR 0.63, 95%CI 0.61–0.65) had lower overall specialized mental health care utilization. Conflict-affected migrants showed higher utilization for psychotic (aHR 3.99, 95%CI 2.39–4.69) and anxiety disorders (aHR 1.27, 95%CI 1.17–1.38), whereas non-conflict-affected migrants had higher utilization for psychotic disorders (aHR 2.03, 95%CI 1.72–2.34) compared to Dutch-borns. Patterns of utilization also varied by benefit receipt and duration of stay, with differences across diagnostic categories.
CONCLUSION: Young migrants had lower overall use of specialized mental health care than Dutch-born peers, but higher use for psychotic, and anxiety disorders, varying by migration background. As unmet need cannot be assessed from our data, it remains unclear whether lower use reflects reduced need or access barriers. However, findings underscore persistent disparities and the need for policies ensuring equitable access.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-026-03052-0.