Skip to main content

Table 4 Associations between Etiological risk factors and Psychosis Phenotypes (N = 47,004)

From: Impact of urban birth and upbringing on expression of psychosis in a Chinese undergraduate population

 

Psychoticism

n = 1961 (4.2%)

Paranoia

n = 2572 (5.5%)

Schizotypal symptoms

n = 867 (1.8%)a

Nuclear syndrome

n = 116 (0.2%)

Diagnosed Schizophrenia

n = 63 (0.1%)

N (%)

OR

N (%)

OR (95%CI)

N (%)

OR (95%CI)

N (%)

OR (95%CI)

N (%)

OR (95%CI)

Male sex

n = 23,444 (49.9%)

993 (50.6)

1.03 (0.94–1.13)

1253 (48.7)

0.95 (0.88–1.03)

393 (45.3)

0.83 (0.73–0.95)**

59 (50.9)

1.04 (0.72–1.50)

38 (60.3)

1.54 (0.93–2.56)

1.20 (1.08–1.33)***

1.07 (0.98–1.17)

0.88 (0.76–1.02)

1.06 (0.73–1.55)

1.61 (0.97–2.67)

Ethnic Minority

n = 4777 (10.2%)

228 (11.6)

1.18 (1.02–1.36)*

278 (10.8)

1.09 (0.96–1.24)

87 (10.0)

1.00 (0.80–1.25)

11 (9.5)

0.91 (0.49–1.70)

9 (14.3)

1.40 (0.69–2.83)

1.01 (0.86–1.19)

0.94 (0.81–1.09)

0.85 (0.67–1.09)

0.81 (0.42–1.53)

1.30 (0.64–2.64)

Low Family Income

n = 6986 (14.9%)

361 (18.4)

1.32 (1.17–1.48)***

386 (15.0)

1.03 (0.92–1.15)

135 (15.6)

1.08 (0.90–1.31)

26 (22.4)

1.63 (1.05–2.54)*

23 (36.5)

3.04 (1.81–5.11)***

1.11 (0.96–1.27)

0.83 (0.73–0.94)**

0.86 (0.70–1.06)

1.32 (0.83–2.10)

2.73 (1.62–4.60)***

Family history psychosis

n = 338 (0.7%)

32 (1.6)

2.43 (1.68–3.50)***

30 (1.2)

1.68 (1.15–2.45)**

15 (1.7)

2.47 (1.47–4.17)***

1 (0.9)

1.21 (0.17–8.69)

0

–

1.60 (1.04–2.48)*

1.04 (0.68–1.61)

1.61 (0.89–2.89)

0.74 (0.10–5.55)

–

Family history non-psychotic disorder

n = 440 (0.9%)

35 (1.9)

2.01 (1.42–2.84)***

52 (2.0)

2.32 (1.73–3.11)***

21 (2.4)

2.66 (1.70–4.14)***

0

–

0

–

1.25 (0.83–1.89)

1.63 (1.64–2.28)**

1.80 (1.09–2.96)*

–

–

Loss of parent

n = 632 (1.3%)

46 (2.3)

1.83 (1.35–2.47)***

62 (2.4)

1.91 (1.47–2.49)***

19 (2.2)

1.67 (1.05–2.66)*

1 (0.9)

0.63 (0.09–4.55)

0

–

1.31 (0.92–1.88)

1.48 (1.09–2.00)*

1.17 (0.70–1.97)

0.43 (0.06–3.18)

–

Physical abuse

n = 14,785 (31.5%)

1044

(53.2)

2.61 (2.38–2.86)***

1281 (49.8)

2.31 (2.13–2.50)***

464 (53.5)

2.64 (2.30–3.02)***

69 (59.5)

3.23 (2.22–4.68)***

33 (52.4)

2.29 (1.39–3.76)**

1.75 (1.58–1.95)***

1.62 (1.48–1.77)***

1.69 (1.46–1.96)***

1.88 (1.27–2.77)***

1.71 (1.03–2.85)*

Sexual abuse

n = 1360 (2.9%)

121 (6.2)

2.43 (1.93–2.84)***

146 (.7)

2.13 (1.79–2.55)***

60 (6.9)

2.52 (1.92–3.29)***

17 (14.7)

5.89 (3.50–9.90)***

3 (4.8)

1.77 (0.55–5.66)

1.83 (1.09–1.76)**

1.36 (1.10–1.69)**

1.35 (0.98–1.86)

2.63 (1.46–4.75)**

1.01 (0.31–3.35)

Neglect

n = 16,056 (34.2%)

1183 (60.3)

3.09 (2.81–3.39)***

1487 (57.8)

2.82 (2.60–3.06)***

552 (63.7)

3.50 (3.04–4.02)***

70 (60.3)

2.94 (2.02–4.26)***

37 (58.7)

2.70 (1.64–4.46)***

1.86 (1.68–2.07)***

1.82 (1.66–1.99)***

2.10 (1.80–2.44)***

1.62 (1.10–2.39)*

1.95 (1.17–3.26)*

  1. Adjusted for age and sex. Second row for each variable further adjusted for PHQ9 score
  2. aNuclear syndrome excluded from analysis
  3. *P < 0.05, **p < 0.01,***p < 0.001