Table 3.
First and Last Service Contacts in the Pathways to Care by Ethnic Group and Total Sample, N (%)
| Ethnic Group | Emergencya Room | Family Doctor/Walk-in Clinic | Clergya/Homeopathsb | Psychologists | Psychiatrists | School counsellorsa | Psychiatric Admissionsc |
| First service contacted vs all other contacts combinedd | |||||||
| White group | 28 (23.9) | 35 (29.9) | 14 (12.0) | 14 (11.6) | 9 (7.4) | 7 (6.0) | 9 (7.4) |
| Black group | 6 (22.2) | 10 (37.0) | 5 (18.5) | 2 (6.5) | 3 (9.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.2) |
| Asian group | 10 (41.7) | 6 (25.0) | 4 (16.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.0) | 2 (8.3) | 1 (4.0) |
| Other ethnicities | 11 (52.4) | 7 (33.3) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.5) | 1 (4.8) | 1 (4.5) |
| Total | 55/189 (23.9) | 58/189 (30.7) | 23/189 (12.2) | 16/199 (8.0) | 14/199 (7.0) | 10/189 (5.3) | 12/199 (6.0) |
| χ2e,f (P value) | P =.023 NSg | P =.806 | P =.223h | P =.100 | P =.820 | P =.557 | P =.772 |
| Last service contacted vs all other contacts combinedd | |||||||
| White group | 19 (16.4) | 14 (12.1) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (3.4) | 20 (17.2) | 3 (2.6) | 48 (41.4) |
| Black group | 2 (6.9) | 5 (17.2) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.4) | 7 (24.1) | 2 (6.9) | 10 (34.5) |
| Asian group | 4 (17.4) | 4 (17.4) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (8.7) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (43.5) |
| Other ethnicities | 1 (4.8) | 5 (23.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (19.0) | 5 (2.6) | 8 (38.1) |
| Totala | 26/189 (13.8) | 28/189 (14.8) | 0/189 (0.0) | 5/189 (2.6) | 33/189 (17.5) | 5/189 (2.6) | 76/189 (40.2) |
| χ2e,f (P value) | P = .319 | P = .513 | N/A | P = .669 | P =.539 | P =.357 | P =.896 |
Data are missing for 5.5% of the sample.
The title “homeopaths” includes homeopathic practitioners and traditional medicine healers.
Data are missing for 0.5% of the sample.
The numbers and percentages for the variable of “all other service contacts combined” were not displayed for each chi-square test to simplify the table. The row percentages for each group represent the percentage of participants from each ethnicity group that used the relevant service contact. The total of the row percentages (not shown) may be different from 100 because of missing information for some service contacts. The row percentages for each category labeled “total” represents the total percentage of that sample who used a given service contact.
Each chi-square analyses compare the 4 groups with respect to the first service contacted or last service contacted (whichever is relevant) vs all other contacts combined.
Table 3 involves multiple chi-square testing therefore an adjusted P value of.007 (.05/7 = 0.007) was used based on the Bonferroni adjustment.
The use of emergency room as the first point of contact represents a trend (P =.023) based on the Bonferroni adjustment.
When the black, Asian, and other ethnicities groups are combined to decrease the proportion of cells with small expected counts, a trend emerges (χ2 = 5.305; df = 1; P =.021).