Skip to main content
Health Equity logoLink to Health Equity
. 2022 Jul 5;6(1):516–526. doi: 10.1089/heq.2021.0159

Psychological Distress Among Asian Indians and Non-Hispanic Whites in the United States

Zasim Azhar Siddiqui 1,*, Usha Sambamoorthi 1,2
PMCID: PMC9518809  PMID: 36186615

Abstract

Introduction:

The prevalence of psychological distress (PD) among Asian Indians is unknown. This study estimated and compared moderate–serious PD in Asian Indians and non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) in the United States.

Methods:

We used a cross-sectional design using the National Health Interview Survey (2012–2017). Adult (age >18 years) NHWs and Asian Indians (N=2,218) were included. PD was measured using the six-item Kessler (K6) scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the association of Asian Indian ethnicity with PD.

Results:

In the analysis, 19.9% of NHWs and 11.0% of Asian Indians reported moderate–serious PD. Asian Indians were less likely to report PD in both unadjusted (unadjusted odds ratio=0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.42–0.58) and fully adjusted (adjusted odds ratio=0.7; 95% CI 0.59–0.82) models.

Conclusions:

Asian Indians had a lower prevalence of PD than NHWs, likely due to multiple protective factors such as high socioeconomic status and lower multimorbidity.

Keywords: Asian Indian, Kessler (K6) psychological distress scale, National Health Interview Survey, psychological distress

Introduction

Psychological distress (PD) is a risk indicator for common mental health disorders in a community, and it is widely used in population health and epidemiological studies.1–3 It is defined as a set of painful mental and physical symptoms that are associated with normal fluctuations of mood in most people. In some cases, however, psychological distress may indicate the beginning of major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, somatization disorder, or a variety of other clinical conditions. It is assessed by many putative self-report measures of depression and anxiety.4

The prevalence of PD has remained stable in the United States for the last two decades.5–7 Recent studies reported a mean prevalence of serious PD in the range of 2.6% to 3.6%,5–7 whereas the prevalence of moderate PD was reported as 15.1%.6

PD is influenced by a multitude of factors that could act as risk factors for PD8–15 or protective against PD.16–24 The risk factors for PD include chronic health conditions, physical functional impairment, discrimination, and high work- and education-related stress.8–15,25 The protective factors include high education, high income, employment status, high social support, health insurance, and physical activities that are associated with lower PD.16–24,26–29 Immigration status may also act as a protective factor (healthy immigrant effect), suggesting that first-generation immigrants usually have better physical and mental health than the natives of host countries.30–32

Variations in PD across different racial and ethnic groups are of particular interest because of systematic differences in factors that may protect against PD or increase the risk of PD. Racial minorities experience varying levels of stress exposure, but have abilities and resources to cope with them.24 For example, racial/ethnic minorities can face additional stressors such as perceived racism, stigmatization, and discrimination that can increase the risk of PD.33 On the other hand, one's racial/ethnic identity itself may be used as a coping factor, which in turn may become a protective factor against PD.34

While education, income, employment, old age, male sex, and social support are well-documented protective factors across all racial/ethnic groups, chronic diseases and disability explain the differences in the prevalence of PD among racial/ethnic groups.17,18,21,24,35,36 However, the degree of protection and magnitude of risk may vary across racial/ethnic groups. For example, the effect of chronic diseases in developing PD is highest among Native Americans, Blacks, and Hispanics.

In comparison, the least impact of chronic diseases is seen among non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) and Asian Americans.21,24 Moreover, studies show that differences in PD persist even after controlling for the risk and protective factors for racial/ethnic groups.17,24

Most studies on PD, by race/ethnicity, focus on NHWs, African Americans, or Hispanics.37–43 Even when other racial/ethnic minorities are examined, the studies combine the racial groups. Researchers generally combined all the Asian American ethnicities into one group (e.g., Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese), whereas research shows challenges in grouping all the Asian American ethnicities together due to their disparate socioeconomic status.32,44

Existing studies have generalized the cultural background of Asian Americans and treated them as one racial group.21,45 One recent study examined PD among the racial subgroups of Asian Americans.20 This study observed that despite some shared cultures, the Asian races are culturally diverse, and PD among these subgroups can be significantly different.20 However, it only included Chinese, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese Asian American groups and did not include Asian Indians. Besides, this study included data from only one U.S. state.

Asian Indians compose 19% of the Asian American population in the United States.46,47 Asian Indians have characteristics that serve as protective factors against PD. For instance, Asian Indians in the United States have high educational attainment, lower unemployment, lower poverty rate, and higher social support through marriage than the general population.48 Studies have also shown that Asian Indians retain a strong culture, ethnic identity, and traditional family structure at home while adapting to the U.S. culture and propriety outside the home.49,50

Besides the protective factor, Asian Indians are exposed to multiple risks that could lead to PD. For instance, the Asian Indian population in the United States is younger,48 reports a high incidence of discrimination,51 and has a high prevalence of chronic diseases, such as diabetes and coronary heart disease, and perceived discrimination for accessing health care services.52,53

Existing literature shows that Asian Indians have several protective and risk factors that could help them cope or develop/exaggerate PD. No study has evaluated PD in Asian Indians in the United States. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess PD in the Asian Indian population and compare it with the NHW population in the United States using nationally representative data.

Methods

Study design

This study used a cross-sectional design using National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2012 to 2017. The study was performed using NHIS public-use files consisting of deidentified data, hence it does not require ethics committee approval.

Data source

NHIS is an annual cross-sectional survey designed to monitor the health of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States.54,55 It is conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics and was initiated in 1957. The NHIS collects data on topics related to demographics, health insurance, health care access, health care utilization, health conditions, and behavioral risk factors.

In this study, we used the core survey—household, family, and sample adult components. The sample design involves multistage clustering, stratification, oversampling of specific groups, and use of survey weights to adjust for nonrespondents.

Study sample

Our study sample consisted of all NHWs and Asian Indian adults (age ≥18 years) who responded to the sample adult survey and did not have any missing value on the PD measure, as defined by the six-item Kessler (K6) scale. We pooled NHIS data from 2012 to 2017 to ensure an adequate sample size for the Asian Indian subgroup.

The steps for the study sample selection are described in Appendix Figure A1. The final sample consisted of 126,835 participants (2,218 Asian Indians and 124,617 NHWs).

Measures

Dependent variable: moderate–serious nonspecific PD

The topic of PD was introduced into the survey in 1997.56 NHIS uses the K6 questions, commonly known as the K6 scale, to identify PD. This scale was developed by Kessler et al. for use in the core survey of the NHIS.56 The scale measures nonspecific PD rather than disorder-specific distress. The K6 scale in the NHIS contains six questions about the participant's mental state in the last 30 days. These questions asked subjects how often (in the last 30 days) they felt sad, nervous, restless/fidgety, hopeless, everything was an effort, and worthless. These items are rated on a five-point Likert scale from “none of the time” (response=0) to “all of the time” (response=4), with the summary score ranging from 0 to 24.

Conventionally, the K6 scale uses the cutpoint score of K6≥13 to identify serious PD. Prochaska et al. determined and validated the subthreshold cutpoint to distinguish between no or low distress (K6<5), moderate distress (5 ≥ K6<13), and serious distress (K6≥13).57 Due to the low prevalence of serious PD, the added moderate threshold in the K6 scale helps to identify participants with significant, but not serious, PD.

In this study, we used the K6 scale score of ≥5 as a dependent variable to identify the sampling population with moderate–serious PD. We combined the two cutpoints due to the low prevalence of serious PD, especially considering the smaller sample size of the Asian Indian population in the United States.

Key independent variable: Asian Indians versus NHWs

Race/ethnicity was used as a key independent variable and classified as NHWs and Asian Indians to assess moderate–serious PD between the two groups. Participants were categorized as NHWs and Asian Indians based on their responses to the NHIS questions on (1) origin (Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin) and (2) race.

Individuals who responded no to the first question and selected White for race were categorized as NHWs. Individuals who responded no to the first question and selected Asian American and the subcategory Asian Indian for the second question were categorized as Asian Indians. In this study, we used only the Asian Indian race as a key independent variable as PD in people of other races and ethnicities, including Asian Americans and their subgroups, has been studied.17,20,21,24,58

Other independent variables

For the other independent variables, we used the individual characteristics that are known to be associated with PD based on published literature.17,59–66 We used biological factors such as age (18–39, 40–49, 50–64, or ≥65 years) and sex (male and female). Marital status was used to determine the respondent's social support. Socioeconomic status was determined using education level, employment status, and income level. For determining access to health care, we used insurance status (insured and not insured).

We also included the number of chronic diseases and conditions as no diseases, one disease, and two or more diseases. We used the race-adjusted body–mass index (BMI) to account for differences in the classification of overweight and obesity in Asian Indians and NHWs, as recommended by the World Health Organization guidelines.67 Physical exercise and activity were recorded as daily, weekly, monthly, or never.

The existing literature shows a bidirectional relationship of PD and behavioral characteristics, such as between smoking and PD62–64 as well as between alcohol use and PD.65,66 We included participants' smoking status (never, past, or current smoker) and their alcohol use status (never, past, or current alcohol user) to observe the effects of these behaviors on PD. The geographical region (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West) and the NHIS (2012–2017) were used as external factors.

Statistical analyses

Unadjusted differences in moderate–serious PD between NHWs and Asian Indians were examined using the Rao–Scott chi-square test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between race/ethnicity and moderate–serious PD. In the regression model, independent variables were added in sequential blocks to observe their effect on the dependent variable.

The first model was the unadjusted model with only race/ethnicity as an independent variable. In model 2, we added biological factors, age and sex, to the unadjusted model. In model 3, we added education as it is highly protective against PD. In model 4, we added the rest of the protective factors observed in the literature, which include marital status, socioeconomic status, health insurance, and physical activity. In model 5, we included the risk factors for PD, which included race-adjusted BMI, number of chronic diseases, and participants' smoking and alcohol use status. In model 6, we added geographical regions and NHIS years.

Parameter estimates from regression were transformed to odds ratios (ORs) and their confidence intervals were determined at 95%. The statistically significant level was set at p≤0.05. All analyses incorporated the strata and weights provided by the NHIS to account for the complex survey design. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc.).

Results

Sample characteristics

Based on the study criteria, data on 2,218 Asian Indians and 124,617 NHWs were analyzed. About half were women (51.4%) and younger than 50 years (50.1%). The majority were married (63.8%), with more than high school education (66.9%), were employed (60.1%), and had health insurance (91.2%). Nearly one in three (62.5%) reported at least one chronic condition.

Appendix Table A1 describes the characteristics of the sample in detail.

Description of characteristics of Asian Indians and NHWs

We found that a high percentage of the Asian Indian population was younger (74.2% participants were <50 years old) compared with NHWs (49.6% participants were <50 years old). In comparison with NHWs, Asian Indians reported a higher percentage of marriage (77.1% vs. 63.6%), college education (73.20% vs. 34.5%), employment (68.50% vs. 60%), and income above 400% Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (54.40% vs. 42.9%).

The prevalence of chronic diseases was significantly higher in NHWs compared with Asian Indians as 63.1% NHWs reported one or more chronic diseases, whereas only 38.5% of Asian Indians reported one or more chronic diseases. Similarly, NHWs showed a higher prevalence of current smoking status (17.7% vs. 4.8%) and alcohol use (69.9% vs. 44.1%). A higher percentage of Asian Indians were obese compared with NHWs (48% vs. 28%).

Table 1 describes differences in demographics, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, behavioral characteristics, and health status by race/ethnicity.

Table 1.

Description of Sample by Racial/Ethnic Characteristics of Adults (≥18 Years) Using the National Health Interview Survey, 2012–2017

Sample characteristics NHWs
Asian Indians
p
N (124,617) Wt. % N (2,218) Wt. %
Moderate–serious PD (K6≥5)         <0.001
 Moderate–serious PD 25,827 19.9 267 11.0  
 No PD 98,790 80.1 1,951 89.0  
Serious PD (K6≥13)         <0.001
 Serious PD 4,553 3.4 31 1.00  
 No PD 120,064 96.6 2,187 99.0  
Sex         0.015
 Women 67,514 51.5 1,000 48.0  
 Men 57,103 48.5 1,218 52.0  
Age in years         <0.001
 18–39 37,116 33.6 1,332 53.5  
 40–49 17,956 16.0 402 20.7  
 50–64 34,458 27.8 308 17.8  
 ≥65 35,087 22.5 176 8.0  
Marital status         <0.001
 Married 65,643 63.6 1,509 77.1  
 Widow, separated, or divorced 34,578 17.8 160 5.5  
 Never married 24,165 18.5 546 17.3  
Education         <0.001
 Less than high school 10,812 8.3 93 5.3  
 High school 31,133 24.9 189 10.0  
 Some college 40,421 32.0 237 11.3  
 College 41,949 34.5 1,693 73.2  
Poverty status         <0.001
 <100% Federal Poverty Level (FPL) 13,384 8.3 247 8.4  
 100 to <200% 19,619 13.7 235 9.9  
 200 to <400% 34,177 27.0 404 19.7  
 ≥400% 47,614 42.9 1,159 54.4  
Employment         <0.001
 Employed 70,578 60.0 1,544 68.5  
 Unemployed 53,989 40.0 673 31.5  
Health insurance         0.661
 Insured 113,558 91.2 2,029 91.5  
 Uninsured 10,722 8.5 182 8.2  
Physical activity/exercise         <0.001
 Daily exercise 8,572 7.0 159 7.2  
 Weekly 44,802 37.8 950 41.4  
 Monthly, yearly, or never 67,424 52.5 1,089 50.3  
 Unable to exercise 2,862 1.8 5 0.3  
Race-adjusted BMI         <0.001
 Underweight and normal 44,386 35.7 707 29.7  
 Overweight 41,677 33.4 466 21.2  
 Obese 34,932 28.0 1,020 48.0  
No. of chronic diseases         <0.001
 No 42,419 37.0 1,425 61.5  
 One 29,672 24.4 460 21.3  
 Two or more 52,510 38.7 333 17.2  
Smoking status         <0.001
 Never smoker 67,551 56.0 1,915 87.2  
 Past smoker 34,176 26.1 172 7.9  
 Current smoker 22,617 17.7 126 4.8  
Alcohol use       <0.001
 Never drinker 18,199 14.8 1,057 49.4  
 Former drinker 19,942 14.4 112 5.5  
 Current drinker 85,464 69.9 1030 44.1  
Region         <0.001
 Northeast 22,515 19.0 490 24.4  
 Midwest 33,088 27.5 385 16.8  
 South 39,520 33.7 727 32.1  
 West 29,494 19.8 616 26.7  
NHIS year         0.002
 2012 20,767 17.0 404 13.8  
 2013 20,119 16.5 394 14.4  
 2014 22,360 16.6 389 16.2  
 2015 20,359 16.5 394 17.3  
 2016 22,727 16.7 341 20.4  
 2017 18,285 16.7 296 18.0  

Based on 124,617 NHWs and 2,218 Asian Indians (age ≥18 years); cross-sectional data of NHIS participants (Asian Indians or NHWs), from multiple years (2012 through 2017), who participated in the sample adult core and did not have missing data on the PD scale. Numbers may not add up to the total in each group due to missing data for marital status, education, employment, poverty status, health insurance, physical activity, BMI, smoking status, and alcohol use.

BMI, body–mass index; K6, six-item Kessler; FPL, Federal Poverty Level; NHIS, National Health Interview Survey; NHWs, non-Hispanic Whites; PD, psychological distress.

Table 2 describes differences in demographics, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, behavioral characteristics, and health status by the prevalence of moderate-serious psychological distress.

Table 2.

Description of Sample by the Prevalence of Moderate–Serious Psychological Distress in Adults (≥18 Years) Using the National Health Interview Survey, 2012–2017

  Moderate–serious PD
No moderate–serious PD
p
N (26,094) Wt. % N (100,741) Wt.%
Sex         <0.001
 Women 15,616 22.2 52,898 77.8  
 Men 10,478 17.1 47,843 82.9  
Age in years         <0.001
 18 to 39 8,722 21.8 29,726 78.2  
 40 to 49 4,242 21.4 14,116 78.6  
 50 to 64 7,705 20.2 27,061 79.8  
 ≥65 5,425 14.6 29,838 85.4  
Race/ethnicity         <0.001
 NHWs 25,827 19.9 98,790 80.1  
 Asian Indians 267 11.0 1,951 89.0  
Marital status         <0.001
 Married 11,250 16.7 55,902 83.3  
 Widow, separated, or divorced 8,689 25.7 26,049 74.3  
 Never married 6,115 24.3 18,596 75.7  
Education         <0.001
 Less than high school 3,331 29.8 7,574 70.2  
 High school 7,134 22.2 24,188 77.8  
 Some college 9,147 21.7 31,511 78.3  
 College 6,404 13.8 37,238 86.2  
Poverty status         <0.001
 <100% FPL 5,317 38.4 8,314 61.6  
 100 to <200% 6,005 30.4 13,849 69.6  
 200 to <400% 6,982 20.6 27,599 79.4  
 ≥400% 6,360 13.1 42,413 86.9  
Employment         <0.001
 Employed 12,420 16.3 59,702 83.7  
 Unemployed 13,668 24.8 40,994 75.2  
Health insurance         <0.001
 Insured 22,689 18.7 92,898 81.3  
 Uninsured 3,340 29.9 7,564 70.1  
Physical activity/exercise         <0.001
 Daily exercise 1,584 17.4 7,147 82.6  
 Weekly 7,491 15.7 38,261 84.3  
 Monthly, yearly, or never 15,646 22.1 52,867 77.9  
 Unable to exercise 1,185 43.2 1,682 56.8  
Race-adjusted BMI         <0.001
 Underweight and normal 8,815 18.9 36,278 81.1  
 Overweight 7,827 17.7 34,316 82.3  
 Obese 8,705 23.1 27,247 76.9  
No. of chronic diseases         <0.001
 No 6,686 14.9 37,158 85.1  
 One 5,849 18.8 24,283 81.2  
 Two or more 13,558 25.0 39,285 75.0  
Smoking status         <0.001
 Never smoker 11,559 45.8 57,907 59.3  
 Past smoker 6,847 24.8 27,501 26.0  
 Current smoker 7,631 29.2 15,112 14.5  
Alcohol use          
 Never drinker 3,572 14.2 15,684 15.8 <0.001
 Former drinker 5,292 18.7 14,762 13.2  
 Current drinker 17,030 66.4 69,464 70.2  
Region         <0.001
 Northeast 4,583 17.8 18,422 82.2  
 Midwest 6,738 20.4 26,735 79.6  
 South 8,131 19.1 32,116 80.9  
 West 6,642 21.6 23,468 78.4  
NHIS year         <0.001
 2012 3,727 16.6 17,444 83.4  
 2013 4,443 20.6 16,070 79.4  
 2014 4,466 18.3 18,283 81.7  
 2015 4,417 20.5 16,336 79.5  
 2016 4,914 20.4 18,154 79.6  
 2017 4,127 22.0 14,454 78.0  

Based on 124,617 NHWs and 2,218 Asian Indians (age ≥18 years); NHIS participants (Asian Indians or NHWs), from multiple years (2012 through 2017), who participated in the sample adult core and did not have missing data on the PD scale. Statistically significant differences in characteristics by Asian Indian and NHW status were tested with Rao–Scott chi-square tests. Numbers may not add up to the total in each group due to missing data for marital status, education, employment, poverty status, health insurance, physical activity, BMI, smoking status, and alcohol use.

FPL, Federal Poverty Level.

Unadjusted and adjusted associations of Asian Indian ethnicity with PD

Based on the K6 scale, 19.7% of the sample reported moderate–serious PD, whereas 3.4% of the sample reported serious PD. The ORs and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) from multivariable logistic regression determining the association of race/ethnicity with moderate–serious PD are shown in Table 3. In the unadjusted model (model 1), Asian Indians were less likely to have moderate–serious PD compared with NHWs (OR=0.50; 95% CI: 0.42–0.58).

Table 3.

Unadjusted and Adjusted Odds Ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals from Multivariable Logistic Regression Determining the Association of Race/Ethnicity with Moderate–Serious Psychological Distress in Adults (≥18 years) Using the National Health Interview Survey, 2012–2017

Model 1: unadjusted
Moderate–serious PD
 Racial/ethnic categories UOR 95% CI Sig
  Asian Indians 0.50 0.42–0.58 ***
  NHWs (reference group)      
Model 2: controlling for sex and age
Moderate–serious PD
 Racial/ethnic categories AOR 95% CI Sig
  Asian Indians
0.46
0.39–0.54
***
  NHWs (reference group)
Model 3: controlling for sex, age, and education
 
 Racial/ethnic categories AOR 95% CI Sig
  Asian Indians
0.57
0.49–0.68
***
  NHWs (reference group)
Model 4: controlling for sex, age, education, marital status, socioeconomic status, health insurance, and physical activity
 Racial/ethnic categories AOR 95% CI Sig
  Asian Indians
0.54
0.46–0.64
***
  NHWs (reference group)
Model 5: controlling for sex, age, education, marital status, socioeconomic status, health insurance, physical activity, race-adjusted BMI, number of chronic diseases, smoking, and alcohol use status
 Racial/ethnic categories AOR 95% CI Sig
  Asian Indians
0.72
0.59–0.82
***
  NHWs (reference group)

Based on 124,617 NHWs and 2,218 Asian Indian adults (age ≥18 years); cross-sectional data of NHIS participants (Asian Indians or NHWs), from multiple years (2012 through 2017), who participated in the sample adult core and did not have missing data on the PD scale. Statistically significant differences in characteristics by Asian Indian and NHW status were tested with Rao–Scott chi-square tests.

*

0.01 ≤ p<0.05; **0.001 ≤ p<0.01; and ***p<0.001.

AOR, adjusted odds ratio; UOR, unadjusted odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

After controlling for biological factors, the adjusted odds ratio of moderate–severe PD in Asian Indians was further reduced (AOR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.39–0.54). Education was highly protective against PD; when controlling for education in model 3, the difference in the likelihood of moderate–serious PD in Asian Indians reduces, but still remains significantly lower in Asian Indians compared with NHWs (AOR=0.57; 95% CI: 0.49–0.68).

In model 5, after controlling for all the known risk and protective factors and behavioral characteristics (smoking and alcohol use), moderate–serious PD among Asian Indians remained statistically significantly lower compared with NHWs (AOR=0.72; 95% CI: 0.61–0.85). In the fully adjusted model 6 (not shown in Table 3), Asian Indians were significantly less likely to have PD than NHWs (AOR=0.7; 95% CI: 0.59–0.82).

Discussion

In this study, we examined the association of Asian Indian ethnicity with PD by comparing Asian Indians with NHWs. Our study shows that even after controlling for the relevant risk and protective factors related to PD, Asian Indians showed a lower prevalence of the disease than NHWs. In our study, the prevalence of moderate–serious PD was 19.7%, similar to the 18.2% combined moderate and serious PD reported separately by Mojtabai and Jorm using NHIS data from 2001 to 2012.6

We also found the prevalence of serious PD from 2012 to 2017 at 3.4%, which was similar to that reported by other national studies using NHIS data. For instance, Mojtabai and Jorm and Tomitaka et al. reported serious PD at 3.1% from 2001 to 2012,6,7 and CDC reported serious PD at 2.6% to 3.6% from 1997 to 2017.68

The multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that Asian Indians were less likely to report moderate–serious PD compared with NHWs. The prevalence of moderate–serious PD was 11% in Asian Indians compared with 19.9% in NHWs. As this is the first study to examine PD among Asian Indians in the United States, we do not have any published studies for comparison.

However, our findings of PD in Asian Indians are consistent with those of other Asian racial groups in the United States. For instance, Kim et al.,21 the CDC,68 and Bratter and Eschbach24 reported a lower PD score in Asian Americans than NHWs. The major difference between these studies and our study is that they either incorporated all Asian races/ethnicities in one group or did not include Asian Indians in their studies.

The lower prevalence in Asian Indians could be explained by high socioeconomic status, which acts as a protective factor against mental health problems. Consistent with published literature, Asian Indians had a favorable mental health profile.69 For instance, Asian Indians reported higher levels of protective factors such as education, income, employment, and marital support.

Asian Indians also showed an overall lower prevalence of chronic diseases than NHWs. However, Asian Indians reported high prevalence of a few chronic diseases such as diabetes (not reported separately in the article) and obesity (48% compared with 28% in NHWs). These findings probably explain the suppression effect in regression model 5.

We observed that even after controlling for established protective and risk factors, Asian Indians were less likely to have moderate–severe PD. We speculate that this can be explained by many factors that we did not control for in the study. For instance, Asian Indians have high expectations regarding education and success, collectivism, and a strong cultural continuity in their community.70–73 Asian Indians also preserve a strong ethnic identity and traditional family structure, pay more attention to parenting, and reinforce their high achievements on children.70,71,74–76

Moreover, Asian Indians have a dense social network and derive high social support from their family, relatives, and community.77 These strong cultural/ethnic identity and social support characteristics among the Asian Indian community can plausibly act as a buffer against PD. Immigration is another factor that could contribute to the lower distress in Asian Indians.

In our study, most Asian Indians (91.1% vs. 5.20%) were born outside the United States, which could indicate a healthy immigrant effect related to selective migration and a healthier state of new immigrants.71,78,79

We cannot rule out systematic underreporting of mental illness in Asian Americans. In general, Asian Americans are ashamed and embarrassed about mental illness and seeking mental health treatment.80–82 Cultural norms in Asian communities often lead to underreporting of health conditions in self-reported interviews.

In the Asian Indian community, mental health issues are often justified under the religious and spiritual framework. Mental hardship is considered God's will, a spiritual curse, or as repercussions of sins.83–85 Mental illness is viewed as a sign of weakness, and it is believed that the disclosure of mental illness will cause rejection from friends and community members and bring disgrace to the family.83,84 This results in Asian Indians not seeking professional mental health treatment and instead relying on religious/spiritual leaders and family members to discuss mental health issues.83,84

Individuals from Asian cultures also face other challenges such as language barriers and difficulties in navigating complex health care delivery systems for recent immigrants. Studies based on claims data have shown a higher rate of multimorbidity among Asian Americans than in NHWs compared with self-reports.86,87

Findings in our study should be interpreted in the context of their limitations. The study's major strengths are that we included nationally representative data for a period of 6 years and comprehensive lists of independent variables were used to test our study objective.

Limitations include cross-sectional data from NHIS; hence causal relationships could not be established. The data in NHIS are self-reported; thus, the findings are subject to recall bias and underreporting, as discussed. Finally, due to the low sample size of Asian Indians, it was not feasible to separately analyze moderate and serious PD.

Conclusions

Our study concludes that Asian Indians are less likely to report PD compared with NHWs. The lower prevalence of distress is attributed to higher socioeconomic status and lower prevalence of chronic diseases. We recommend that mental health practitioners and future researchers should understand the distinctive characteristics and diversity of Asian Americans and other racial minority groups in the United States to better serve these populations.

Abbreviations Used

AOR

adjusted odds ratio

BMI

body–mass index

CI

confidence interval

K6

six-item Kessler

NHIS

National Health Interview Survey

NHWs

non-Hispanic Whites

OR

odds ratio

PD

psychological distress

UOR

unadjusted odds ratio

Appendix

Appendix Figure A1.

Appendix Figure A1.

Study sample selection: National Health Interview Survey, 2012–2017. K6, six-item Kessler; NHWs, non-Hispanic Whites.

Appendix Table A1.

Description of Sample Characteristics of Non-Hispanic White and Asian Indian Adults (≥18 Years) Using the National Health Interview Survey, 2012–2017

Sample characteristics N=126,835 Wt. % 100.0
Moderate–serious PD (K6≥5)
 Moderate–serious PD 26,094 19.7
 No PD 100,741 80.3
Serious PD (K6≥13)
 Serious PD 4,584 3.40
 No PD 122,251 96.6
Sex
 Women 68,514 51.4
 Men 58,321 48.6
Race/ethnicity
 Non-Hispanic Whites 124,617 98.0
 Asian Indians 2,218 2.0
Age in years
 18 to 39 38,448 34.0
 40 to 49 18,358 16.1
 50 to 64 34,766 27.6
 ≥65 35,263 22.2
Marital statusa
 Married 67,152 63.8
 Widow, separated, or divorced 34,738 17.6
 Never married 24,711 18.5
Educationa
 Less than high school 10,905 8.2
 High school 31,322 24.6
 Some college 40,658 31.6
 College 43,642 35.3
Poverty statusa
 <100% FPL 13,631 8.3
 100 to <200% 19,854 13.6
 200 to <400% 34,581 26.8
 ≥400% 48,773 43.1
Employmenta
 Employed 72,122 60.1
 Unemployed 54,662 39.8
Health insurancea
 Insured 115,587 91.2
 Uninsured 10,904 8.5
Physical activity/exercisea
 Daily exercise 8,731 7.0
 Weekly 45,752 37.9
 Monthly, yearly, or never 68,513 52.5
 Unable to exercise 2,867 1.8
Race-adjusted BMIa
 Underweight and normal 45,093 35.6
 Overweight 42,143 33.2
 Obese 35,952 28.4
No. of chronic diseases
 None 43,844 37.5
 One 30,132 24.3
 Two 52,843 38.1
Smoking statusa
 Never smoker 69,466 56.6
 Past smoker 34,348 25.8
 Current smoker 22,743 17.4
Alcohol usea
 Never drinker 19,256 15.5
 Former drinker 20,054 14.2
 Current drinker 86,494 69.4
Region
 Northeast 23,005 19.1
 Midwest 33,473 27.3
 South 40,247 33.6
 West 30,110 20.0
National Health Interview Survey year
 2012 21,171 16.9
 2013 20,513 16.5
 2014 22,749 16.6
 2015 20,753 16.5
 2016 23,068 16.8
 2017 18,581 16.7
a

Represents the missing data; marital status, smoking, and employment status have less than 0.4% missing data. Physical activity and alcohol use have 0.8% missing data, race-adjusted BMI has 2.9% missing data, and poverty status has 7.9% missing data.

BMI, body–mass index; FPL, Federal Poverty Level; K6, six-item Kessler; PD, psychological distress.

Authors' Contributions

Z.A.S. was involved in conceptualization, methodology, statistical analysis, writing—original draft, writing—review, and editing. U.S. was involved in conceptualization, methodology, statistical analysis, writing—review, and editing. Both the authors revised and approved the final article.

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Funding Information

No funding was received for this article.

Cite this article as: Siddiqui ZA, Sambamoorthi U (2022) Psychological distress among Asian Indians and non-Hispanic Whites in the United States, Health Equity 6:1, 516–526, DOI: 10.1089/heq.2021.0159.

References

  • 1. Drapeau A, Marchand A, Beaulieu-Prévost D. Epidemiology of psychological distress. In: Mental Illnesses: Understanding, Prediction and Control. Edited by Luciano L'Abate. Norderstedt, Germany: BoD—Books on Demand; London, United Kingdom: IntechOpen, 2012, pp. 105–134. [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Marchand A, Drapeau A, Beaulieu-Prévost D. Psychological distress in Canada: the role of employment and reasons of non-employment. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2012;58:596–604. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Doherty DT, Moran R, Kartalova-O'Doherty Y. Psychological distress, mental health problems and use of health services in Ireland. Dublin: ; Health Research Board, HRB Research Series 5. 2008 [Google Scholar]
  • 4. American Psychology Association. Psychological distress; APA Dictionary of Psychology. 2020. Available at https://dictionary.apa.org/psychological-distress Accessed December 11, 2022.
  • 5. Botello A, Herrán M, Salcedo V, et al. Prevalence of latent and overt polyautoimmunity in autoimmune thyroid disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2020;93:375–389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Mojtabai R, Jorm AF. Trends in psychological distress, depressive episodes and mental health treatment-seeking in the United States: 2001–2012. J Affect Disord. 2015;174:556–561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Tomitaka S, Kawasaki Y, Ide K, et al. Distribution of psychological distress is stable in recent decades and follows an exponential pattern in the US population. Sci Rep. 2019;9:1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Gispert R, Rajmil L, Schiaffino A, et al. Sociodemographic and health-related correlates of psychiatric distress in a general population. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2003;38:677–683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Mandemakers JJ, Monden CWS. Does education buffer the negative influence of disability on psychological distress? Soc Sci Med. 2010;71:288–297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Caron J, Liu A. Factors associated with psychological distress in the Canadian population: a comparison of low-income and non low-income sub-groups. Community Ment Health J. 2011;47:318–330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Myer L, Stein D, Grimsrud A, et al. Social determinants of psychological distress in a nationally-representative sample of South African adults. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66:1828–1840. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Phongsavan P, Chey T, Bauman A, et al. Social capital, socio-economic status and psychological distress among Australian adults. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:2546–2561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Hamer M, Bates CJ, Mishra GD. Depression, physical function, and risk of mortality: national diet and nutrition survey in adults older than 65 years. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2011;19:72–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. González-Castro JL, Ubillos S. Determinants of psychological distress among migrants from Ecuador and Romania in a Spanish city. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2011;57:30–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Yip Tiffany, Gee Gilbert TD. Racial discrimination and psychological distress: the impact of ethnic identity and age among immigrant and united states-born Asian adults. Dev Psychol. 2008;44:787–800. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Nemeroff R, Midlarsky E, Meyer JF. Relationships among social support, perceived control, and psychological distress in late life. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2010;71:69–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Tran TV, DeMarco R, Chan K, et al. Race, age and serious psychological distress in the USA. Int J Cult Ment Health. 2015;8:162–175. [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Weissman J, Russell D, Mann JJ. Sociodemographic characteristics, financial worries and serious psychological distress in US adults. Community Ment Health J. 2020;56:606–613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Walters V, McDonough P, Strohschein L. The influence of work, household structure, and social, personal and material resources on gender differences in health: an analysis of the 1994 Canadian National Population Health Survey. Soc Sci Med. 2002;54:677–692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Hyunjeong P, Eunsuk C, Jennifer AW. Racial/ethnic differences in correlates of psychological distress among five Asian-American subgroups and non-Hispanic Whites. Ethn Health. 2018;25:1072–1088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Kim G, Bryant AN, Parmelee P. Racial/ethnic differences in serious psychological distress among older adults in California. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012;27:1070–1077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Gadalla TM. Determinants, correlates and mediators of psychological distress: a longitudinal study. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68:2199–2205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Chittleborough CR, Winefield H, Gill TK, et al. Age differences in associations between psychological distress and chronic conditions. Int J Public Health. 2011;56:71–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Bratter JL, Eschbach K. Race/ethnic differences in nonspecific psychological distress: evidence from the National Health Interview Survey. Soc Sci Q. 2005;86:620–644. [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Yoshihama M, Bybee D, Blazevski J. Day-to-day discrimination and health among Asian Indians: a population-based study of Gujarati men and women in Metropolitan Detroit. J Behav Med. 2012;35:471–483. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. McMorrow S, Gates JA, Long SK, et al. Medicaid expansion increased coverage, improved affordability, and reduced psychological distress for low-income parents. Health Aff. 2017;36:808–818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Olive LS, Telford RM, Byrne DG, et al. Psychological distress leads to reduced physical activity and fitness in children: the Australian longitudinal LOOK study. J Behav Med. 2016;39:587–598. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Perales F, Pozo-Cruz J del, Pozo-Cruz B del. Impact of physical activity on psychological distress: a prospective analysis of an Australian national sample. Am J Public Health. 2014;104:e91–e97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Ward BW, Martinez ME. Health insurance status and psychological distress among US adults aged 18–64 years. Stress Health. 2015;31:324–335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Marks AK, Ejesi K, García Coll C. Understanding the U.S. immigrant paradox in childhood and adolescence. Child Dev Perspect. 2014;8:59–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Markides KS, Rote S. The healthy immigrant effect and aging in the United States and other Western Countries. academic.oup.com. Available at https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article-abstract/59/2/205/5151354 Accessed April 28, 2020. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 32. Salas-Wright CP, Vaughn MG, Goings TC, et al. Immigrants and mental disorders in the united states: new evidence on the healthy migrant hypothesis. Psychiatry Res. 2018;267:438–445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Kaholokula JK, Antonio MCK, Ing CKT, et al. The effects of perceived racism on psychological distress mediated by venting and disengagement coping in Native Hawaiians. BMC Psychol. 2017;5:2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Mossakowski KN. Coping with perceived discrimination: does ethnic identity protect mental health? J Health Soc Behav. 2003;44:318–331. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Park H, Choi E, Park YS, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in mental health among Asian Americans and non-Hispanic Whites: based on California health interview survey. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2018;39:208–214. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Keyes KM, Nicholson R, Kinley J, et al. Age, period, and cohort effects in psychological distress in the United States and Canada. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;179:1216–1227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Watkins DC, Johnson NC. Age and gender differences in psychological distress among African Americans and Whites: findings from the 2016 National Health Interview Survey. Healthcare (Basel). 2018;6:6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Barnes DM, Bates LM. Do racial patterns in psychological distress shed light on the Black-White depression paradox? A systematic review. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017;52:913–928. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Molina KM, Alcántara C. Household structure, family ties, and psychological distress among U.S.-born and immigrant Latino women. J Fam Psychol. 2013;27:147–158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Recto P, Champion JD. Psychological distress and associated factors among Mexican American Adolescent Females. Hisp Health Care Int 2016;14:170–176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Barragán A, Yamada A-M, Gilreath TD. Psychological distress behavioral patterns among Latinos: we don't see ourselves as worthless. Community Ment Health J. 2019;55:232–240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Willis HA, Neblett EW. Racial identity and changes in psychological distress using the multidimensional model of racial identity. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2020;26:509–519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Steers M-LN, Chen T-A, Neisler J, et al. The buffering effect of social support on the relationship between discrimination and psychological distress among church-going African-American adults. Behav Res Ther. 2019;115:121–128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Holland AT, Palaniappan LP. Problems with the collection and interpretation of Asian-American health data: omission, aggregation, and extrapolation. Ann Epidemiol. 2012;22:397–405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Cho H, Kim I, Velez-Ortiz D. Factors associated with mental health service use among Latino and Asian Americans. Community Ment Health J. 2014;50:960–967. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Blank RM, Mesenbourg TL. 2010 Census Summary File 1; 2010 Census of Population and Housing- Technical documentation; U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration U.S. CENSUS BUREAU. 2012. Available at https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf Accessed August 15, 2020.
  • 47. Hoeffel EM, Rastogi S, Kim MO, et al. The Asian population: 2010; 2010 census briefs.Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US Census Bureau. 2012. Available at https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-11.pdf Accessed September 15, 2020.
  • 48. Pew Research Center Social & Demographic. Indians in the U.S. Fact Sheet. 2017. Available at https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/fact-sheet/asian-americans-indians-in-the-u-s/ Accessed November 11, 2020.
  • 49. Dasgupta S Das. Gender roles and cultural continuity in the Asian Indian immigrant community in the U.S. Sex Roles. 1998;38:953–974. [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Shankar S. Desi Land: Teen Culture, Class, and Success in Silicon Valley. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Nadimpalli SB, Dulin-Keita A, Salas C, et al. Associations between discrimination and cardiovascular health among Asian Indians in the United States. J Immigr Minor Health. 2016;18:1284–1291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Misra R, Hunte H. Perceived discrimination and health outcomes among Asian Indians in the United States. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:567. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Misra R, Patel T, Kotha P, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular risk factors in US Asian Indians: results from a national study. J Diabetes Complications. 2010;24:145–153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Parsons VL, Moriarity C, Jonas K, et al. Design and estimation for the national health interview survey, 2006–2015. Vital Heal Stat 2. 2014:1–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. CDC. NHIS—About the National Health Interview Survey. 2020. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/about_nhis.htm Accessed April 18, 2020.
  • 56. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, et al. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med. 2002;32:959–976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Prochaska JJ, Sung H-Y, Max W, et al. Validity study of the K6 scale as a measure of moderate mental distress based on mental health treatment need and utilization. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2012;21:88–97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Paek M-S, Seo S, Choi D. Factors affecting psychological distress among Asian American and non-Hispanic White older adults. Soc Behav Personal Int J. 2019;47:1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Ulbrich PM, Warheit GJ, Zimmerman RS. Race, socioeconomic status, and psychological distress: an examination of differential vulnerability. J Health Soc Behav. 1989;30:131–146. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Kosidou K, Dalman C, Lundberg M, et al. Socioeconomic status and risk of psychological distress and depression in the Stockholm Public Health Cohort: a population-based study. J Affect Disord. 2011;134:160–167. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Lazzarino AI, Hamer M, Stamatakis E, et al. The combined association of psychological distress and socioeconomic status with all-cause mortality: a national cohort study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:22–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Zvolensky MJ, Jardin C, Wall MM, et al. Psychological distress among smokers in the United States: 2008–2014. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;20:707–713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Sung H-Y, Prochaska JJ, Ong MK, et al. Cigarette smoking and serious psychological distress: a population-based study of California adults. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011;13:1183–1192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Dube SR, Caraballo RS, Dhingra SS, et al. The relationship between smoking status and serious psychological distress: findings from the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Int J Public Health. 2009;54 Suppl 1:68–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Woo B, Wang K, Tran T. Racial and ethnic differences in associations between psychological distress and the presence of binge drinking: results from the California health interview survey. Addict Behav. 2017;65:1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Neff JA. Alcohol consumption and psychological distress among U.S. Anglos, Hispanics and Blacks. Alcohol Alcohol. 1986;21:111–119. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Pacific WHORO for the W. The Asia-Pacific perspective: redefining obesity and its treatment. Sydney: Health Communications Australia. Available at http://iris.wpro.who.int/handle/10665.1/5379 Accessed July 12, 2021.
  • 68. Center for Health Statistics N. Serious psychological distress in the past 30 days among adults aged 18 and over, by selected characteristics: United States, average annual, selected years 1997–1998 through 2015–2016. 2017.. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/contents2017.htm#046 Accessed April 11, 2020.
  • 69. Zhang Y, Misra R, Sambamoorthi U. Prevalence of multimorbidity among Asian Indian, Chinese, and non-Hispanic White adults in the United States. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:3336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Paik SJ, Rahman Z, Kula SM, et al. Diverse Asian American families and communities: culture, structure, and education (part 1: why they differ). School Community J. 2017;27:35–66. [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Williams JP. Journey to America: South Asian diaspora migration to the United States (1965–2015). In: Indigenous, Aboriginal, Fugitive and Ethnic Groups Around the Globe. Edited by Liat Klain-Gabbay L. London, UK: ; IntechOpen, 2019, p.97 [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Grewal S, Bottorff JL, Hilton BA. The influence of family on immigrant South Asian women's health. J Fam Nurs. 2005;11:242–263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Sharma RK, Khosla N, Tulsky JA, et al. Traditional expectations versus US realities: first-and second-generation Asian Indian perspectives on end-of-life care. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:311–317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Bhattacharya G, Schoppelrey SL. Preimmigration beliefs of life success, postimmigration experiences, and acculturative stress: South Asian immigrants in the United States. J Immigr Health. 2004;6:83–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Pew Research Center Social & Demographic. The Rise of Asian Americans. 2012. Available at https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2012/06/19/the-rise-of-asian-americans/ Accessed March 16, 2021.
  • 76. Asher N. Class acts: Indian American high school students negotiate professional and ethnic identities. Urban Educ. 2002;37:267–295. [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Kandula NR, Cooper AJ, Schneider JA, et al. Personal social networks and organizational affiliation of South Asians in the United States. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Frisbie WP, Cho Y, Hummer RA. Immigration and the health of Asian and Pacific Islander adults in the United States. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;153:372–380. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Stafford M, Newbold BK, Ross NA. Psychological distress among immigrants and visible minorities in Canada: a contextual analysis. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2011;57:428–441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Lee S, Juon H-S, Martinez G, et al. Model minority at risk: expressed needs of mental health by Asian American young adults. J Community Health. 2009;34:144–152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Park M, Chesla CA, Rehm RS, et al. Working with culture: culturally appropriate mental health care for Asian Americans. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67:2373–2382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Jimenez DE, Bartels SJ, Cardenas V, et al. Stigmatizing attitudes toward mental illness among racial/ethnic older adults in primary care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013;28:1061–1068. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Conrad MM, Pacquiao DF. Manifestation, attribution, and coping with depression among Asian Indians from the perspectives of health care practitioners. J Transcult Nurs. 2005;16:32–40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Leung P, Cheung M, Tsui V. Asian Indians and depressive symptoms: reframing mental health help-seeking behavior. Int Soc Work. 2012;55:53–70. [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Tavkar P, Iyer SN, Hansen DJ. Barriers to mental health services for Asian Indians in America. In: Poster presented at The 42nd Annual Convention of the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Lim E, Gandhi K, Davis J, et al. Prevalence of chronic conditions and multimorbidities in a geographically defined geriatric population with diverse races and ethnicities. J Aging Health. 2018;30:421–444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Steiner CA, Friedman B. Hospital utilization, costs, and mortality for adults with multiple chronic conditions, nationwide inpatient sample, 2009. Prev Chronic Dis. 2013;10:E62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Health Equity are provided here courtesy of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

RESOURCES