» Articles » PMID: 36921280

Co-occurring Homelessness, Justice Involvement, Opioid Dependence and Psychosis: a Cross-sectoral Data Linkage Study

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2023 Mar 15
PMID 36921280
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Administrative data offer unique opportunities for researching experiences which pose barriers to participation in primary research and household surveys. Experiencing multiple social disadvantages is associated with very poor health outcomes, but little is known about how often this occurs and what combinations are most common. We linked administrative data across public services to create a novel population cohort containing information on experiences of homelessness, justice involvement, opioid dependence and psychosis.

Methods: We securely linked administrative data from (i) a population register derived from general practitioner registrations; (ii) local authority homelessness applications; (iii) prison records; (iv) criminal justice social work reports; (v) community dispensing for opioid substitution therapy; and (vi) a psychosis clinical register, for people aged ≥18 years resident in Glasgow, Scotland between 01 April 2010 and 31 March 2014. We estimated period prevalence and compared demographic characteristics for different combinations.

Results: Of 536 653 individuals in the cohort, 28 112 (5.2%) had at least one of the experiences of interest during the study period and 5178 (1.0%) had more than one. Prevalence of individual experiences varied from 2.4% (homelessness) to 0.7% (psychosis). The proportion of people with multiple co-occurring experiences was highest for imprisonment (50%) and lowest for psychosis (14%). Most combinations showed a predominance of men living in the most deprived areas of Scotland.

Conclusions: Cross-sectoral record linkage to study multiple forms of social disadvantage showed that co-occurrence of these experiences was relatively common. Following this demonstration of feasibility, these methods offer opportunities for evaluating the health impacts of policy and service change.

References
1.
Connelly R, Playford C, Gayle V, Dibben C . The role of administrative data in the big data revolution in social science research. Soc Sci Res. 2016; 59:1-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.04.015. View

2.
Lyons R, Ford D, Moore L, Rodgers S . Use of data linkage to measure the population health effect of non-health-care interventions. Lancet. 2013; 383(9927):1517-1519. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61750-X. View

3.
Alvarez-Madrazo S, McTaggart S, Nangle C, Nicholson E, Bennie M . Data Resource Profile: The Scottish National Prescribing Information System (PIS). Int J Epidemiol. 2016; 45(3):714-715f. PMC: 5005947. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyw060. View

4.
Somers J, Moniruzzaman A, Rezansoff S, Brink J, Russolillo A . The prevalence and geographic distribution of complex co-occurring disorders: a population study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2015; 25(3):267-77. PMC: 6998736. DOI: 10.1017/S2045796015000347. View

5.
Tweed E, Thomson R, Lewer D, Sumpter C, Kirolos A, Southworth P . Health of people experiencing co-occurring homelessness, imprisonment, substance use, sex work and/or severe mental illness in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2021; 75(10):1010-1018. PMC: 8458085. DOI: 10.1136/jech-2020-215975. View