ArticleScandinavian journal of public health2025
Discrimination and health: A cross-sectional study comparing Muslims with other-religious.
Article in Scandinavian journal of public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- White by default: conceptual and methodological limits of binary white logic in global health equity research.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Authority, trust, and healthcare communication in a religious minority: the case of the Haredi community in Israel during COVID-19.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Interactions With Relatives of Critically Ill Non-Western Immigrants: Do We Have a Blind Spot?Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Contextualising the WHO Global Research Agenda on Health, Migration and Displacement in Norway invites to a reflection for decolonising research.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum.2026
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this study is to report perceived discrimination among Muslims living in Norway and to address and compare associations between perceived discrimination and health among Muslims with an immigrant background and other-religious with an immigrant background.
methodA representative sample of individuals with an immigrant background in Norway was used in a cross-sectional study design that included 5484 respondents aged 16 to 74 years. The respondents were sub-grouped after religious affiliation, and as immigrants and Norwegian-born. This sample is from 'The Survey on living conditions among persons with an immigrant background 2016', conducted by Statistics Norway. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between perceived discrimination and self-rated health and between perceived discrimination and mental health problems.
resultsOur findings show that Muslims with an immigrant background are more likely to report perceived discrimination than non-Muslims with an immigrant background. Perceived discrimination was associated with poor self-rated health and mental health problems among immigrant Muslims and Norwegian-born Muslims. Among other-religious with an immigrant background, perceived discrimination had an inverse relationship with mental health problems among immigrants, while an association between perceived discrimination and poor self-rated health was found among Norwegian-born.
conclusions
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.