Ethnicity, Deprivation and Psychosis: the Glasgow experience Pavan Srireddy 1, 2 , Anupam Agnihotri 1, 2 , John Park 1 , John Taylor 2, 3 , Moira Connolly 1, 2 , Rajeev Krishnadas 1, 4 1 NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Glasgow, Scotland; 2 School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Scotland ; 3 NHS Ayrshire & Arran, Ayr, Scotland; 4 Academic unit of Mental Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Scotland Keywords: Schizophrenia, Psychosis, Ethnicity, Deprivation Ever since Odegaardǯs studies in the early part of the 20th century there has been considerable interest regarding the differences in the rates of psychosis among native and non-native populations (Odegaard, 1932). There is a substantial body of research which demonstrates increased rates of psychosis among the Black African and Caribbean population in the UK (Fearon et al., 2006). One of the proposed reasons for the higher rates of psychosis among Black and minority ethnic (BME) groups is the greater levels of socio-economic disadvantage among these groups (Morgan et al., 2010). Studies have demonstrated higher rates of hospital admission and use of the mental health act (MHA) among BME patients when compared with White patients (Bhui et al., 2003). These findings have significant implications for mental health policy and service provision. The aim of our Glasgow based study was to examine the prevalence of psychosis in BME compared to White population; to compare admission rates and MHA detention rates in these populations; and to examine if prevalence rates of psychosis varied with deprivation status across the ethnic groups. Method The dataset analyzed in this paper was derived from the Glasgow Psychosis Clinical Information System (PsyCIS), a secondary care case register in use in Glasgow. The register consists of details of adult (aged 18-64 years) patients in the Greater Glasgow NHS board area, diagnosed with a psychotic disorder, attending general adult psychiatric services. This includes patients with an ICD 10 diagnosis of F20 -29; F30 -31; F32.3; F06.0 – 06.2; F06.30-06.31; F1(x) with psychotic symptoms; and F53 diagnosed by the patientsǯ responsible consultant psychiatrist. Two research nurses conducted a retrospective medical case note review of all the patients included in the register over a period of 42 months between February 2002 and August 2005 in order to collect a range of relevant clinical and socio-demographic data sets. Data on ethnicity was based on self reported information collected at time of contact with psychiatric services. In total more than 8,000 case notes were audited and 4,438 patients were identified as having a psychotic illness from the inclusive