<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"Neighbourhood ethnic density and psychosis - Is there a difference according to generation?."
Abstract:"Background: For different migrant groups living in an area with few people from the same ethnic background is associated with increased psychosis incidence (the ethnic density effect). We set out to answer the question: are there generational differences in this effect? Methods: Analysis of a population based cohort (2.2 million) comprising all those born 1st January 1965, or later, living in Denmark on their 15th birthday. This included 90,476 migrants from Africa, Europe (excluding Scandinavia) and the Middle East, with 55% first generation and the rest second-generation migrants. Neighbourhood co-ethnic density was determined at age 15 and we adjusted for age, gender, calendar period, parental psychiatric history and parental income. Results: For first-generation migrants from Africa, there was no statistically significant difference (p= 0.30) in psychosis rates when comparing lowest with highest ethnic density quintiles, whereas the second generation showed a 3.87-fold (95% CI 1.77-8.48) increase. Similarly, for migrants from the Middle East, the first generation showed no evidence of an ethnic density effect (p= 0.94) while the second showed a clear increase in psychosis when comparing lowest with highest quintiles, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.43 (95% CI, 1.18-5.00). For European migrants, there was some limited evidence of an effect in the first generation, (IRR) 1.69 (95% CI, 1.19-2.40), with this slightly raised in the second: IRR 1.80 (95% CI, 1.27-2.56). Conclusions: We found strong evidence for an ethnic density effect on psychosis incidence for second-generation migrants but this was either weak or absent for the first generation. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:

Neighbourhood ethnic density and psychosis - Is there a difference according to generation?
Background: For different migrant groups living in an area with few people from the same ethnic background is associated with increased psychosis incidence (the ethnic density effect). We set out to answer the question: are there generational differences in this effect? Methods: Analysis of a population based cohort (2.2 million) comprising all those born 1st January 1965, or later, living in Denmark on their 15th birthday. This included 90,476 migrants from Africa, Europe (excluding Scandinavia) and the Middle East, with 55% first generation and the rest second-generation migrants. Neighbourhood co-ethnic density was determined at age 15 and we adjusted for age, gender, calendar period, parental psychiatric history and parental income. Results: For first-generation migrants from Africa, there was no statistically significant difference (p= 0.30) in psychosis rates when comparing lowest with highest ethnic density quintiles, whereas the second generation showed a 3.87-fold (95% CI 1.77-8.48) increase. Similarly, for migrants from the Middle East, the first generation showed no evidence of an ethnic density effect (p= 0.94) while the second showed a clear increase in psychosis when comparing lowest with highest quintiles, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.43 (95% CI, 1.18-5.00). For European migrants, there was some limited evidence of an effect in the first generation, (IRR) 1.69 (95% CI, 1.19-2.40), with this slightly raised in the second: IRR 1.80 (95% CI, 1.27-2.56). Conclusions: We found strong evidence for an ethnic density effect on psychosis incidence for second-generation migrants but this was either weak or absent for the first generation. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.