Is gender inequity a risk factor for men reporting poorer self-rated health in the United States?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kavanagh SA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6049919 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Introduction:Although education is among the major socioeconomic status (SES) resources that influence populations' and individuals' health, social marginalization may reduce the health gain that follows access to SES indicators such as education, a pattern called marginalization-related diminished return (MDR). The literature on MDRs, however, has been mainly derived from studies that have defined marginalization based on race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Thus, more research is needed on MDRs that may follow as a result of immigration. To extend what is known on immigration status related MDRs, this study compared a national sample of immigrants and non-immigrants for the effect of education on the poor self-rated health (SRH) of adults in the United States. Methods:With a cross-sectional design, this study employed data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a survey that had enrolled 33,654 adults who were either immigrants (n = 6225; 18.5%) or non-immigrants (n = 27 429; 81.5%). The independent variable was education level, treated as a categorical variable. The dependent variable was SRH treated as a dichotomous variable. Race, ethnicity, age, gender, marital status, and region were the confounders. Immigration (nativity) was the moderator. Logistic regression was used for data analysis. Results:Higher education credentials were associated with better SRH in the pooled sample; however, immigration showed a significant statistical interaction with education level (college graduation) on the outcome. This interaction was indicative of a smaller protective effect of college graduation on poor SRH among immigrants than non-immigrant adults. Conclusion:In line with the MDRs framework, the effect of education on SRH is weaker for immigrants than for non-immigrant adults. There is a need to help highly educated immigrants to mobilize their human capital to secure their best health outcomes, similar to non-immigrants. Such strategies may require bold and innovative policy solutions to reduce discrimination against immigrants, so they can more effectively translate their education and human capital into tangible outcomes such as health.
| S-EPMC7470225 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOral diseases negatively impact general health, affecting physical, psychological, social and emotional wellbeing, and ability to give back to community. The relationship between poor oral health, and general health and wellbeing among Indigenous Australians has not been documented. Working in partnership with seven Indigenous communities in South Australia, this study aimed to: 1) quantify self-rated oral health and health-related quality of life and; 2) investigate associations between poor self-rated oral health and general health among Indigenous Australian adults.MethodsData was collected from a large convenience sample of Indigenous Australians aged 18+ years from Feb 2018 to Jan 2019. General health-related quality of life, as the main outcome variable, was measured by calculating disutility scores with the five individual EQ-5D dimensions (EuroQol instrument: EQ-5D-5L), then classified as 'no problem' and 'at least one problem'. Self-reported oral health, as the main explanatory, was dichotomised into 'fair or poor' and 'excellent, very good or good'. Multivariable log-Poisson regression models were used to estimate associations between poor self-rated oral health and general health by calculating mean rate ratios (MRR) for disutility scores and prevalence ratios (PR) for individual dimensions, after adjusting for social-demographic characteristics and health-related behaviours.ResultsData were available for 1011 Indigenous South Australian adults. The prevalence of 'fair or poor' self-rated oral health was 33.5%. The mean utility score was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.81-0.83). Compared with those rating their oral health as 'excellent or very good or good', those who rated their oral health as 'fair or poor' had a mean disutility score that was 1.6 (95% CI: 1.1-2.2) times higher, and the prevalence of at least one problem ranged from 90 to 160% higher for individual EQ-5D dimensions.ConclusionsFair or poor self-rated oral health among Indigenous persons in South Australia was associated with poor general health as measured by EQ-5D-5L disutility. The relationship was especially evident with respect to mobility, self-care and anxiety/depression. The findings emphasise the importance of oral health as predictors of general health among Indigenous Australians.
| S-EPMC7919297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper evaluates racial/ethnic differences in self-rated mental health for adults in the United States, while controlling for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics as well as length of stay in the country. Using data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey Cancer Control Supplement (NHIS-CCS), binomial logistic regression models are fit to estimate the association between race/ethnicity and poor/fair self-reported mental health among US Adults. The size of the analytical sample was 22,844 persons. Overall prevalence of poor/fair self-rated mental health was 7.72%, with lower prevalence among Hispanics (6.93%). Non-Hispanic blacks had the highest prevalence (10.38%). After controls for socioeconomic characteristics are incorporated in the models, Hispanics were found to have a lower probability of reporting poor/fair self-rated mental health in comparison to non-Hispanic whites (OR = 0.70; 95% CI [0.55-0.90]). No difference was found for other minority groups when compared to the reference group in the final model. Contrary to global self-rated health, Hispanics were found to have a lower probability of reporting poor/fair self-rated mental health in comparison to non-Hispanic whites. No difference was found for non-Hispanic blacks when they were compared to non-Hispanic whites. Self-rated mental health is therefore one case of a self-rating of health in which evidence supporting the epidemiological paradox is found among adults in the United States.
| S-EPMC5036069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-rated health and the factors that influence it have never been described in Singapore before. This paper presents a descriptive study of self-rated health in a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of 6236 persons.MethodsAs part of the National Health Surveillance Survey 2001, 6236 subjects aged 18 years and above were interviewed in the homes of participants by trained interviewers. The subjects were asked "In general, how would you rate your health today?", and given 5 possible responses. These were then categorized as "Good" (very good and good) and "Poor" (moderate, bad and very bad) self-rated health. The association of socio-economic and health behaviour risk factors with good self-rated health was studied using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsUnivariate analyses suggest that gender, ethnicity, marital status, education, household income, age, self-reported doctor-diagnosed illnesses, alcohol intake, exercise and BMI are all associated with poor self-rated health. In multivariate regression analyses, gender, ethnicity, household income, age, self-reported illness and current smoking and BMI were associated with poor self-rated health. There are gender differences in the association of various factors such as household income, smoking and BMI to self-rated health.ConclusionSocioeconomic factors and health behaviours are significantly associated with self-rated health, and gender differences are striking. We discuss why these factors may impact self-rated health and why gender differences may have been observed, propose directions for further research and comment on the public policy implications of our findings.
| S-EPMC1976324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare an objective with a subjective numeracy assessment for association with self-reported health status, where numeracy refers to "the degree to which individuals have the capacity to access, process, interpret, communicate, and act on numerical, quantitative, graphical, biostatistical, and probabilistic health information needed to make effective health decisions" RESULTS: We completed a secondary analysis of two population-based surveys, the Empire State Poll (n = 763) and the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC; n = 2609). The first survey assessed numeracy with a 3-item subjective instrument. The second assessed numeracy with more than 20 math problems. Both used the same measure for self-reported health status. Lower numeracy, whether subjectively or objectively assessed, was associated with worse self-reported health, even after controlling for education and other sociodemographic confounders. The odds ratios for the association were very similar (0.91 and 0.90 respectively). A lengthy objective numeracy assessment and a brief self-report assessment had similar associations with health status. A brief self-report measure of numeracy has similar properties to a lengthy objective assessment and is likely to be more feasible to use to screen patients in practice.
| S-EPMC8379725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A number of theoretical approaches suggest that gender inequity may give rise to health risks for men. This study undertook a multilevel analysis to ascertain if state-level measures of gender inequity are predictors of men's mortality in the United States. Data for the analysis were taken primarily from the National Longitudinal Mortality Study, which is based on a random sample of the non-institutionalised population. The full data set included 174,703 individuals nested within 50 states and had a six-year follow-up for mortality. Gender inequity was measured by nine variables: higher education, reproductive rights, abortion provider access, elected office, management, business ownership, labour force participation, earnings and relative poverty. Covariates at the individual level were age, income, education, race/ethnicity, marital status and employment status. Covariates at the state level were income inequality and per capita gross domestic product. The results of logistic multilevel modelling showed a number of measures of state-level gender inequity were significantly associated with men's mortality. In all of these cases greater gender inequity was associated with an increased mortality risk. In fully adjusted models for all-age adult men the elected office (OR 1.05 95% CI 1.01-1.09), business ownership (OR 1.04 95% CI 1.01-1.08), earnings (OR 1.04 95% CI 1.01-1.08) and relative poverty (OR 1.07 95% CI 1.03-1.10) measures all showed statistically significant effects for each 1 standard deviation increase in the gender inequity z-score. Similar effects were seen for working-age men. In older men (65+ years) only the earnings and relative poverty measures were statistically significant. This study provides evidence that gender inequity may increase men's health risks. The effect sizes while small are large enough across the range of gender inequity identified to have important population health implications.
| S-EPMC5769061 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe extant literature on gender differentials in health in developed countries suggests that women outlive men at all ages, but women report poorer health than men. It is well established that Indian women live longer than men, but few studies have been conducted to understand the gender dimension in self-rated health and self-reported disability. The present study investigates gender differentials in self-rated health (SRH) and self-reported disability (SRD) among adults in India, using a nationally representative data.MethodsUsing data on 10,736 respondents aged 18 and older in the 2007 WHO Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health in India, prevalence estimates of SRH are calculated separately for men and women by socio-economic and demographic characteristics. The association of SRH with gender is tested using a multinomial logistic regression method. SRD is assessed using 20 activities of daily living (ADL). Further, gender differences in total life expectancy (TLE), disability life expectancy (DLE) and the proportion of life spent with a disability at various adult ages are measured.ResultsThe relative risk of reporting poor health by women was significantly higher than men (relative risk ratio: 1.660; 95% confidence Interval (CI): 1.430-1.927) after adjusting for socio-economic and demographic characteristics. Women reported higher prevalence of severe and extreme disability than men in 14 measures out of a total20 ADL measures. Women aged less than 60 years reported two times more than men in SRD ? 5 ADLs. Finally, both DLE and proportion of life spent with a disability were substantially higher for women irrespective of their ages.ConclusionIndian women live longer but report poorer health than men. A substantial gender differential is found in self-reported disability. This makes for an urgent call to health researchers and policy makers for gender-sensitive programs.
| S-EPMC4633186 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Japanese society is more egalitarian than the United States as is reflected by the lower degree of prevalence of social inequalities in health. We examined whether subjective socioeconomic status is associated with different trajectories of self-rated health (SRH), and whether this relationship differs between the United States and Japan. Methods:We analyzed the responses of 3968 Americans from the survey Midlife in the United States, 2004-06, and the responses of 989 Japanese from the survey Midlife in Japan, 2008. We conducted a multilevel analysis with three self-ratings of health (10 years ago, current and 10 years in the future) nested within individuals and nested within 10 levels of subjective social status. Age, sex, educational level and subjective financial situation were adjusted. Results:After making statistical adjustments for confounding variables, respondents in Japan continued to report lower average levels of health. However, the rate of expected decline in SRH over the next decade was strongly socially patterned in the United States, whereas it was not in Japan. Conclusion:The Japanese showed no disparity in the anticipated trajectory of SRH over time, whereas the Americans showed a strong social class gradient in future trajectories of SRH.
| S-EPMC6306092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWe used nationally representative samples of China and the US older population to investigate (1) whether factors influencing self-rated health among older Chinese were similar to those among older Americans; and (2) whether there was a significant cross-national difference in self-rated health between China and the USA after controlling those available influencing factors.DesignA cross-sectional study. Data came from the 2014 Health and Retirement Study and China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study conducted from 2014 to 2015.ParticipantsOur final sample size totaled 8905 older adults in the USA and 4442 older adults in China.OutcomeThe response variable was self-rated health. Ordered logistic regression models were conducted to investigate factors influencing self-rated health among older adults.ResultsMore than three-fourths (78%) of older adults in China reported fair or poor health status, while almost 74% of older adults in the USA reported excellent, very good or good health status. In the overall ordered logistic regression model, when controlling statistically for sociodemographics, family structure, functional limitations, cognition, chronic conditions, mental health and health-related behaviours, the Chinese survey respondents were much more likely to rate their health as being poorer than the US respondents. The odds of having better versus poorer health was almost five times greater in American older adults than those in China (OR=4.88, 95% CI 4.06 to 5.86). Older adults in China living alone rated their health better than those living with spouse/partner; however, no significant difference was found between these two living arrangements in older Americans. In contrast, older adults in the USA living with others rated their health worse compared with those living with spouse/partner. In addition, older adults who had more activities of daily living limitations, poorer self-reported memory, worse mental health and chronic health conditions had lower self-rated health in both countries.ConclusionsWe found a striking difference in self-rated health between China and the USA even after controlling for measures of disease, functional status and other influencing factors. Relative to their American counterparts, Chinese elders were much more likely to report worse health.
| S-EPMC6677996 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:HIV testing is an essential prerequisite for accessing treatment with antiretroviral therapy or prevention using pre-exposure prophylaxis. Internet distribution of HIV self-tests is a novel approach, and data on the programmatic cost of this approach are limited. We analyse the costs and cost-effectiveness of a self-testing programme. METHODS:Men who have sex with men (MSM) reporting unknown or negative HIV status were enrolled from March to August 2015 into a 12-month trial of HIV self-testing in the United States. Participants were randomly assigned either to the self-testing arm or the control arm. All participants received information on HIV testing services and locations in their community. Self-testing participants received up to four self-tests each quarter, which they could use themselves or distribute to their social network associates. Quarterly follow-up surveys collected testing outcomes, including number of tests used and new HIV diagnoses. Using trial expenditure data, we estimated the cost of implementing a self-testing programme. Primary outcomes of this analysis included total programme implementation costs, cost per self-test completed, cost per person tested, cost per new HIV diagnosis among those self-tested and cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) saved. RESULTS:A total of 2665 men were assigned either to the self-testing arm (n = 1325) or the control arm (n = 1340). HIV testing was reported by 971 self-testing participants who completed a total of 5368 tests. In the control arm, 619 participants completed 1463 HIV tests. The self-testing participants additionally distributed 2864 self-tests to 2152 social network associates. Testing during the trial identified 59 participants and social network associates with newly diagnosed HIV infection in the self-testing arm; 11 control participants were newly diagnosed with HIV. The implementation cost of the HIV self-testing programme was $449,510. The cost per self-test completed, cost per person tested at least once, and incremental cost per new HIV diagnosis was $61, $145 and $9365 respectively. We estimated that self-testing programme potentially averted 3.34 transmissions, saved 14.86 QALYs and nearly $1.6 million lifetime HIV treatment costs. CONCLUSIONS:The HIV self-testing programme identified persons with newly diagnosed HIV infection at low cost, and the programme is cost saving.
| S-EPMC6970935 | biostudies-literature