Dataset Information

Individual socioeconomic position, neighbourhood disadvantage and mental well-being: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of mid-age adults.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with mental illness, yet its relationship with mental well-being is unclear. Mental well-being is defined as feeling good and functioning well. Benefits of mental well-being include reduced mortality, improved immune functioning and pain tolerance, and increased physical function, pro-social behaviour, and academic and job performance. This study aims to explore the relationship between individual socioeconomic position (SEP), neighbourhood disadvantage and mental well-being in mid-age adults.

Methods

Multilevel modelling was used to analyse data collected from 7866 participants from the second (2009) wave of HABITAT (How Areas in Brisbane Influence healTh and activiTy), a longitudinal study (2007-2018) of adults aged 40-65 years living in Brisbane, Australia. Mental well-being was measured using the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS). Exposure measures were education, occupation, household income, and neighbourhood socioeconomic disadvantage.

Results

The lowest MWB scores were observed for the least educated (β = - 1.22, 95%CI = - 1.74, - 0.71), those permanently unable to work (β = - 5.50, 95%CI = - 6.90, - 4.10), the unemployed (β = - 2.62, 95%CI = - 4.12, - 1.13), and members of low-income households (β = - 3.77, 95%CI = - 4.59, - 2.94). Residents of the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods had lower MWB scores than those living in the least disadvantaged neighbourhoods, after adjustment for individual-level SEP (β = - 0.96, 95%CI = - 1.66, - 0.28).

Conclusions

Both individual-level SEP and neighbourhood disadvantage are associated with mental well-being although the association is stronger for individual-level SEP. This research highlights the need to address individual and neighbourhood-level socioeconomic determinants of mental well-being.

SUBMITTER: Mann EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8919596 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Individual socioeconomic position, neighbourhood disadvantage and mental well-being: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of mid-age adults.

Mann Emily M EM Heesch Kristiann C KC Rachele Jerome N JN Burton Nicola W NW Turrell Gavin G

BMC public health 20220314 1

<h4>Background</h4>Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with mental illness, yet its relationship with mental well-being is unclear. Mental well-being is defined as feeling good and functioning well. Benefits of mental well-being include reduced mortality, improved immune functioning and pain tolerance, and increased physical function, pro-social behaviour, and academic and job performance. This study aims to explore the relationship between individual socioeconomic position (SEP), neighbour ...[more]

PMID: 35287636

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocio-economic disadvantage at both individual and neighbourhood levels has been found to be associated with single lifestyle risk factors. However, it is unknown to what extent their combined effects contribute to a broad lifestyle profile. We aimed to (i) investigate the associations of individual socio-economic disadvantage (ISED) and neighbourhood socio-economic disadvantage (NSED) in relation to an extended score of health-related lifestyle risk factors (lifestyle risk index); and to (ii) investigate whether NSED modified the association between ISED and the lifestyle risk index.MethodsOf 77 244 participants [median age (IQR): 46 (40-53) years] from the Lifelines cohort study in the northern Netherlands, we calculated a lifestyle risk index by scoring the lifestyle risk factors including smoking status, alcohol consumption, diet quality, physical activity, TV-watching time and sleep time. A higher lifestyle risk index was indicative of an unhealthier lifestyle. Composite scores of ISED and NSED based on a variety of socio-economic indicators were calculated separately. Linear mixed-effect models were used to examine the association of ISED and NSED with the lifestyle risk index and to investigate whether NSED modified the association between ISED and the lifestyle risk index by including an interaction term between ISED and NSED.ResultsBoth ISED and NSED were associated with an unhealthier lifestyle, because ISED and NSED were both positively associated with the lifestyle risk index {highest quartile [Q4] ISED beta-coefficient [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.64 [0.62-0.66], P < 0.001; highest quintile [Q5] NSED beta-coefficient [95% CI]: 0.17 [0.14-0.21], P < 0.001} after adjustment for age, sex and body mass index. In addition, a positive interaction was found between NSED and ISED on the lifestyle risk index (beta-coefficient 0.016, 95% CI: 0.011-0.021, Pinteraction < 0.001), which indicated that NSED modified the association between ISED and the lifestyle risk index; i.e. the gradient of the associations across all ISED quartiles (Q4 vs Q1) was steeper among participants residing in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods compared with those who resided in the less disadvantaged neighbourhoods.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that public health initiatives addressing lifestyle-related socio-economic health differences should not only target individuals, but also consider neighbourhood factors.

Project description:Background: The lockdowns associated with the COVID-19 pandemic has been called a crisis in mental health, and adolescents may have been among the most affected. Comparing the first period of societal lockdown in spring 2020 to periods going back to 2014 using a rich cross-sectional dataset based on repeated surveys, we explore the potential changes in self-reported mental well-being across sociodemographic groups among Norway's adolescents. Methods: Norway closed schools and implemented strict restrictions in March 2020; an electronic questionnaire survey was distributed to lower secondary school students in Trøndelag county (N = 2,443) in May 2020. Results were compared with similar surveys conducted annually in the same county dating back to 2014. Logistic regression models were applied to investigate potential changes in depressive symptoms, loneliness, and quality of life and life satisfaction, and to detect possible differences in the impact of lockdown between the genders and socioeconomic groups. Results: The prevalence of boys and girls reporting high quality of life (43-34%; 23-16%) and life satisfaction (91-80%; 82-69%) decreased significantly compared to the pre-pandemic. For girls only, lockdown was associated with higher odds for reporting high depressive symptoms. As expected, the least privileged socioeconomic groups showed the greatest psychological distress. However, our trend analyses provided no evidence that the socioeconomic inequalities in psychological distress (according to prevalence of high depressive symptoms or loneliness) changed substantial in any direction during the first wave of the pandemic [between the pre-pandemic and inter-pandemic periods]. Conclusion: Adolescents are vulnerable, and interventions should provide them with mental health support during crises such as societal lockdown. In particular, the social and health policy, public health, and further research should target these least privileged groups.

Project description:ObjectiveAfrican Americans, especially those in the Southeastern USA, have different dietary behaviours from the general US population, and have the highest prevalence, incidence and mortality of diet-related disease outcomes, such as cardiovascular disease. However, there are scant data regarding factors such as socioeconomic position (SEP) across the life course that influence dietary behaviours in this high-risk population. Our aim was to examine the impact of life course and neighbourhood SEPs on dietary intake among African Americans.Participants and settingData for this cross-sectional analysis came from the community-based Jackson Heart Study (JHS). We analysed a total of 3948 JHS participants (mean age: 55.4±12.5; 63.9% women), who had complete dietary intake and covariate information.MethodsWe examined the associations of childhood SEP (CSEP), adulthood SEP (ASEP) and neighbourhood SEP (NSEP) with 10 selected dietary intake measures, using multilevel log-gamma generalised linear regression models.Outcome measuresDietary intake measures include daily saturated fat, sodium, protein, fibre, fruits and vegetables, whole grains, sugar-sweetened beverage, nuts, fish and processed meat.ResultsIn age, sex and total energy intake adjusted models, most dietary intakes were associated with these three SEP measures. After additional adjustment for other SEP measures, most of the significant associations with CSEP and NSEP were attenuated, except for the associations of fibre with CSEP (relative rate [RR] [95% CI] 1.05 [1.00-1.10]) and whole grains with NSEP (RR [95% CI] 1.28 [1.02-1.61]). The associations (shown as RR [95% CI]) between ASEP and sugar-sweetened beverage: 0.70 (0.59-0.83), processed meat: 0.75 (0.63-0.90), sodium: 0.99 (0.94-1.00), fibre: 1.10 (1.03-1.16), protein: 1.05 (1.01-1.09), fruits and vegetables: 1.21 (1.11-1.32), nuts: 2.13 (1.59-2.87), and fish: 1.57 (1.27-1.95) generally persisted after additional adjustment for both CSEP and NSEP. However, the association between ASEP and whole grains was attenuated.ConclusionsHigh ASEP may have a more beneficial influence on dietary practices in African Americans than CSEP or NSEP.

Project description:BackgroundThe extent to which neighbourhood characteristics explain accumulation of health behaviours is poorly understood. We examined whether neighbourhood disadvantage was associated with co-occurrence of behaviour-related risk factors, and how much of the neighbourhood differences in the co-occurrence can be explained by individual and neighbourhood level covariates.MethodsThe study population consisted of 60 694 Finnish Public Sector Study participants in 2004 and 2008. Neighbourhood disadvantage was determined using small-area level information on household income, education attainment, and unemployment rate, and linked with individual data using Global Positioning System-coordinates. Associations between neighbourhood disadvantage and co-occurrence of three behaviour-related risk factors (smoking, heavy alcohol use, and physical inactivity), and the extent to which individual and neighbourhood level covariates explain neighbourhood differences in co-occurrence of risk factors were determined with multilevel cumulative logistic regression.ResultsAfter adjusting for age, sex, marital status, and population density we found a dose-response relationship between neighbourhood disadvantage and co-occurrence of risk factors within each level of individual socioeconomic status. The cumulative odds ratios for the sum of health risks comparing the most to the least disadvantaged neighbourhoods ranged between 1.13 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.24) and 1.75 (95% CI, 1.54-1.98). Individual socioeconomic characteristics explained 35%, and neighbourhood disadvantage and population density 17% of the neighbourhood differences in the co-occurrence of risk factors.ConclusionsCo-occurrence of poor health behaviours associated with neighbourhood disadvantage over and above individual's own socioeconomic status. Neighbourhood differences cannot be captured using individual socioeconomic factors alone, but neighbourhood level characteristics should also be considered.

Dataset Information

Individual socioeconomic position, neighbourhood disadvantage and mental well-being: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of mid-age adults.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Individual socioeconomic position, neighbourhood disadvantage and mental well-being: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of mid-age adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets