Dataset Information

Exploring the potential for a new measure of socioeconomic deprivation status to monitor health inequality.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Monitoring health inequalities is an important task for health research and policy, to uncover who is being left behind - and where - and to inform effective and equitable policies and programmes to tackle existing inequities. The choice of which measure to use to monitor and analyse health inequalities is thereby not trivial. This article explores a new measure of socioeconomic deprivation status (SDS) to monitor health inequalities.

Methods

The SDS measure was constructed using the Alkire-Foster method. It includes eight indicators across two equally weighted dimensions (education and living standards) and specifies a four-level gradient of socioeconomic deprivation at the household-level. We conducted four exercises to examine the value-added of the proposed SDS measure, using Demographic and Health Surveys data. First, we examined the discriminatory power of the new measure when applied to outcomes in four select reproductive, maternal, neonatal, and child health (RMNCH) indicators across six countries: skilled birth attendance, stunting, U5MR, and DTP3 immunisation. Then, we analysed the behaviour and association of the new SDS measure vis-à-vis the DHS Wealth Index, including chi-squared test and Pearson correlation coefficient. Third, we analysed the robustness of the SDS measure results to changes in its structure, using pairwise comparisons and Kendal Tau-b rank correlation. Finally, we illustrated some of the advantageous properties of the new measure, disaggregation and decomposition, on Haitian data.

Results

1) Higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation are generally consistently associated with lower levels of achievements in the RMNCH indicators across countries. 2) 87% of all pairwise rank comparisons across a range of SDS measure structures were robust. 3) SDS and DHS Wealth Index are associated, but with considerable cross-country variation, highlighting their complementarity. 4) Haitian households in rural areas experienced, on average, more severe socioeconomic deprivation as well as lower levels of RMNCH achievement than urban households.

Conclusions

The proposed SDS measure adds analytical possibilities to the health inequality monitoring literature, in line with ethically and conceptually well-founded notions of absolute, multidimensional disadvantage. In addition, it allows for breakdown by its dimensions and components, which may facilitate nuanced analyses of health inequality, its correlates, and determinants.

SUBMITTER: Dirksen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9034442 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The effect of deprivation on total bone health status has not been well defined. We examined the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and poor bone health and falls and we found a significant association. The finding could be beneficial for current public health strategies to minimise disparities in bone health.PurposeSocioeconomic deprivation is associated with many illnesses including increased fracture incidence in older people. However, the effect of deprivation on total bone health status has not been well defined. To examine the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and poor bone health and falls, we conducted a cross-sectional study using baseline measures from the United Kingdom (UK) Biobank cohort comprising 502,682 participants aged 40-69 years at recruitment during 2006-2010.MethodWe examined four outcomes: 1) low bone mineral density/osteopenia, 2) fall in last year, 3) fracture in the last five years, and 4) fracture from a simple fall in the last five years. To measure socioeconomic deprivation, we used the Townsend index of the participant's residential postcode.ResultsAt baseline, 29% of participants had low bone density (T-score of heel < -1 standard deviation), 20% reported a fall in the previous year, and 10% reported a fracture in the previous five years. Among participants experiencing a fracture, 60% reported the cause as a simple fall. In the multivariable logistic regression model after controlling for other covariates, the odds of a fall, fracture in the last five years, fractures from simple fall, and osteopenia were respectively 1.46 times (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-1.49), 1.26 times (95% CI 1.22-1.30), 1.31 times (95% CI 1.26-1.36) and 1.16 times (95% CI 1.13-1.19) higher for the most deprived compared with the least deprived quantile.ConclusionSocioeconomic deprivation was significantly associated with poor bone health and falls. This research could be beneficial to minimise social disparities in bone health.

Project description:For Germany, regional differences for various health indicators, which are also associated with socioeconomic factors, have been documented. This article aims to develop a regional socioeconomic deprivation index for Germany that (1) can be used to analyse regional socioeconomic inequalities in health and (2) provides a basis for explaining regional health differences in Germany. The core data stem from the INKAR (indicators and maps on spatial and urban development in Germany and Europe) database compiled by Germany's Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development. Factor analysis is used for indexing and the weighting of indicators for the three dimensions of education, occupation and income. The German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation (GISD) is generated at the levels of associations of municipalities, administrative districts and administrative regions for the years 1998, 2003, 2008 and 2012. Aggregate data and individual data from the German Health Update 2014/2015-EHIS (GEDA 2014/2015-EHIS) study are used to analyse associations between the index and selected health indicators. For around two thirds of the causes of death, the German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation reveals significant socioeconomic inequalities at the level of Germany's administrative regions. At district level, life expectancy in the bottom fifth of districts presenting the highest levels of deprivation is, depending on the observation period, 1.3 years lower for women and 2.6 years lower for men in comparison to the upper fifth of districts presenting the lowest levels of deprivation. The index can explain 45.5% and 62.2% of regional differences in life expectancy for women and men, respectively. Moreover, the population in regions characterised by high levels of deprivation has significantly higher rates of smokers, engages less frequently in leisure-time physical activities and is more often obese. The German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation illustrates regional socioeconomic differences at different spatial levels and contributes to explaining regional health differences. This index is intended for use in research as well as by federal and federal state health reporting systems and should enable access to new sources of data for investigating the links between social inequalities and health in Germany.

Project description:ImportanceAir quality has improved and smoking rates have declined over the past half-century in the US. It is unknown whether such secular improvements, and other policies, have helped close socioeconomic gaps in respiratory health.ObjectiveTo describe long-term trends in socioeconomic disparities in respiratory disease prevalence, pulmonary symptoms, and pulmonary function.Design, setting, and participantsThis repeated cross-sectional analysis of the nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) and predecessor surveys, conducted from 1959 to 2018. included 160 495 participants aged 6 to 74 years.ExposuresFamily income quintile defined using year-specific thresholds; educational attainment.Main outcomes and measuresTrends in socioeconomic disparities in prevalence of current/former smoking among adults aged 25 to 74 years; 3 respiratory symptoms (dyspnea on exertion, cough, and wheezing) among adults aged 40 to 74 years; asthma stratified by age (6-11, 12-17, and 18-74 years); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ([COPD] adults aged 40-74 years); and 3 measures of pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], forced vital capacity [FVC], and FEV1/FVC<0.70) among adults aged 24 to 74 years.ResultsOur sample included 160 495 individuals surveyed between 1959 and 2018: 27 948 children aged 6 to 11 years; 26 956 children aged 12 to 17 years; and 105 591 adults aged 18 to 74 years. Income- and education-based disparities in smoking prevalence widened from 1971 to 2018. Socioeconomic disparities in respiratory symptoms persisted or worsened from 1959 to 2018. For instance, from 1971 to 1975, 44.5% of those in the lowest income quintile reported dyspnea on exertion vs 26.4% of those in the highest quintile, whereas from 2017 to 2018 the corresponding proportions were 48.3% and 27.9%. Disparities in cough and wheezing rose over time. Asthma prevalence rose for all children after 1980, but more sharply among poorer children. Income-based disparities in diagnosed COPD also widened over time, from 4.5 percentage points (age- and sex-adjusted) in 1971 to 11.3 percentage points from 2013 to 2018. Socioeconomic disparities in FEV1 and FVC also increased. For instance, from 1971 to 1975, the age- and height-adjusted FEV1 of men in the lowest income quintile was 203.6 mL lower than men in the highest quintile, a difference that widened to 248.5 mL from 2007 to 2012 (95% CI, -328.0 to -169.0). However, disparities in rates of FEV1/FVC lower than 0.70 changed little.Conclusions and relevanceSocioeconomic disparities in pulmonary health persisted and potentially worsened over the past 6 decades, suggesting that the benefits of improved air quality and smoking reductions have not been equally distributed. Socioeconomic position may function as an independent determinant of pulmonary health.