Dataset Information

Sociodemographic factors and prejudice toward HIV and hepatitis B/C status in a working-age population: results from a national, cross-sectional study in Japan.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: In many countries, HIV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infected individuals may face discrimination and mistreatment from coworkers. Effective interventions to reduce workplace discrimination are therefore needed to protect these vulnerable populations. The current study investigated potential associations between sociodemographic factors and prejudice toward HIV and HBV/HCV infected colleagues within a Japanese working population. METHODS: An online anonymous, nationwide internet survey was administered to a cross-section of approximately 3,000 individuals in Japan. The survey comprised 14 questions focusing on demographics (five items), basic HIV or HBV/HCV knowledge (eight items), and potential prejudice toward HIV or HBV/HCV infected colleagues (one item). The sociodemographic characteristics evaluated were sex, age, educational level, employment status, and individual income; with multiple logistic regression used for the analysis. RESULTS: In total, 3,055 individuals were recruited for the HIV related survey and 3,129 for the HBV/HCV related survey. Older age was significantly and positively associated with prejudice toward HIV infected colleagues (p<0.01) and negatively associated with prejudice toward HBV/HCV infected colleagues (p<0.01). Statistically significant associations were not observed between other sociodemographic characteristics and potential prejudice toward HIV and HBV/HCV infected coworkers. CONCLUSION: Overall, this study suggests that age may be associated with prejudice toward HIV and HBV/HCV infected colleagues among the working age population of Japan. As such, policy makers should consider the age of participants when formulating efforts to reduce prejudice toward HIV and HBV/HCV infected workers.

SUBMITTER: Eguchi H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4008599 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are among the most common pathologies in the general population. However, research into the prevalence of upper arm MSDs is hampered by a lack of uniformity in case definition, and by the absence of a gold standard for measurement. Furthermore, some sectors of the population have benefited from extensive research whilst others have largely been ignored. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVES: to investigate the prevalence of shoulder MSDs in a working age female population not exposed to specific occupational risk factors such as heavy and/or repetitive work, assessing the differences in prevalence recorded by using three different standard measurement tools. METHODS: 302 working aged women were enrolled in this study (age 20-55 years). Each subject underwent three different assessments: standardized questionnaires for symptoms and disability and the SF36 health survey, a clinical assessment performed by a blinded orthopaedic specialist, and an imaging assessment by means of ultrasound (US) and Magnetic Resonance (MR) if indicated. RESULTS: According to the questionnaire 77 subjects (25.5%) complained of shoulder pain whilst 225 (74.5%) were asymptomatic. According to the clinical examination, 31 subjects (10.3%) resulted positive, whereas 271 subjects (89.7%) had normal shoulders. According to the imaging findings, 26 subjects (8.6%) had alterations to the anatomical structures of the shoulder, whilst 276 subjects (91.4%) had no detectable abnormalities in either shoulder. In all assessments, the prevalence increased with age (p?=?0.001). CONCLUSION: Depending on the outcome measure used, the prevalence of reported MSDs of the shoulder varies considerably. There is a striking difference between the prevalence of subjective reported symptoms and the standardized clinical/imaging examinations. However, the results of all the assessments did concur in one aspect; there was a significant trend of increased prevalence of shoulder MSDs with age. When looking at reported prevalence, this study shows the importance of noting the measurement method used before making comparisons, as it can vary considerably. The epidemic of shoulder pain reported is not indicative of an epidemic of shoulder pathology.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough sociodemographic differences in dietary intake have been widely studied, the up-to-date evidence on the corresponding variations in motives for food selection is limited. We investigated how sociodemographic characteristics and special diets in households are associated with the relative importance of various food motives.MethodsParticipants were members of the S Group loyalty card program across Finland who consented to release their grocery purchase data to be used for research purposes and responded to a web-based questionnaire in 2018 (LoCard study). Self-reported information on sociodemographic factors (age, gender, marital status, living situation, education, household income), special diets in household and food motives (Food Choice Questionnaire) were utilized in the present analyses (N = 10,795). Age- and gender-adjusted linear models were performed separately for each sociodemographic predictor and motive dimension (derived by factor analysis) outcome. The importance of each sociodemographic predictor was evaluated based on an increase in R2 value after adding the predictor to the age- and gender-adjusted model.ResultsAge emerged as a central determinant of food motives with the following strongest associations: young adults emphasized convenience (∆R2 = 0.09, P < 0.001) and mood control (∆R2 = 0.05, P < 0.001) motives more than middle-aged and older adults. The relative importance of cheapness decreased with increasing socioeconomic position (SEP) (∆R2 = 0.08, P < 0.001 for income and ∆R2 = 0.04, P < 0.001 for education). However, the price item ("is good value for money") depicting the concept of worth did not distinguish between SEP categories. Considerations related to familiarity of food were more salient to men (∆R2 = 0.02, P < 0.001) and those with lower SEP (∆R2 = 0.03, P < 0.001 for education and ∆R2 = 0.01, P < 0.001 for income). Respondents living in households with a vegetarian, red-meat-free, gluten-free or other type of special diet rated ethical concern as relatively more important than households with no special diets (∆R2 = 0.02, P < 0.001).ConclusionsWe observed sociodemographic differences in a range of food motives that might act as barriers or drivers for adopting diets that benefit human and planetary health. Interventions aiming to narrow SEP and gender disparities in dietary intake should employ strategies that take into account higher priority of familiarity and price in daily food selection in lower-SEP individuals and males.

Project description:Policy Points The private sector has large potential influence over social determinants of health, but we have limited information about how businesses perceive or engage in actions to promote health and well-being. We conducted a national survey of more than 1,000 businesses of varying sizes and industries to benchmark private sector engagement in employee, environmental, consumer, and community health, which we collectively refer to as a corporate culture of health. Overall, the private sector is taking steps to foster health and well-being but still has substantial opportunity for growth. The private sector has a large potential role in advancing health and well-being, but attention to corporate practices around health tends to focus on a narrow range of issues and on large businesses. Systematically describing private sector engagement in health and well-being is a necessary step toward understanding the current state of the field and developing an agenda for businesses going forward. We conducted a national survey of 1,017 private sector organizations to assess current levels of engagement in what we term a culture of health (CoH). We measured corporate CoH along four dimensions, which assess the extent to which businesses promote employee, environmental, consumer, and community health and well-being. We also explored potential explanations for the number of health-related actions taken in each dimension. On average, businesses took 38% of health-related actions included in our survey. For each dimension, we found variation among businesses in the number of actions taken (on average, there were almost fourfold differences between the bottom and top quartiles of businesses in terms of actions taken). Mentioning health and well-being in the corporate mission, having a strategic plan for CoH, and perceiving a positive return on CoH investments were all associated with businesses' actions taken. Fewer than half of businesses, however, perceived a positive return on their CoH investments. Overall, the private sector is taking steps to foster health and well-being. However, there remains substantial variation among businesses and opportunity for growth, even among those currently taking the most action. Strengthening the business case for a corporate CoH may increase private sector investments in health and well-being. Actions taken by individual businesses, business groups, industries, and regulators have the potential to improve corporate engagement and impact.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies have reported that individualized residential place-based discrimination (PBD) affects residents' health. However, studies exploring the association between institutionalized PBD and health are scarce, especially in Asian countries including Japan.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with random two-stage sampling of 6191 adults aged 25-64 years in 100 census tracts across Osaka city in 2011. Of 3244 respondents (response rate 52.4%), 2963 were analyzed using multilevel logistic regression to examine the association of both individualized and institutionalized PBD with self-rated health (SRH) after adjustment for individual-level factors such as socioeconomic status (SES). An area-level PBD indicator was created by aggregating individual-level PBD responses in each tract, representing a proxy for institutionalized PBD, i.e., the concept that living in a stigmatized neighborhood affects neighborhood health. 100 tracts were divided into quartiles in order. The health impact of area-level PBD was compared with that of area-level SES indicators (quartile) such as deprivation.ResultsAfter adjustment for individual-level PBD, the highest and third area-level PBD quartiles showed odds ratio (OR) 1.57 (95% credible interval: 1.13-2.18) and 1.38 (0.99-1.92), respectively, for poor SRH compared with the lowest area-level PBD quartile. In a further SES-adjusted model, ORs of area-level PBD (highest and third quartile) were attenuated to 1.32 and 1.31, respectively, but remained marginally significant, although those of the highest area-level not-home-owner (census-based indicator) and deprivation index quartiles were attenuated to 1.26 and 1.21, respectively, and not significant. Individual-level PBD showed significant OR 1.89 (1.33-2.81) for poor SRH in an age, sex, PBD and SES-adjusted model.ConclusionInstitutionalized PBD may be a more important environmental determinant of SRH than other area-level SES indicators such as deprivation. Although it may have a smaller health impact than individualized PBD, attention should be paid to invisible and unconscious aspects of institutionalized PBD to improve residents' health.

Dataset Information

Sociodemographic factors and prejudice toward HIV and hepatitis B/C status in a working-age population: results from a national, cross-sectional study in Japan.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets