R Mitchell1, J Gibbs, H Tunstall, S Platt, D Dorling. 1. Public Health and Health Policy, University of Glasgow, 1 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, UK. r.mitchell@clinmed.gla.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify plausible mechanisms by which resilience (low mortality rates despite persistent economic adversity) was achieved in some areas in Britain between 1971 and 2001. METHODS: Mixed method observational study, combining quantitative analyses of cause- and age group-specific mortality rates, and area sociodemographic and environmental characteristics, with case studies of resilient areas which included in-depth interviews. RESULTS: The causes of death, and age groups, contributing most to resilience varied markedly between the 18 resilient areas; as disease aetiology varies, a range of protective processes must be in operation. Four area characteristics, which plausibly contributed to resilience, emerged from the in-depth interviews: population composition; retaining or attracting population; environment and housing; and social cohesion. Quantitative analyses demonstrated significant difference between resilient and non-resilient areas in retaining or attracting population only. CONCLUSIONS: While we identified plausible area characteristics through which resilience was achieved, there does not appear to be a definitive set that reliably produces resilience, and resilient and non-resilient areas did not differ significantly in their possession of most of these characteristics. If such characteristics do have a role in creating resilience, but are present in both resilient and non-resilient areas, further work is needed to explore what makes them "successful" in some areas, but not in others.
OBJECTIVES: To identify plausible mechanisms by which resilience (low mortality rates despite persistent economic adversity) was achieved in some areas in Britain between 1971 and 2001. METHODS: Mixed method observational study, combining quantitative analyses of cause- and age group-specific mortality rates, and area sociodemographic and environmental characteristics, with case studies of resilient areas which included in-depth interviews. RESULTS: The causes of death, and age groups, contributing most to resilience varied markedly between the 18 resilient areas; as disease aetiology varies, a range of protective processes must be in operation. Four area characteristics, which plausibly contributed to resilience, emerged from the in-depth interviews: population composition; retaining or attracting population; environment and housing; and social cohesion. Quantitative analyses demonstrated significant difference between resilient and non-resilient areas in retaining or attracting population only. CONCLUSIONS: While we identified plausible area characteristics through which resilience was achieved, there does not appear to be a definitive set that reliably produces resilience, and resilient and non-resilient areas did not differ significantly in their possession of most of these characteristics. If such characteristics do have a role in creating resilience, but are present in both resilient and non-resilient areas, further work is needed to explore what makes them "successful" in some areas, but not in others.
Authors: J Popay; H Kaloudis; L Heaton; B Barr; E Halliday; V Holt; K Khan; A Porroche-Escudero; A Ring; G Sadler; G Simpson; F Ward; P Wheeler Journal: Perspect Public Health Date: 2022-07-08
Authors: Jeong Hwan Kim; Tené T Lewis; Matthew L Topel; Mohamed Mubasher; Chaohua Li; Viola Vaccarino; Mahasin S Mujahid; Mario Sims; Arshed A Quyyumi; Herman A Taylor; Peter T Baltrus Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 2.830