| Literature DB >> 24884742 |
Mojgan Padyab1, Margareta Norberg.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Life course socioeconomic inequalities in heart disease, stroke and all-cause mortality are well studied in Sweden. However, few studies have sought to explain the mechanism for such associations mainly due to lack of longitudinal data with multiple measures of socioeconomic status (SES) across the life course. Given the population health concern about how socioeconomic inequality is related to poorer health, we aim to tackle obesity as one of the prime suspects that could explain the association between SES inequality and cardiovascular disease and consequently premature death. The aim of this study is to test which life course model best describes the association between socioeconomic disadvantage and obesity among 60 year old inhabitants of Västerbotten County in Northern Sweden.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24884742 PMCID: PMC4018623 DOI: 10.1186/1475-9276-13-35
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Characteristics of the study population and distribution of socioeconomic trajectories among VIP participants for the years 1990–1992, by sex
| | | |||
| Current daily smoking (%) | 23.0 | 19.3 | ||
| | | |||
| Active (%) | 38.6 | 40.6 | ||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 34.2 | 34.0 | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 65.8 | 66.0 | ||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 51.9 | 45.3 | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 48.1 | 54.7 | ||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 56.3 | 44.1 | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 43.7 | 55.9 | ||
| | | |||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 34.6 | 28.1 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 15.9 | 14.6 |
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.7 | 2.0 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 5.0 | 2.7 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 3.3 | 2.9 |
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 2.9 | 9.3 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 35.3 | 39.1 |
ahealth behaviors concurrent with the BMI at the age of 60.
Mean BMI ± standard deviation of the study population by socioeconomic status (SES) in men (n = 1522) and women (n = 1818)
| | | |||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 26.4 ± 3.3 | 25.7 ± 3.8* | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 26.4 ± 3.4 | 26.7 ± 4.4 | ||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 26.4 ± 3.3 | 25.7 ± 3.8* | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 26.3 ± 3.5 | 26.8 ± 4.4 | ||
| | | |||
| Advantaged (0) | 26.4 ± 3,3 | 25.6 ± 3.5* | ||
| Disadvantaged (1) | 26.2 ± 3.5 | 26.6 ± 4.4 | ||
| | ||||
| t1 | t2 | t3 | | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 26.4 ± 3.5 | 25.3 ± 3.6** |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 26.4 ± 3.1 | 25.8 ± 3.4 |
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 26.1 ± 2.8 | 25.3 ± 3.1 |
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 26.5 ± 3.6 | 25.7 ± 4.9 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 25.9 ± 3.1 | 26.6 ± 3.1 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 26.3 ± 3.2 | 26.3 ± 3.4 |
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 25.5 ± 2.8 | 26.1 ± 3.8 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 26.1 ± 3.5 | 26.6 ± 4.4 |
| 0 | 26.4 ± 3.5 | 25.3 ± 3.6 † | ||
| 1 | 26.4 ± 3.1 | 25.8 ± 3.5 | ||
| 2 | 25.9 ± 3.1 | 26.2 ± 3.6 | ||
| 3 | 26.1 ± 3.5 | 26.6 ± 4.4 | ||
*P < 0.01 compared to the disadvantaged group.
**P < 0.01 compared to the stable disadvantaged group (111).
†P < 0.01 compared to the most disadvantaged group (n disadvantaged = 3).
Partial F tests for different contrasts according to different hypotheses among women
| | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6, 1110 | 0.11 | 0.9 | 6, 1061 | 0.06 | 0.9 | |
| | | | | | | |
| t1 (SES at the age of 40) | 6, 1110 | 1.37 | 0.2 | 6, 1061 | 1.67 | 0.1 |
| t2 (SES at the age of 50) | 6, 1110 | 1.08 | 0.4 | 6, 1061 | 1.16 | 0.3 |
| t3 (SES at the age of 60) | 6, 1110 | 1.14 | 0.3 | 6, 1061 | 1.34 | 0.2 |
| | | | | | | |
| Late life mobility | 5, 1110 | 4,59 | <0.001 | 5, 1061 | 5.10 | 0.001 |
| Any mobility | 5, 1110 | 4.56 | <0.001 | 5, 1061 | 5.09 | 0.001 |
Predictors in Model 0 = SES corresponding to each life course model.
Predictors in Model 1 = Model 0+ health behaviors concurrent with the outcome (Physical activity and smoking).