Claire L Niedzwiedz1, Jill P Pell1, Richard Mitchell1. 1. Claire L. Niedzwiedz is with Centre for Research on Environment, Society, and Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. Jill P. Pell is with Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland. Richard Mitchell is with Centre for Research on Environment, Society, and Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We investigated to what extent current financial distress explains the relationship between life-course socioeconomic position and well-being in Southern, Scandinavian, Postcommunist, and Bismarckian welfare regimes. METHODS: We analyzed individuals (n = 18 324) aged 50 to 75 years in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe, 2006-2009. Well-being was measured with CASP-12 (which stands for control, autonomy, self-realization, and pleasure) and life satisfaction. We generated a life-course socioeconomic index from 8 variables and calculated multilevel regression models (containing individuals nested within 13 countries), as well as stratified single-level models by welfare regime. RESULTS: Life-course socioeconomic advantage was related to higher well-being; the difference in life satisfaction between the most and least advantaged was 2.09 (95% confidence interval = 1.87, 2.31) among women and 1.65 (95% confidence interval = 1.43, 1.87) among men. The weakest associations were found among Scandinavian countries. Financial distress was associated with lower well-being and attenuated the relationship between life-course socioeconomic position and well-being in all regimes (ranging from 34.26% in Postcommunist to 72.22% in Scandinavian countries). CONCLUSIONS: We found narrower inequalities in well-being in the Scandinavian regime. Reducing financial distress may help improve well-being and reduce inequalities.
OBJECTIVES: We investigated to what extent current financial distress explains the relationship between life-course socioeconomic position and well-being in Southern, Scandinavian, Postcommunist, and Bismarckian welfare regimes. METHODS: We analyzed individuals (n = 18 324) aged 50 to 75 years in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe, 2006-2009. Well-being was measured with CASP-12 (which stands for control, autonomy, self-realization, and pleasure) and life satisfaction. We generated a life-course socioeconomic index from 8 variables and calculated multilevel regression models (containing individuals nested within 13 countries), as well as stratified single-level models by welfare regime. RESULTS: Life-course socioeconomic advantage was related to higher well-being; the difference in life satisfaction between the most and least advantaged was 2.09 (95% confidence interval = 1.87, 2.31) among women and 1.65 (95% confidence interval = 1.43, 1.87) among men. The weakest associations were found among Scandinavian countries. Financial distress was associated with lower well-being and attenuated the relationship between life-course socioeconomic position and well-being in all regimes (ranging from 34.26% in Postcommunist to 72.22% in Scandinavian countries). CONCLUSIONS: We found narrower inequalities in well-being in the Scandinavian regime. Reducing financial distress may help improve well-being and reduce inequalities.
Authors: B Aldabe; R Anderson; M Lyly-Yrjänäinen; A Parent-Thirion; G Vermeylen; C C Kelleher; I Niedhammer Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2010-06-27 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Albert Espelt; Carme Borrell; Maica Rodríguez-Sanz; Carles Muntaner; M Isabel Pasarín; Joan Benach; Maartje Schaap; Anton E Kunst; Vicente Navarro Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2008-03-13 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Mikko Laaksonen; Kirsi Talala; Tuija Martelin; Ossi Rahkonen; Eva Roos; Satu Helakorpi; Tiina Laatikainen; Ritva Prättälä Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Terje A Eikemo; Rasmus Hoffmann; Margarete C Kulik; Ivana Kulhánová; Marlen Toch-Marquardt; Gwenn Menvielle; Caspar Looman; Domantas Jasilionis; Pekka Martikainen; Olle Lundberg; Johan P Mackenbach Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stefan Sieber; Boris Cheval; Dan Orsholits; Bernadette W Van der Linden; Idris Guessous; Rainer Gabriel; Matthias Kliegel; Marja J Aartsen; Matthieu P Boisgontier; Delphine Courvoisier; Claudine Burton-Jeangros; Stéphane Cullati Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Ana Isabel Ribeiro; Elias Teixeira Krainski; Marilia Sá Carvalho; Guy Launoy; Carole Pornet; Maria de Fátima de Pina Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Niina Sahrakorpi; Saila B Koivusalo; Johan G Eriksson; Hannu Kautiainen; Beata Stach-Lempinen; Risto P Roine Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2017-07
Authors: Claire L Niedzwiedz; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Aaron Reeves; Martin McKee; David Stuckler Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Laura J Samuel; Sarah L Szanton; Jennifer L Wolff; Katherine A Ornstein; Lauren J Parker; Laura N Gitlin Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 3.921