| Literature DB >> 34064460 |
Zeyun Feng1,2, Jane M Cramm1, Anna P Nieboer1.
Abstract
Background: An understanding of factors associated with health behaviours is critical for the design of appropriate health promotion programmes. Important influences of social cohesion, education, and income on people's health behaviours have been recognised in Western countries. However, little is known about these influences in the older Chinese population. Objective: To investigate associations of social cohesion and socioeconomic status (SES) with health behaviours among middle-aged and older adults in China.Entities:
Keywords: health behaviour; healthy diet; physical activity; smoking; social cohesion; social participation; socioeconomic status
Year: 2021 PMID: 34064460 PMCID: PMC8125501 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18094894
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Characteristics of the study population (n = 13,367).
|
| % | Mean (SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Age (years) Range 50–99 | 13,367 | 63.2 (9.4) | |
| Gender (female) | 7093 | 53.1 | |
| Marital status | |||
| Non-single | 11,093 | 83.1 | |
| Areas of residence (rural) | 6800 | 50.9 | |
|
| |||
| Educational level | |||
| Lower | 8202 | 61.7 | |
| Income quintile | |||
| Q1 (lowest) | 2665 | 20.0 | |
| Q2 | 2646 | 19.9 | |
| Q3 | 2688 | 20.2 | |
| Q4 | 2724 | 20.5 | |
| Q5 (highest) | 2583 | 19.4 | |
| Social cohesion scale | 12,938 | 3.4 (0.5) | |
|
| |||
| Daily smoker | |||
| Female | 209 | 3.0 | |
| Male | 2954 | 48.9 | |
| Total sample | 3163 | 24.5 | |
| Inadequate VF consumption | |||
| Female | 2013 | 28.4 | |
| Male | 2223 | 39.0 | |
| Total sample | 4236 | 35.0 | |
| Insufficient PA | |||
| Female | 2284 | 33.2 | |
| Male | 1960 | 32.3 | |
| Total sample | 4244 | 32.8 | |
| Social participation scale | |||
| Female | 6879 | 1.7 (0.4) | |
| Male | 6069 | 1.7 (0.4) | |
| Total | 12,948 | 1.7 (0.4) |
SD, standard deviation; SES, socioeconomic status; VF, vegetables and fruit; PA, physical activity. No data on age, gender, residence were missing. Higher Social participation scores indicate greater social participation.
Relationships between social cohesion and socioeconomic status with four health behaviours.
| Sufficient PA | Adequate VF Consumption | Daily Smoker | Social Participation § | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | B | SE | |
| Independent variables | |||||
| Social cohesion | 1.058 | 1.300 ** | 0.839 * | 0.074 | 0.007 ** |
| (0.975–1.147) | (1.192–1.417) | (0.754–0.934) | |||
| Education (low) | 1.058 | 0.806 ** | 1.314 ** | −0.052 | 0.008 ** |
| (0.963–1.162) | (0.730–0.890) | (1.166–1.480) | |||
| Income | 0.606 ** | 2.650 ** | 0.790 ** | 0.101 | 0.008 ** |
| (0.552–0.665) | (2.396–2.932) | (0.699–0.891) | |||
| Covariates | |||||
| Age | 0.960 ** | 1.000 | 0.959 ** | −0.005 | 0.000 ** |
| (0.956–0.964) | (0.995–1.005) | (0.953–0.964) | |||
| Gender (female) | 0.937 | 1.510 ** | 0.027 ** | −0.003 | 0.007 |
| (0.867–1.013) | (1.390–1.640) | (0.023–0.032) | |||
| Residence (rural) | 0.681 ** | 0.455 ** | 1.608 ** | 0.122 | 0.008 ** |
| (0.621–0.745) | (0.415–0.500) | (1.431–1.808) | |||
| Non-Single | 1.078 | 1.330 ** | 0.787 * | −0.003 | 0.010 |
| (0.968–1.200) | (1.188–1.489) | (0.671–0.923) | |||
| Constant | 25.762 ** | 0.889 | 20.600 ** | 1.679 ** | |
| R2 | 0.047 | 0.153 | 0.445 | 0.062 | |
| (Nagelkerke) | (Nagelkerke) | (Nagelkerke) | |||
|
| 12,822 | 12,005 | 12,797 | 12,840 | |
* p < 0.01, ** p < 0.001. SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval. §, continuous variable. PA, physical activity. Reference groups: male, urban residence, single, higher education. Higher Social participation scores indicate greater social participation.
Associations between social cohesion and socioeconomic status with health behaviours among males and females.
| Sufficient PA | Adequate VF Consumption | Daily Smoker | Social Participation § | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | Males | Females | Males | Females | Males | Females | |
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | B (SE) | B (SE) | |
| Social cohesion | 1.178 * | 0.976 | 1.251 ** | 1.357 ** | 0.805 ** | 0.984 | 0.067 | 0.080 |
| (1.044–1.329) | (0.874–1.091) | (1.106–1.416) | (1.202–1.531) | (0.716–0.904) | (0.732–1.323) | (0.011) ** | (0.010) ** | |
| Low education | 0.941 | 1.184 | 0.866 | 0.723 ** | 1.320 ** | 1.413 | −0.050 | −0.055 |
| (0.826–1.073) | (1.034–1.356) | (0.759–0.989) | (0.620–0.841) | (1.163–1.498) | (0.938–2.129) | (0.012) ** | (0.012) ** | |
| Income | 0.595 ** | 0.616 ** | 2.506 ** | 2.806 ** | 0.807 * | 0.652 | 0.124 | 0.081 |
| (0.519–0.682) | (0.541–0.700) | (2.175–2.887) | (2.430–3.240) | (0.708–0.920) | (0.461–0.923) | (0.012) ** | (0.011) ** | |
| Age | 0.969 ** | 0.952 ** | 1.010 * | 0.990 * | 0.948 ** | 1.037 ** | −0.004 | −0.006 |
| (0.963–0.975) | (0.946–0.958) | (1.003–1.017) | (0.983–0.996) | (0.942–0.954) | (1.020–1.055) | (0.001) ** | (0.001) ** | |
| Residence (rural) | 0.840 | 0.568 ** | 0.493 ** | 0.426 ** | 1.704 ** | 1.076 | 0.152 | 0.098 |
| (0.736–0.960) | (0.501–0.644) | (0.432–0.563) | (0.373–0.486) | (1.503–1.933) | (0.778–1.488) | (0.012) ** | (0.011) ** | |
| Non-Single | 1.072 | 1.051 | 1.277 | 1.265 * | 0.878 | 0.951 | 0.035 | −0.023 |
| (0.894–1.286) | (0.916–1.205) | (1.061–1.537) | (1.092–1.466) | (0.708–0.920) | (0.677–1.338) | (0.017) | (0.012) | |
| Constant | 9.387 ** | 55.798 ** | 0.512 | 2.640 * | 41.854 ** | 0.002 ** | 1.607 | 1.734 |
| (0.056) ** | (0.051) ** | |||||||
* p < 0.01. ** p < 0.001. SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval. § continuous variable. PA, physical activity; higher social participation scores indicate greater social participation.
Social cohesion scale.
|
| ||||
| To a very small extent | To a small extent | Neither great nor small extent | To a great extent | To a very great extent |
| First, think about people in our neighbourhood. Generally speaking, would you say that you can trust them…? | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Now, think about people whom you work with. Generally speaking, would you say that you can trust them …? | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| How about strangers? Generally speaking, would you say that you can trust them …? | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||
| Not safe at all | Slightly safe | Moderately safe | Very safe | Completely safe |
| In general, how safe from crime and violence do you feel when you are alone at home? | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| How safe do you feel when walking down your street alone after dark? | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Social participation scale.
| How Often in the Last 12 Months Have You… |
|---|
| 1. Attended any public meeting in which there was a discussion of local or school affairs? |
| 2. Met personally with someone you consider to be a community leader? |
| 3. Attended any group, club, society, union or organisational meeting? |
| 4. Worked with other people in your neighbourhood to fix or improve something? |
| 5. Had friends over to your home? |
| 6. Been in the home of someone who lives in a different neighbourhood than you do or had…them in your home? |
| 7. Socialised with co-workers outside of work? |
| 8. Attended religious services (not including weddings and funerals)? |
| 9. Gotten out of the house/your dwelling to attend social meetings, activities, programmes or events or to visit friends or relatives? |