| Literature DB >> 34107877 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive functioning is an important measure of intrinsic capacity. In this study, we examine the association of life course socioeconomic status (SES) and height with cognitive functioning among older adults (50+) in India and China. The age pattern of cognitive functioning with measures of life course socioeconomic status has also been examined.Entities:
Keywords: Ageing; Childhood socioeconomic status; Cognition; Intrinsic capacity; Stature; WHO-SAGE
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34107877 PMCID: PMC8191062 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02303-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Characteristics of the study population, WHO-SAGE Wave 1 (2007/10)
| Background Characteristics | Categories | India | China |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (years, SD) | 61.5 (8.89) | 62.6(8.96) | |
| Mean height (cm, SD) | 156.7(9.97) | 159.2(8.68) | |
| Mean cognitive functioning (score, SD) | 38.1 (10.01) | 50.9 (11.8) | |
| – | % | % | |
| Sex | Male | 51.0 | 49.8 |
| Female | 49.0 | 50.2 | |
| Residence | Urban | 28.9 | 47.4 |
| Rural | 71.1 | 52.6 | |
| Marital status | Married | 76.9 | 85.1 |
| Otherwise | 23.1 | 14.9 | |
| Schooling | No formal education | 50.8 | 22.6 |
| Less than primary | 10.9 | 18.8 | |
| Completed secondary | 24.4 | 40.9 | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 13.9 | 17.7 | |
| Wealth quintile | Poorest | 18.2 | 16.3 |
| Poorer | 19.5 | 18.1 | |
| Middle | 18.8 | 20.5 | |
| Richer | 19.6 | 23.3 | |
| Richest | 23.9 | 21.8 | |
| Own employment | Never worked | 27.0 | 8.6 |
| Informal employment | 22.2 | 2.6 | |
| Self-employed | 36.4 | 45.2 | |
| Private/public sector | 14.4 | 43.6 | |
| Mother’s education | No formal education | 90.2 | 87.4 |
| Less than primary | 5.3 | 6.0 | |
| Completed secondary | 3.9 | 5.1 | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 0.6 | 1.5 | |
| Father’s education | No formal education | 66.6 | 68.7 |
| Less than primary | 13.3 | 12.9 | |
| Completed secondary | 15.4 | 13.9 | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 4.8 | 4.5 | |
| Mother’s employment | Never worked | 65.5 | 38.7 |
| Informal employment | 17.6 | 1.8 | |
| Self-employed | 14.5 | 48.6 | |
| Private/public sector | 2.5 | 10.9 | |
| Father’s employment | Never worked | 2.8 | 24.8 |
| Informal employment | 26.4 | 2.0 | |
| Self-employed | 57.1 | 51.1 | |
| Private/public sector | 13.7 | 22.1 | |
| Body mass index | Underweight | 38.3 | 4.1 |
| Normal weight | 48.3 | 59.9 | |
| Overweight | 10.6 | 29.9 | |
| Obesity | 2.8 | 6.1 | |
| Self-rated health | Good | 77.6 | 78.8 |
| Poor | 22.4 | 21.2 | |
| 1 + ADL | No | 47.8 | 87.1 |
| Yes | 52.2 | 12.9 | |
| Sleep problems | No | 85.5 | 97.3 |
| Yes | 14.5 | 2.7 | |
| Edentulism (Teeth loss) | No | 84.9 | 90.9 |
| Yes | 15.1 | 9.1 | |
| Tobacco use | No | 53.1 | 73.6 |
| Yes | 46.9 | 26.4 | |
| Alcohol use | No | 96.0 | 83.2 |
| Yes | 4.0 | 16.8 | |
| Physical inactivity | No | 68.5 | 61.2 |
| Yes | 31.5 | 38.8 | |
| Self-reported depression | No | 95.9 | 99.7 |
| Yes | 4.1 | 0.3 | |
| Observations | – | 6560 | 13,106 |
Fig. 1Age-adjusted mean cognitive functioning score among older adults in India and China, WHO-SAGE Wave 1 (2007/10)
Mixed effect linear regression results of cognitive functioning among older adults for India and China, WHO-SAGE Wave 1 (2007/10)
| Characteristics | Categories | India | China |
|---|---|---|---|
| – | – | β (95% CI) | β (95% CI) |
| Mother’s educationa | Less than primary | 0.85*(−0.04, 1.76) | 1.50***(0.69, 2.31) |
| Completed secondary | 1.53***(0.40, 2.66) | 0.96**(0.022, 1.90) | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 3.07**(0.59, 5.56) | 2.17***(0.54, 3.80) | |
| Father’s educationa | Less than primary | 0.80**(0.18, 1.43) | 1.35***(0.76, 1.94) |
| Completed secondary | 1.00***(0.31, 1.68) | 1.24***(0.60, 1.88) | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 2.53***(1.36, 3.69) | 3.50***(2.43, 4.57) | |
| Mother’s employmentb | Informal employment | 0.38(−0.38, 1.15) | − 0.016(− 1.95, 1.92) |
| Self-employed | − 0.29(− 0.94, 0.36) | 0.36(− 0.42, 1.15) | |
| Private/public sector | − 0.77(−2.11, 0.56) | 0.26(− 0.50, 1.02) | |
| Father’s employmentb | Informal employment | 1.31**(0.038, 2.59) | 0.61(−1.15, 2.38) |
| Self-employed | 2.15***(0.93, 3.37) | 0.62(−0.17, 1.41) | |
| Private/public sector | 2.04***(0.71, 3.37) | 0.40(−0.31, 1.11) | |
| Height quintilec | 2 | 0.83**(0.20, 1.46) | 0.96***(0.39, 1.52) |
| 3 | 1.06***(0.42, 1.70) | 1.32***(0.76, 1.89) | |
| 4 | 1.38***(0.74, 2.02) | 1.63***(1.03, 2.23) | |
| Highest | 1.81***(1.15, 2.47) | 2.23***(1.60, 2.86) | |
| Schoolinga | Less than primary | 3.80***(3.11, 4.49) | 2.96***(2.39, 3.53) |
| Completed secondary | 5.63***(5.03, 6.23) | 5.44***(4.90, 5.99) | |
| Higher secondary (HS) and above | 9.28***(8.45, 10.1) | 7.82***(7.08, 8.55) | |
| Wealth quintiled | Poorer | 0.92***(0.24, 1.61) | 0.75***(0.18, 1.33) |
| Middle | 1.42***(0.71, 2.13) | 1.02***(0.40, 1.64) | |
| Richer | 2.01***(1.28, 2.74) | 2.28***(1.63, 2.93) | |
| Richest | 2.71***(1.93, 3.49) | 2.07***(1.34, 2.81) | |
| Own employmentb | Informal employment | 0.56(−0.16, 1.29) | 1.21*(−0.11, 2.54) |
| Self-employed | 0.42(−0.23, 1.07) | 0.39(−0.42, 1.21) | |
| Private/public sector | 1.21***(0.44, 1.98) | 2.47***(1.68, 3.25) | |
| Age (years) | −0.08***(− 0.11, − 0.06) | −0.26***(− 0.28, − 0.23) | |
| Gendere | Female | −2.96***(−3.54, −2.38) | −1.57***(− 2.02, −1.12) |
| Residencef | Rural | −0.72**(− 1.42, − 0.019) | −0.73(− 2.14, 0.68) |
| Marital statusg | Otherwise | −1.09***(− 1.60, − 0.57) | −0.82***(− 1.33, − 0.31) |
| Body mass indexh | Underweight | −0.86***(− 1.31, − 0.40) | −0.15(− 1.04, 0.72) |
| Overweight | 0.89***(0.24, 1.54) | 0.33*(−0.06, 0.73) | |
| Obesity | 0.66(−0.47, 1.80) | −0.12(− 0.90, 0.66) | |
| Sleep problems | −0.60*(− 1.25, 0.041) | −1.14*(− 2.31, 0.018) | |
| Edentulism | − 0.63**(− 1.23, − 0.038) | −1.27***(− 1.87, − 0.66) | |
| Poor self-rated health | −1.52***(− 2.09,-0.95) | − 2.03***(− 2.50, − 1.56) | |
| 1 + ADL | −1.02***(− 1.47, − 0.56) | −2.77***(− 3.38, − 2.17) | |
| Tobacco use | 0.08(− 0.36, 0.52) | 0.05(−0.44, 0.55) | |
| Alcohol use | −0.99*(− 2.03, 0.035) | − 0.29(− 0.83, 0.25) | |
| Physically inactive | −1.31***(− 1.78, − 0.84) | 0.03(− 0.36, 0.43) | |
| Self-reported depression | −1.35**(− 2.39, − 0.32) | −2.81*(−6.04, 0.42) | |
| Region | 0.84(0.41, 1.73) | 1.49(.74, 2.98) | |
| PSU | 1.96(1.70, 2.26) | 2.56(2.09, 3.13) | |
| Individual | – | 7.44 (7.30, 7.58) | 9.25(9.13, 9.37) |
| Observations | – | 5787 | 10,934 |
areference no formal education, breference never worked, creference lowest,dreference poorest,ereference male, freference urban, g reference currently married, h reference normal weight
CI confidence interval*** p < .001, ** p < .005, * p < .01
Life course SES and cognitive functioning among older adults in India and China, WHO-SAGE Wave 1 (2007/10)
| Life-course SES | India | China | |
|---|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | β (95% CI) | ||
| Less than primary | Less than primary | Ref | Ref |
| Greater than primary | Less than primary | 0.74(−1.89, 3.38) | 0.23(−2.66, 3.13) |
| Less than primary | Greater than primary | 5.66***(5.14, 6.19) | 4.39***(3.94, 4.83) |
| Greater than primary | Greater than primary | 8.73***(7.60, 9.86) | 6.91***(6.00, 7.81) |
| – | – | ||
| Less than primary | Less than primary | Ref | Ref |
| Greater than primary | Less than primary | 0.88*(−0.08, 1.84) | 1.15**(.027, 2.28) |
| Less than primary | Greater than primary | 5.16***(4.58, 5.74) | 4.23***(3.77, 4.69) |
| Greater than primary | Greater than primary | 7.59***(6.85, 8.33) | 6.45***(5.76, 7.14) |
| – | – | ||
| Not employed | Not employed | Ref | Ref |
| Not employed | Employed | 1.77***(0.62, 2.93) | 1.10(−0.51, 2.73) |
| Employed | Not employed | 1.14***(0.50, 1.78) | 1.74***(0.92, 2.56) |
| Employed | Employed | 0.70**(0.028, 1.38) | 2.16***(1.30, 3.03) |
| – | – | ||
| Not employed | Not employed | Ref | Ref |
| Not employed | Employed | 1.81*(−0.21, 3.84) | 1.13*(− 0.18, 2.45) |
| Employed | Not employed | 0.48(−1.87, 2.84) | 1.79***(0.89, 2.68) |
| Employed | Employed | 2.39**(0.39, 4.39) | 2.26***(1.37, 3.15) |
| – | – | ||
| Less than primary | Less than primary | Ref | Ref |
| Greater than primary | Less than primary | 1.74(−1.83, 5.32) | 3.62(−2.75, 10.0) |
| Less than primary | Greater than primary | 5.04***(4.45, 5.63) | 5.31***(4.54, 6.09) |
| Greater than primary | Greater than primary | 9.75***(8.49, 11.0) | 8.65***(6.25, 11.1) |
| – | – | ||
| Not employed | Not employed | Ref | Ref |
| Not employed | Employed | 3.99***(1.60, 6.38) | 1.14(−0.58, 2.87) |
| Employed | Not employed | 0.05(−2.41, 2.52) | 1.86***(0.93, 2.80) |
| Employed | Employed | 2.67**(0.48, 4.86) | 2.46***(1.49, 3.43) |
Separate regression analysis was performed for each predictor variable adjusting demographic and health variables
CI confidence interval *** p < .001, ** p < .005, * p < .01
Fig. 2Predicted cognitive functioning score by parental education categories and age controlling socio-demographic, and health variables for India and China, WHO-SAGE Wave 1. A and B. Age pattern of cognition score of the study participants by mother’s and father’s education categories in India. C and D. Age pattern of cognition score of the study participants by mother’s and father’s education categories in China
Fig. 3Predicted cognitive functioning score by education (study participants) and wealth quintile in relation to age controlling demographic, and health variables for India and China, WHO-SAGE Wave 1. A and B. Age pattern of cognition score by participant’s education and wealth quintile categories in India. C and D. Age pattern of cognition score by participant’s education and wealth quintile categories in China