Different indicators of socioeconomic status and their relative importance as determinants of health in old age

International Journal for Equity in Health

Research

Alexander Darin-Mattsson¹  Stefan Fors¹  Ingemar Kåreholt² 

[1] Aging Research Centre (ARC), Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm University, Gävlegatan 16, 113 30, Stockholm, Sweden;Aging Research Centre (ARC), Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm University, Gävlegatan 16, 113 30, Stockholm, Sweden;Institute of Gerontology, School of Health and Welfare, Aging Research Network-Jönköping (ARN-J), Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden;

关键词: Socioeconomic indicators;    Education;    Social class;    Income;    Occupational complexity;    SES-index;    Late-life health;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12939-017-0670-3

 received in 2017-01-31, accepted in 2017-09-21,  发布年份 2017

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundSocioeconomic status has been operationalised in a variety of ways, most commonly as education, social class, or income. In this study, we also use occupational complexity and a SES-index as alternative measures of socioeconomic status. Studies show that in analyses of health inequalities in the general population, the choice of indicators influence the magnitude of the observed inequalities. Less is known about the influence of indicator choice in studies of older adults. The aim of this study is twofold: i) to analyse the impact of the choice of socioeconomic status indicator on the observed health inequalities among older adults, ii) to explore whether different indicators of socioeconomic status are independently associated with health in old age.MethodsWe combined data from two nationally representative Swedish surveys, providing more than 20 years of follow-up. Average marginal effects were estimated to compare the association between the five indicators of SES, and three late-life health outcomes: mobility limitations, limitations in activities of daily living (ADL), and psychological distress.ResultsAll socioeconomic status indicators were associated with late-life health; there were only minor differences in the effect sizes. Income was most strongly associated to all indicators of late-life health, the associations remained statistically significant when adjusting for the other indicators. In the fully adjusted models, education contributed to the model fits with 0–3% (depending on the outcome), social class with 0–1%, occupational complexity with 1–8%, and income with 3–18%.ConclusionsOur results indicate overlapping properties between socioeconomic status indicators in relation to late-life health. However, income is associated to late-life health independently of all other variables. Moreover, income did not perform substantially worse than the composite SES-index in capturing health variation. Thus, if the primary objective of including an indicator of socioeconomic status is to adjust the model for socioeconomic differences in late-life health rather than to analyse these inequalities per se, income may be the preferable indicator. If, on the other hand, the primary objective of a study is to analyse specific aspects of health inequalities, or the mechanisms that drive health inequalities, then the choice of indicator should be theoretically guided.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017