A prospective investigation of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and self-rated health in a large US cohort.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Neighborhood characteristics play a critical role in health. Self-rated health (SRH) is an important indicator of quality of life and a strong predictor of premature death. Prospective study on neighborhood deprivation and SRH is limited. METHODS:We examined neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation with reporting fair/poor SRH at follow-up (2004-2006) in 249,265 men and women (age 50-71) who reported SRH as good or better at baseline (1995-1996) in the NIH-AARP Health and Diet Study. Baseline addresses were geocoded and linked to 2000 Census. Census tract level variables were used to generate a socioeconomic deprivation index by principle component analysis. RESULTS:Residents of more deprived neighborhoods had a higher risk of developing poor/fair SRH at follow-up, even after adjusting for individual-level factors (Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) Q5 vs Q1: 1.26 (1.20, 1.32), p-trend: <0.0001). The results were largely consistent across subgroups with different demographics, health behaviors, and disease conditions and after excluding participants who moved away from their baseline address. CONCLUSION:Neighborhood disadvantage predicts SRH over 10 years.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:We examined whether the risk of premature mortality associated with living in socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods varies according to the health status of individuals. METHODS:Community-dwelling adults (n = 566,402; age = 50-71 years) in 6 US states and 2 metropolitan areas participated in the ongoing prospective National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study, which began in 1995. We used baseline data for 565,679 participants on health behaviors, self-rated health status, and medical history, collected by mailed questionnaires. Participants were linked to 2000 census data for an index of census tract socioeconomic deprivation. The main outcome was all-cause mortality ascertained through 2006. RESULTS:In adjusted survival analyses of persons in good-to-excellent health at baseline, risk of mortality increased with increasing levels of census tract socioeconomic deprivation. Neighborhood socioeconomic mortality disparities among persons in fair-to-poor health were not statistically significant after adjustment for demographic characteristics, educational achievement, lifestyle, and medical conditions. CONCLUSIONS:Neighborhood socioeconomic inequalities lead to large disparities in risk of premature mortality among healthy US adults but not among those in poor health.
Project description:Neighborhood conditions may have an important impact on physical activity and sedentary behaviors in the older population. Most previous studies in this area are cross-sectional and report mixed findings regarding the effects of neighborhood environment on different types of physical activity. Moreover, little is known about the prospective relationship between neighborhood environment and sedentary behaviors. Our analysis included 136,526 participants from the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study (age 51-70). Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation was measured with an index based on census variables and developed using principal component analysis. Physical activity and sedentary behaviors were measured both at baseline (1995-1996) and follow-up (2004-2006). Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the prospective relationship between neighborhood deprivation and exercise, non-exercise physical activity, and sedentary behaviors, adjusting for baseline physical activity and sedentary behaviors as well as potential confounders. We found that more severe neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation was prospectively associated with reduced time for exercise (? Q5 vs Q1 (95% confidence interval), hour, -0.85 (-0.95, -0.75)) but increased time spent in non-exercise physical activities (1.16 (0.97, 1.34)), such as household activities, outdoor chores, and walking for transportation. Moreover, people from more deprived neighborhoods were also more likely to engage in prolonged (?5?h/day) TV viewing (Odds ratio Q5 vs Q1 (95% confidence interval), 1.21 (1.15, 1.27)). In conclusion, neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation is associated with physical activity and sedentary behavior in the older population. These associations may differ for different types of physical activities.
Project description:Low neighborhood socioeconomic status has been linked to adverse health outcomes. However, it is unclear whether changing the neighborhood may influence health. We examined 10-year change in neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation in relation to mortality rate among 288,555 participants aged 51-70 years who enrolled in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study in 1995-1996 (baseline) and did not move during the study. Changes in neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation between 1990 and 2000 were measured by US Census data at the census tract level. All-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer deaths were ascertained through annual linkage to the Social Security Administration Death Master File between 2000 and 2011. Overall, our results suggested that improvement in neighborhood socioeconomic status was associated with a lower mortality rate, while deterioration was associated with a higher mortality rate. More specially, a 30-percentile-point reduction in neighborhood deprivation among more deprived neighborhoods was associated with 11% and 19% reductions in the total mortality rate among men and women, respectively. On the other hand, a 30-point increase in neighborhood deprivation in less deprived neighborhoods was associated with an 11% increase in the mortality rate among men. Our findings support a longitudinal association between changing neighborhood conditions and mortality.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The purpose of this study was to separately examine the impact of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and availability of healthcare resources on prostate cancer risk among African American and Caucasian men. METHODS:In the large, prospective NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, we analyzed baseline (1995-1996) data from adult men, aged 50-71 years. Incident prostate cancer cases (n = 22,523; 1,089 among African Americans) were identified through December 2006. Lifestyle and health risk information was ascertained by questionnaires administered at baseline. Area-level socioeconomic indicators were ascertained by linkage to the US Census and the Area Resource File. Multilevel Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS:A differential effect among African Americans and Caucasians was observed for neighborhood deprivation (p-interaction = 0.04), percent uninsured (p-interaction = 0.02), and urologist density (p-interaction = 0.01). Compared to men living in counties with the highest density of urologists, those with fewer had a substantially increased risk of developing advanced prostate cancer (HR = 2.68, 95 % CI = 1.31, 5.47) among African American. CONCLUSIONS:Certain socioeconomic indicators were associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer among African American men compared to Caucasians. Minimizing differences in healthcare availability may be a potentially important pathway to minimizing disparities in prostate cancer risk.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Several studies have reported that individualized residential place-based discrimination (PBD) affects residents' health. However, studies exploring the association between institutionalized PBD and health are scarce, especially in Asian countries including Japan.<h4>Methods</h4>A cross-sectional study was conducted with random two-stage sampling of 6191 adults aged 25-64 years in 100 census tracts across Osaka city in 2011. Of 3244 respondents (response rate 52.4%), 2963 were analyzed using multilevel logistic regression to examine the association of both individualized and institutionalized PBD with self-rated health (SRH) after adjustment for individual-level factors such as socioeconomic status (SES). An area-level PBD indicator was created by aggregating individual-level PBD responses in each tract, representing a proxy for institutionalized PBD, i.e., the concept that living in a stigmatized neighborhood affects neighborhood health. 100 tracts were divided into quartiles in order. The health impact of area-level PBD was compared with that of area-level SES indicators (quartile) such as deprivation.<h4>Results</h4>After adjustment for individual-level PBD, the highest and third area-level PBD quartiles showed odds ratio (OR) 1.57 (95% credible interval: 1.13-2.18) and 1.38 (0.99-1.92), respectively, for poor SRH compared with the lowest area-level PBD quartile. In a further SES-adjusted model, ORs of area-level PBD (highest and third quartile) were attenuated to 1.32 and 1.31, respectively, but remained marginally significant, although those of the highest area-level not-home-owner (census-based indicator) and deprivation index quartiles were attenuated to 1.26 and 1.21, respectively, and not significant. Individual-level PBD showed significant OR 1.89 (1.33-2.81) for poor SRH in an age, sex, PBD and SES-adjusted model.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Institutionalized PBD may be a more important environmental determinant of SRH than other area-level SES indicators such as deprivation. Although it may have a smaller health impact than individualized PBD, attention should be paid to invisible and unconscious aspects of institutionalized PBD to improve residents' health.
Project description:BACKGROUND:A growing body of research has demonstrated that individuals who live in neighborhoods with more severe socioeconomic deprivation may have higher risks for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, previous studies have examined neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) at only 1 point in time, and it is unclear whether changes in neighborhood SES also can influence the risks of CRC. METHODS:Cox regression analysis was used to examine different trajectories of change in neighborhood SES over 10 years in relation to the incidence of CRC among 266,804 participants (ages 51-70 years) in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. Eligible participants reported living in the same neighborhood at baseline (1995-1996) and from 2004 to 2006 according to a follow-up questionnaire. Changes in neighborhood SES were measured between 1990 and 2000 by SES indices derived from Census data. Neighborhoods were grouped into 4 categories based on median SES indices in 1990 and 2000 (low-low, low-high, high-low, and high-high). RESULTS:Compared with residents whose neighborhoods were in the higher SES group at both time points (reference category), those whose neighborhoods were consistently in the low SES group had a 7% higher risk of developing CRC (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.14). Moreover, the risk of CRC was 15% higher (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.28) for those living in neighborhoods with decreasing SES (high-low) over time. CONCLUSIONS:The current findings suggest that exposure to consistently low SES neighborhoods and/or a decrease in neighborhood SES over a period of time may be associated with higher risks of CRC.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Both excessive weight gain and weight loss are important risk factors in the older population. Neighborhood environment may play an important role in weight change, but neighborhood effects on weight gain and weight loss have not been studied separately. This study examined the associations between neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and excessive weight gain and weight loss. METHODS:This analysis included 153,690 men and 105,179 women (aged 51-70 years). Baseline addresses were geocoded into geographic coordinates and linked to the 2000 U.S. Census at the Census tract level. Census variables were used to generate a socioeconomic deprivation index by principle component analysis. Excessive weight gain and loss were defined as gaining or losing >10% of baseline (1995-1996) body weight at follow-up (2004-2006). The analysis was performed in 2015. RESULTS:More severe neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation was associated with higher risks of both excessive weight gain and weight loss after adjusting for individual indicators of SES, disease conditions, and lifestyle factors (Quintile 5 vs Quintile 1: weight gain, OR=1.36, 95% CI=1.28, 1.45 for men and OR=1.20, 95% CI=1.13, 1.27 for women; weight loss, OR=1.09, 95%% CI=1.02, 1.17 for men and OR=1.23, 95% CI=1.14, 1.32 for women). The findings were fairly consistent across subpopulations with different demographics and lifestyle factors. CONCLUSIONS:Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation predicts higher risk of excessive weight gain and weight loss.
Project description:Multiple health behaviors could have greater impact on chronic diseases than single behaviors, but correlates of behavioral clusters are relatively understudied. Using data from NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study (initiated in 1995) for 324,522 participants from the U.S. (age 50-71), we conducted exploratory factor analysis to identify clusters of adherence to eight cancer prevention behaviors. Poisson regressions examined associations between cluster scores and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, measured with census block group (1) poverty and (2) low education. Four clusters emerged: Movement (adequate physical activity/less TV); Abstinence (never smoked/less alcohol); Weight control (healthy body mass index/high fruits and vegetables); and Other (adequate sleep/receiving cancer screenings). Scores on all clusters were lower for participants in neighborhoods with the highest poverty (most deprived quintile versus least deprived: relative risk [RR] = 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.94-0.96) for Movement, 0.98 (95% CI = 0.97-0.99) for Abstinence, 0.94 (95% CI = 0.92-0.95) for Weight control, and 0.94 (95% CI = 0.93-0.95) for Other; all p < 0.001). Scores on three clusters were lower for participants in neighborhoods with the lowest education (RR = 0.88 (95% CI = 0.87-0.89) for Movement, 0.89 (95% CI = 0.88-0.90) for Weight control, and 0.90 (95% CI = 0.89-0.91) for Other; all p < .001). Health behaviors among older adults demonstrated four clusters. Neighborhood deprivation was associated with lower scores on clusters, suggesting that interventions to reduce concentrated deprivation may be an efficient approach for improving multiple behaviors simultaneously.
Project description:Socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods have been associated with poor health outcomes. Little is known about the biological mechanism by which deprived neighborhood conditions exert negative influences on health. Data from the 1999-2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) were used to assess the relationship between neighborhood deprivation index (NDI) and log-transformed leukocyte telomere length (LTL) via multilevel modeling to control for census tract level clustering. Models were constructed using tertiles of NDI (ref = low NDI). NDI was calculated using census tract level socioeconomic indicators from the 2000 U.S. Census. The sample (n = 5,106 adults) was 49.8% female and consisted of 82.9% non-Hispanic whites, 9.4% non-Hispanic blacks, and 7.6% Mexican Americans. Mean age was 45.8 years. Residents of neighborhoods with high NDI were younger, non-white, had lower educational attainment, and had a lower poverty to income ratio (all <i>p</i> < 0.0001). Neighborhood deprivation was inversely associated with LTL among individuals living in neighborhoods with medium NDI (? = -0.043, SE = 0.012, <i>p</i> = 0.0005) and high NDI (? = -0.039, SE = 0.013, <i>p</i> = 0.003). Among men, both medium (? = -0.042, SE = 0.015, <i>p</i> = 0.006) and high (? = -0.047, SE = 0.015, <i>p</i> = 0.001) NDI were associated with shorter LTL. Among women, only medium NDI (? = -0.020, SE = 0.016, <i>p</i> = 0.009) was associated with shorter LTL. After controlling for individual characteristics, including individual-level socioeconomic status, increasing neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation is associated with shorter LTL among a nationally representative sample of US adults. This suggests that telomere shortening may be a mechanism through which neighborhood deprivation results in poor health outcomes.
Project description:Socioeconomic inequalities are major health determinants. To monitor and understand them at local level, ecological indexes of socioeconomic deprivation constitute essential tools. In this study, we describe the development of the updated version of the European Deprivation Index for Portuguese small-areas (EDI-PT), describe its spatial distribution and evaluate its association with a general health indicator-all-cause mortality in the period 2009-2012. Using data from the 2011 European Union-Statistics on Income and Living Conditions Survey (EU-SILC), we obtained an indicator of individual deprivation. After identifying variables that were common to both the EU-SILC and the census, we used the indicator of individual deprivation to test if these variables were associated with individual-level deprivation, and to compute weights. Accordingly, eight variables were included. The EDI-PT was produced for the smallest area unit possible (n = 18084 census block groups, mean/area = 584 inhabitants) and resulted from the weighted sum of the eight selected variables. It was then categorized into quintiles (Q1-least deprived to Q5-most deprived). To estimate the association with mortality we fitted Bayesian spatial models. The EDI-PT was unevenly distributed across Portugal-most deprived areas concentrated in the South and in the inner North and Centre of the country, and the least deprived in the coastal North and Centre. The EDI-PT was positively and significantly associated with overall mortality, and this relation followed a rather clear dose-response relation of increasing mortality as deprivation increases (Relative Risk Q2 = 1.012, 95% Credible Interval 0.991-1.033; Q3 = 1.026, 1.004-1.048; Q4 = 1.053, 1.029-1.077; Q5 = 1.068, 1.042-1.095). Summing up, we updated the index of socioeconomic deprivation for Portuguese small-areas, and we showed that the EDI-PT constitutes a sensitive measure to capture health inequalities, since it was consistently associated with a key measure of population health/development, all-cause mortality. We strongly believe this updated version will be widely employed by social and medical researchers and regional planners.