Objectives: This study investigated the association between employment status and depression.Methods: Data from the Korea Welfare Panel Study (KOWEPS) collected from 2008 to 2011 were used. A total of 7368 subjects were included in this study after exclusion of subjects with missing data and those who were self-employed or could not work. Depression was assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Employment status, age, sex, region, education, marital status, income, head of household, self-rated health, smoking status, drinking habits, and the current year's and the previous year's CES-D scores were included in the model as independent variables. A generalised linear mixedeffects model for longitudinal binary data was used.Results: Compared with those who were permanently employed, individuals who moved from permanent to precarious employment (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.70) or to unemployment (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.43) and from precarious employment to unemployment (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.06) showed a significantly increased the odds of having depression. Continuing precarious employment (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.83) or unemployment (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.70) also significantly increased the odds of having depression. These results were particularly identified in men and head of household women. The effects were not significant among nonhead of household women.

Background: Neighborhood environmental factors along with individual factors are beginning to make a mark as factors which influence individual health outcomes. The goal of this study is to look at the combined impact of individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status on all-cause mortality in diabetic patients who have just been diagnosed. Methods: The Korean National Health Insurance (2002–2013) was employed in this cohort research, which used a stratified random sample. During the years 2003–2006, a total of 15,882 individuals who were newly diagnosed with diabetes and using oral disease-controlling medication were included in the study. Individual income and neighborhood deprivation index were used to examine the combined effect on all-cause mortality. The frailty model was performed using Cox’s proportional hazard regression. Results: During the study period, 28.3 percent (n = 4493) of the 15,882 eligible individuals died. In a Cox regression analysis after adjusting for all covariates, with advantaged and disadvantaged neighborhoods classified according to individual household income, the adjusted HR for patients living in a disadvantaged area was higher compared to patients living in an advantaged area in patients with middle income, compared to the reference group (a high income within an advantaged neighborhood) (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09–1.35; HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02–1.25, respectively). The adjusted HR for patients with low income who lived in a disadvantaged location was greater than for patients who lived in an advantaged area (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.18–1.53 vs. HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14–1.49). Conclusions: Individual SES has a greater impact on all-cause mortality among diabetic patients when they live in a low-income neighborhood.