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

Abstract

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.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12939-017-0670-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Posição socioeconômica e autoavaliação da saúde bucal no Brasil: resultados da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde

“…Já as pessoas mais escolarizadas apresentam maior envolvimento no autocuidado e buscam mais frequentemente a resolução de problemas de saúde, além de usufruí-Cad. Saúde Pública 2019; 35(6):e00099518 rem de melhores condições sociais e econômicas, como emprego, renda, posse de bens e acesso a serviços 1,5,10,38,39,40 . O papel de destaque da renda como um indicador de posição socioeconômica fortemente associado aos maiores gradientes de desigualdade na autopercepção da saúde bucal da população brasileira traz implicações para as políticas de saúde, pois aponta a necessidade de reforçar o acesso a cuidados de saúde bucal nos grupos mais desfavorecidos em termos econômicos.…”

Influence of Socioeconomic Status and Stress Over Quality of Sleep: A Systematic Review

“…Environmental stress results from exposure to multiple environmental stressors (e.g. housing, income, social relationships) and varies according to SES, and needs to be distinguished from psychological stress in the development of MD such as anxiety and depression 15,[52][53][54] . In older people, the level of exposure to environmental stressors influences psychological stress.…”

Sex differences in cognitive reserve: implications for Alzheimer’s Disease in women

“…Low socioeconomic status (SES), often assessed as a combination of education, occupation, and income (Darin-Mattsson et al, 2017), is linked to poorer health leading to earlier mortality (Matthews and Gallo, 2010) and increased risk of AD (Karp et al, 2004). It is hypothesized that low SES increases stress because of greater financial strain, exposure to physical strain from living in areas with elevated chemical and noise pollution, and unavailability of a nutritious diet (Cohen et al, 2010;Evans and Kim, 2010).…”