Jurisdictional, socioeconomic and gender inequalities in child health and development: analysis of a national census of 5-year-olds in Australia

Abstract

ObjectivesEarly child development may have important consequences for inequalities in health and well-being. This paper explores population level patterns of child development across Australian jurisdictions, considering socioeconomic and demographic characteristics.DesignCensus of child development across Australia.Setting and participantsTeachers complete a developmental checklist, the Australian Early Development Index (AEDI), for all children in their first year of full-time schooling. Between May and July 2009, the AEDI was collected by 14 628 teachers in primary schools (government and non-government) across Australia, providing information on 261 147 children (approximately 97.5% of the estimated 5-year-old population).Outcome measuresLevel of developmental vulnerability in Australian children for five developmental domains: physical well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive skills and communication skills and general knowledge.ResultsThe results show demographic and socioeconomic inequalities in child development as well as within and between jurisdiction inequalities. The magnitude of the overall level of inequality in child development and the impact of covariates varies considerably both between and within jurisdiction by sex. For example, the difference in overall developmental vulnerability between the best-performing and worst-performing jurisdiction is 12.5% for males and 7.1% for females. Levels of absolute social inequality within jurisdictions range from 8.2% for females to 12.7% for males.ConclusionsThe different mix of universal and targeted services provided within jurisdictions from pregnancy to age 5 may contribute to inequality across the country. These results illustrate the potential utility of a developmental census to shed light on the impact of differences in universal and targeted services to support child development by school entry.

Modeling health status using the logarithmic biophysical modulator

“…So a simple apt modulator is essential to determine the prevailing health status in the communities aiming to resist malnutrition influencing factors and so the Equation 9 can be the easier option to choose in assessing the overall health status. The German chemist Friedrich Wohler, the pioneer of organic chemistry disapproves the vitalism inventing Wohler synthesis in 1828 (Brinkman et al, 2012;Wohler, 1828). The current study findings similarly can overlap the place of the BMI (Wohler, 1828) in health science.…”

The influence of the neighborhood physical environment on early child health and development: A review and call for research

“…A large US study of 22,797 children 1-5 years found that limited perceived access to amenities (recreation/community center, library, sidewalks, park/playground) was associated with less time spent in peer play and fewer family outings (Kenney, 2012). Furthermore, in Australia, differences in developmental vulnerability (children who score o10th percentile of the national AEDC population) across states and territories existed even after adjusting for sociodemographic factors and some of these differences were explained by the different mix of services that support children and families from birth to school age (Brinkman et al, 2012).…”

“…Four studies reported a significant association between domains of early child development and the presence of child relevant neighborhood destinations (e.g., recreation center, library, school) and services (e.g., child care centers) (Kenney, 2012;Fan and Chen, 2012;Brinkman et al, 2012;Rosenberg et al, 2011). A large US study of 22,797 children 1-5 years found that limited perceived access to amenities (recreation/community center, library, sidewalks, park/playground) was associated with less time spent in peer play and fewer family outings (Kenney, 2012).…”

Improving developmental care in primary practice for disadvantaged children

“…Recording of developmental problems was also twofold higher in remote than non-remote primary care centres. This disparity is due to the high levels of risk and disadvantage experienced by many remote area indigenous children 37. Encouragingly, a high proportion of children with developmental problems received follow-up in all our primary care centres.…”