What causes health inequality? A systematic review on the relative importance of social causation and health selection

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Socioeconomic inequalities in a 16-year longitudinal measurement of successful ageing

Kok

Aartsen²,

Deeg

et al. 2016

“…Similar to other systematic reviews, for example, Kröger et al 36 who consider only studies analysing health selection versus social causation or Niedzwiedz et al 35 who took only studies into account that consider specific life course models and their relation to health, our review follows a conceptual approach by choosing only mediation models. We included all studies that focus on explaining socioeconomic inequalities in SRH, covering at least two of the three main pathways (material, behavioural or psychosocial factors) and analysing the relative contribution of these approaches in separate and joint models.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in self-rated health: a systematic review of the relative contribution of material, psychosocial and behavioural factors

Moor

Spallek

Richter

2016

214

180

The evidence presented might be used for policymakers to identify and to justify prioritisation in terms of prevention and health promotion. The findings show that multiple factors are important for tackling social inequalities in health. Strategies for reducing these inequalities should focus on material/structural living conditions as they shape conditions of psychosocial resources and health behaviour.

“…8 However, the relationship between SEP and health of adults is influenced by processes operating during early life which can impact on their health (and related behaviours) and SEP 4146 50–55 Moreover, childhood SEP may be more important for adult health in certain settings than others, for example, a study found father's education to be more important than own education in explaining differences in self-rated health in Eastern when compared with Western Europe 10…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergenerational social mobility and leisure-time physical activity in adulthood: a systematic review

Elhakeem

Hardy

Bann³

et al. 2016

AimTo systematically review the association between intergenerational social mobility and leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) in adulthood, in order to assess all published evidence relating to the hypothesis that adults socially mobile between childhood and adulthood will have different levels of LTPA than those in the same socioeconomic group across life.MethodsA systematic review was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO) and reference lists. Eligible studies examined associations between any indicator of social mobility, based on at least one measure of parental socioeconomic position (SEP) and one measure of own adult SEP, and LTPA in adulthood.Results13 studies comprising a total of 44 000 participants from the UK, Finland, Sweden, Australia, USA and Brazil were included. Participants were aged 16–70 years and were from population-based surveys, occupational cohorts and primary care registries. Most studies (n=9) used occupational class measures to identify social mobility; education (n=4) and income (n=1) were also used. There was consistent evidence in nine of the 13 studies that stable high socioeconomic groups tended to report the highest levels of participation in LTPA and stable low socioeconomic groups the lowest. Upward and downwardly mobile groups participated in LTPA at levels between these stable groups.ConclusionsCumulative exposure to higher SEP in childhood and adulthood was associated with higher LTPA in adulthood. Thus, a potential outcome of policies and interventions which aim to minimise exposure to socioeconomic adversity may be increased LTPA among adults.Trial registration numberCRD42016036538.