Comparing the availability, price, variety and quality of fruits and vegetables across retail outlets and by area level socioeconomic position

Abstract Objective: To explore whether area-level socioeconomic position or the form of retail stream (conventional versus farmers’ market) are associated with differences in the price, availability, variety and quality of a range of fresh fruit and vegetables. Design: A multi-site cross-sectional pilot study of farmers’ markets, supermarkets and independent fruit and vegetable retailers. Each was surveyed to assess the price, availability, variety and quality of 15 fruit and 18 vegetable items. Setting: Retail outlets were located in South-East Queensland. Subjects: Fifteen retail outlets were surveyed (five of each retail stream). Results: Average basket prices were not significantly different across the socioeconomic spectrum however prices in low socioeconomic areas were cheapest. Availability, variety, and quality did not differ across levels of socioeconomic position however the areas with the most socioeconomic disadvantage scored poorest for quality and variety. Supermarkets had significantly better fruit and vegetable availability than farmers’ markets however price, variety and quality scores were not different across retail streams. Results demonstrate a trend to fruit and vegetable prices being more expensive at farmers’ markets, with the price of the Fruit basket being significantly greater at the organic farmer’s market compared with the non-organic farmers’ markets. Conclusions: Neither area-level socioeconomic position nor the form of retail stream was significantly associated with differences in the availability, price, variety and quality of fruit and vegetables, except for availability which was higher in supermarkets than farmers’ markets. Further research is needed to determine what role farmers’ markets can play in affecting fruit and vegetable intake.

Neighbourhood disadvantage, individual-level socioeconomic position, and self-reported chronic arthritis : a cross-sectional multilevel study

Objective: To examine the association between individual- and neighborhood-level disadvantage and self-reported arthritis. Methods: We used data from a population-based cross-sectional study conducted in 2007 among 10,757 men and women ages 40–65 years, selected from 200 neighborhoods in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia using a stratified 2-stage cluster design. Data were collected using a mail survey (68.5% response). Neighborhood disadvantage was measured using a census-based composite index, and individual disadvantage was measured using self-reported education, household income, and occupation. Arthritis was indicated by self-report. Data were analyzed using multilevel modeling. Results: The overall rate of self-reported arthritis was 23% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 22–24). After adjustment for sociodemographic factors, arthritis prevalence was greatest for women (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% CI 1.4–1.7) and in those ages 60–65 years (OR 4.4, 95% CI 3.7–5.2), those with a diploma/associate diploma (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1–1.6), those who were permanently unable to work (OR 4.0, 95% CI 3.1–5.3), and those with a household income <$25,999 (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7–2.6). Independent of individual-level factors, residents of the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were 42% (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2–1.7) more likely than those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods to self-report arthritis. Cross-level interactions between neighborhood disadvantage and education, occupation, and household income were not significant. Conclusion: Arthritis prevalence is greater in more socially disadvantaged neighborhoods. These are the first multilevel data to examine the relationship between individual- and neighborhood-level disadvantage upon arthritis and have important implications for policy, health promotion, and other intervention strategies designed to reduce the rates of arthritis, indicating that intervention efforts may need to focus on both people and places.

Multilevel determinants of breast cancer survival : association with geographic remoteness and area-level socioeconomic disadvantage

A major priority for cancer control agencies is to reduce geographical inequalities in cancer outcomes. While the poorer breast cancer survival among socioeconomically disadvantaged women is well established, few studies have looked at the independent contribution that area- and individual-level factors make to breast cancer survival. Here we examine relationships between geographic remoteness, area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and breast cancer survival after adjustment for patients’ socio- demographic characteristics and stage at diagnosis. Multilevel logistic regression and Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation were used to analyze 18 568 breast cancer cases extracted from the Queensland Cancer Registry for women aged 30 to 70 years diagnosed between 1997 and 2006 from 478 Statistical Local Areas in Queensland, Australia. Independent of individual-level factors, area-level disadvantage was associated with breast-cancer survival (p=0.032). Compared to women in the least disadvantaged quintile (Quintile 5), women diagnosed while resident in one of the remaining four quintiles had significantly worse survival (OR 1.23, 1.27, 1.30, 1.37 for Quintiles 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively).) Geographic remoteness was not related to lower survival after multivariable adjustment. There was no evidence that the impact of area-level disadvantage varied by geographic remoteness. At the individual level, Indigenous status, blue collar occupations and advanced disease were important predictors of poorer survival. A woman’s survival after a diagnosis of breast cancer depends on the socio-economic characteristics of the area where she lives, independently of her individual-level characteristics. It is crucial that the underlying reasons for these inequalities be identified to appropriately target policies, resources and effective intervention strategies.

Geographic remoteness, area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and inequalities in colorectal cancer survival in Queensland : a multilevel analysis

Background To explore the impact of geographical remoteness and area-level socioeconomic disadvantage on colorectal cancer (CRC) survival. Methods Multilevel logistic regression and Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations were used to analyze geographical variations in five-year all-cause and CRC-specific survival across 478 regions in Queensland Australia for 22,727 CRC cases aged 20–84 years diagnosed from 1997–2007. Results Area-level disadvantage and geographic remoteness were independently associated with CRC survival. After full multivariate adjustment (both levels), patients from remote (odds Ratio [OR]: 1.24, 95%CrI: 1.07-1.42) and more disadvantaged quintiles (OR = 1.12, 1.15, 1.20, 1.23 for Quintiles 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively) had lower CRC-specific survival than major cities and least disadvantaged areas. Similar associations were found for all-cause survival. Area disadvantage accounted for a substantial amount of the all-cause variation between areas. Conclusions We have demonstrated that the area-level inequalities in survival of colorectal cancer patients cannot be explained by the measured individual-level characteristics of the patients or their cancer and remain after adjusting for cancer stage. Further research is urgently needed to clarify the factors that underlie the survival differences, including the importance of geographical differences in clinical management of CRC.

Bisphenol A exposure is not associated with area-level socioeconomic index in Australian children using pooled urine samples

Bisphenol A (BPA) is used extensively in food-contact materials and has been detected routinely in populations worldwide, and this exposure has been linked to a range of negative health outcomes in humans. There is some evidence of an association between BPA and different socioeconomic variables which may be the result of different dietary patterns. The aim of this study was to conduct a preliminary investigation of the association between BPA and socioeconomic status in Australian children using pooled urine specimens and an area level socioeconomic index. Surplus pathology urine specimens collected from children aged 0-15 years in Queensland, Australia as samples of convenience (n = 469) were pooled by age, sex and area level socioeconomic index (n = 67 pools), and analysed for total BPA using online solid phase extraction LC-MS/MS. Concentration ranged from 1.08-27.4 ng/ml with geometric mean 2.57 ng/ml, and geometric mean exposure was estimated as 70.3 ng/kg d-1. Neither BPA concentration nor excretion was associated with age or sex, and the authors found no evidence of an association with socioeconomic status. These results suggest that BPA exposure is not associated with socioeconomic status in the Australian population due to relatively homogenous exposures in Australia, or that the socioeconomic gradient is relatively slight in Australia compared with other OECD countries.

Change in walking for transport : a longitudinal study of the influence of neighbourhood disadvantage and individual-level socioeconomic position in mid-aged adults

Background Unlike leisure time physical activity, knowledge of the socioeconomic determinants of active transport is limited, research on this topic has produced mixed and inconsistent findings, and it remains unknown if peoples’ engagement in active transport declines as they age. This longitudinal study examined relationships between neighbourhood disadvantage, individual-level socioeconomic position and walking for transport (WfT) during mid- and early old-age (40 – 70 years). Three questions were addressed: (i) which socioeconomic groups walk for transport, (ii) does the amount of walking change over time as people age, and (iii) is the change socioeconomically patterned? Methods The data come from the HABITAT study of physical activity, a bi-annual multilevel longitudinal survey of 11,036 residents of 200 neighbourhoods in Brisbane, Australia. At each wave (2007, 2009 and 2011) respondents estimated the duration (minutes) of WfT in the previous 7 days. Neighbourhood disadvantage was measured using a census-derived index comprising 17 different socioeconomic components, and individual-level socioeconomic position was measured using education, occupation, and household income. The data were analysed using multilevel mixed-effects logistic and linear regression. Results The odds of being defined as a ‘never walker’ were significantly lower for residents of disadvantaged neighbourhoods, but significantly higher for the less educated, blue collar employees, and members of lower income households. WfT declined significantly over time as people aged and the declines were more precipitous for older persons. Average minutes of WfT declined for all neighbourhoods and most socioeconomic groups; however, the declines were steeper for the retired and members of low income households. Conclusions Designing age-friendly neighbourhoods might slow or delay age-related declines in WfT and should be a priority. Steeper declines in WfT among residents of low income households may reflect their poorer health status and the impact of adverse socioeconomic exposures over the life course. Each of these declines represents a significant challenge to public health advocates, urban designers, and planners in their attempts to keep people active and healthy in their later years of life.

Socioeconomic position, gender, health behaviours and biomarkers of cardiovascular disease and diabetes

Socio-economic gradients in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes have been found throughout the developed world and there is some evidence to suggest that these gradients may be steeper for women. Research on social gradients in biological risk factors for CVD and diabetes has received less attention and we do not know the extent to which gradients in biomarkers vary for men and women. We examined the associations between two indicators of socio-economic position (education and household income) and biomarkers of diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) for men and women in a national, population-based study of 11,247 Australian adults. Multi-level linear regression was used to assess associations between education and income and glucose tolerance, dyslipidaemia, blood pressure (BP) and waist circumference before and after adjustment for behaviours (diet, smoking, physical activity, TV viewing time, and alcohol use). Measures of glucose tolerance included fasting plasma glucose and insulin and the results of a glucose tolerance test (2 h glucose) with higher levels of each indicating poorer glucose tolerance. Triglycerides and High Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol were used as measures of dyslipidaemia with higher levels of the former and lower levels of the later being associated with CVD risk. Lower education and low income were associated with higher levels of fasting insulin, triglycerides and waist circumference in women. Women with low education had higher systolic and diastolic BP and low income women had higher 2 h glucose and lower HDL cholesterol. With only one exception (low income and systolic BP), all of these estimates were reduced by more than 20% when behavioural risk factors were included. Men with lower education had higher fasting plasma glucose, 2 h glucose, waist circumference and systolic BP and, with the exception of waist circumference, all of these estimates were reduced when health behaviours were included in the models. While low income was associated with higher levels of 2-h glucose and triglycerides it was also associated with better biomarker profiles including lower insulin, waist circumference and diastolic BP. We conclude that low socio-economic position is more consistently associated with a worse profile of biomarkers for CVD and diabetes for women.

Identification of area-level influences on regions of high cancer incidence in Queensland, Australia : a classification tree approach

Background: Strategies for cancer reduction and management are targeted at both individual and area levels. Area-level strategies require careful understanding of geographic differences in cancer incidence, in particular the association with factors such as socioeconomic status, ethnicity and accessibility. This study aimed to identify the complex interplay of area-level factors associated with high area-specific incidence of Australian priority cancers using a classification and regression tree (CART) approach. Methods: Area-specific smoothed standardised incidence ratios were estimated for priority-area cancers across 478 statistical local areas in Queensland, Australia (1998-2007, n=186,075). For those cancers with significant spatial variation, CART models were used to identify whether area-level accessibility, socioeconomic status and ethnicity were associated with high area-specific incidence. Results: The accessibility of a person’s residence had the most consistent association with the risk of cancer diagnosis across the specific cancers. Many cancers were likely to have high incidence in more urban areas, although male lung cancer and cervical cancer tended to have high incidence in more remote areas. The impact of socioeconomic status and ethnicity on these associations differed by type of cancer. Conclusions: These results highlight the complex interactions between accessibility, socioeconomic status and ethnicity in determining cancer incidence risk.

Socioeconomic inequalities in weight status among mid-aged adults : the contribution of perceptions of weight status and weight-control behaviours

Background Socioeconomically-disadvantaged adults in developed countries experience a higher prevalence of a number of chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, osteoarthritis and some forms of cancer. Overweight and obesity are major risk factors for these diseases. Lower socioeconomic groups have a greater prevalence of overweight and obesity and this may contribute to their higher morbidity and mortality. International studies suggest that socioeconomic groups may differ in their self-perceptions of weight status and their engagement in weightcontrol behaviours (WCBs). Research has shown that lower socioeconomic adults are more likely to underestimate their weight status, and are less likely to engage in WCBs. This may contribute (in part) to the marked inequalities in weight status observed at the population level. There are few, and somewhat limited, Australian studies that have examined the types of weight-control strategies people adopt, the barriers to their weight control, the determinants of their perceived weight status and WCBs. Furthermore, there are no known Australian studies that have examined socioeconomic differences in these factors to better understand the reasons for socioeconomic inequalities in weight status. Hence, the overall aim of this Thesis is to examine why socioeconomically-disadvantaged group experience a greater prevalence of overweight and obesity than their more-advantaged counterparts. Methods This Thesis used data from two sources. Men and women aged 45 to 60 years were examined from both data source. First, the longitudinal Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) Study were used to advance our knowledge and understanding of socioeconomic differences in weight change, perceived weight status and WCBs. A total of 2753 participants with measured weights at both baseline (1999-2000) and follow-up (2004-2005) were included in the analyses. Percent weight change over the five-year interval was calculated and perceived weight status, WCBs and highest attained education were collected at baseline. Second, the Candidate conducted a postal questionnaire from 1013 Brisbane residents (69.8 % response rate) to investigate the relationship between socioeconomic position, determinants of perceived weight status, WCBs, and barriers and reasons to weight control. A test-retest reliability study was conducted to determine the reliability of the new measures used in the questionnaire. Most new measures had substantial to almost perfect reliability when considering either kappa coefficient or crude agreement. Results The findings from the AusDiab Study (accepted for publication in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health) showed that low-educated men and women were more likely to be obese at baseline compared to their higheducated respondents (O.R. = 1.97, 95 % C.I. = 1.30-2.98 and O.R. = 1.52, 95 % C.I. = 1.03-2.25, respectively). Over the five year follow-up period (1999-2000 to 2004- 05) there were no socioeconomic differences in weight change among men, however socioeconomically-disadvantaged women had greater weight gains. Participants perceiving themselves as overweight gained less weight than those who saw themselves as underweight or normal weight. There was no relationship between engaging in WCBs and five-year weight change. The postal questionnaire data showed that socioeconomically-disadvantaged groups were less likely to engage in WCBs. If they did engage in weight control, they were less likely to adopt exercise strategies, including moderate and vigorous physical activities but were more likely to decrease their sitting time to control their weight. Socioeconomically-disadvantaged adults reported more barriers to weight control; such as perceiving weight loss as expensive, requiring a lot of cooking skills, not being a high priority and eating differently from other people in the household. These results have been accepted for publication in Public Health Nutrition. The third manuscript (under review in Social Science and Medicine) examined socioeconomic differences in determinants of perceived weight status and reasons for weight control. The results showed that lower socioeconomic adults were more likely to specify the following reasons for weight control: they considered themselves to be too heavy, for occupational requirements, on recommendation from their doctor, family members or friends. Conversely, high-income adults were more likely to report weight control to improve their physical condition or to look more attractive compared with those on lower-incomes. There were few socioeconomic differences in the determinants of perceived weight status. Conclusions Education inequalities in overweight/obesity among men and women may be due to mis-perceptions of weight status; overweight or obese individuals in loweducated groups may not perceive their weight as problematic and therefore may not pay attention to their energy-balance behaviours. Socioeconomic groups differ in WCBs, and their reasons and perceived barriers to weight control. Health promotion programs should encourage weight control among lower socioeconomic groups. More specifically, they should encourage the engagement of physical activity or exercise and dietary strategies among disadvantaged groups. Furthermore, such programs should address potential barriers for weight control that disadvantaged groups may encounter. For example, disadvantaged groups perceive that weight control is expensive, requires cooking skills, not a high priority and eating differently from other people in the household. Lastly, health promotion programs and policies aimed at reducing overweight and obesity should be tailored to the different reasons and motivations to weight control experienced by different socioeconomic groups. Weight-control interventions targeted at higher socioeconomic groups should use improving physical condition and attractiveness as motivational goals; while, utilising social support may be more effective for encouraging weight control among lower socioeconomic groups.

Socioeconomic differences in takeaway food consumption among adults

Background In Australia and other developed countries, there are consistent and marked socioeconomic inequalities in health. Diet is a major contributing factor to the poorer health of lower socioeconomic groups: the dietary patterns of disadvantaged groups are least consistent with dietary recommendations for the prevention of diet-related chronic diseases compared with their more advantaged counterparts. Part of the reason that lower socioeconomic groups have poorer diets may be their consumption of takeaway foods. These foods typically have nutrient contents that fail to comply with the dietary recommendations for the prevention of chronic disease and associated risk factors. A high level of takeaway food consumption, therefore, may negatively influence overall dietary intakes and, consequently, lead to adverse health outcomes. Despite this, little attention has focused on the association between socioeconomic position (SEP) and takeaway food consumption, with the limited number of studies showing mixed results. Additionally, studies have been limited by only considering a narrow range of takeaway foods and not examining how different socioeconomic groups make choices that are more (or less) consistent with dietary recommendations. While a large number of earlier studies have consistently reported socioeconomically disadvantaged groups consume a lesser amount of fruit and vegetables, there is limited knowledge about the role of takeaway food in socioeconomic variations in fruit and vegetable intake. Furthermore, no known studies have investigated why there are socioeconomic differences in takeaway food consumption. The aims of this study are to: examine takeaway food consumption and the types of takeaway food consumed (healthy and less healthy) by different socioeconomic groups, to determine whether takeaway food consumption patterns explain socioeconomic variations in fruit and vegetable intake, and investigate the role of a range of psychosocial factors in explaining the association between SEP and takeaway food consumption and the choice of takeaway food. Methods This study used two cross-sectional population-based datasets: 1) the 1995 Australian National Nutrition Survey (NNS) which was conducted among a nationally representative sample of adults aged between 25.64 years (N = 7319, 61% response rate); and 2) the Food and Lifestyle Survey (FLS) which was conducted by the candidate and was undertaken among randomly selected adults aged between 25.64 years residing in Brisbane, Australia in 2009 (N = 903, 64% response rate). The FLS extended the NNS in several ways by describing current socioeconomic differences in takeaway food consumption patterns, formally assessing the mediated effect of takeaway food consumption to socioeconomic inequalities in fruit and vegetable intake, and also investigating whether (and which) psychosocial factors contributed to the observed socioeconomic variations in takeaway food consumption patterns. Results Approximately 32% of the NNS participants consumed takeaway food in the previous 24 hours and 38% of the FLS participants reported consuming takeaway food once a week or more. The results from analyses of the NNS and the FLS were somewhat mixed; however, disadvantaged groups were likely to consume a high level of �\less healthy. takeaway food compared with their more advantaged counterparts. The lower fruit and vegetable intake among lower socioeconomic groups was partly mediated by their high consumption of �\less healthy. takeaway food. Lower socioeconomic groups were more likely to have negative meal preparation behaviours and attitudes, and weaker health and nutrition-related beliefs and knowledge. Socioeconomic differences in takeaway food consumption were partly explained by meal preparation behaviours and attitudes, and these factors along with health and nutrition-related beliefs and knowledge appeared to contribute to the socioeconomic variations in choice of takeaway foods. Conclusion This thesis enhances our understanding of socioeconomic differences in dietary behaviours and the potential pathways by describing takeaway food consumption patterns by SEP, explaining the role of takeaway food consumption in socioeconomic inequalities in fruit and vegetable intake, and identifying the potential impact of psychosocial factors on socioeconomic differences in takeaway food consumption and the choice of takeaway food. Some important evidence is also provided for developing policies and effective intervention programs to improve the diet quality of the population, especially among lower socioeconomic groups. This thesis concludes with a discussion of a number of recommendations about future research and strategies to improve the dietary intake of the whole population, and especially among disadvantaged groups.

Socioeconomic status and health outcomes in a developing country

Although the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and health is well documented for developed countries, less evidence has been presented for developing countries. The aim of this paper is to analyse this relationship at the household level for Fiji, a developing country in the South Pacific, using original household survey data. To allow for the endogeneity of SES status in the household health production function, we utilize a simultaneous equation approach where estimates are achieved by full information maximum likelihood. By restricting our sample to one, relatively small island, and including area and district hospital effects, physical geography effects are unpacked from income effects. We measure SES, as permanent income which is constructed using principal components analysis. An alternative specification considers transitory household income. We find that a 1% increase in wealth (our measure of permanent income) would lead to a 15% decrease in the probability of an incapacitating illness occurring intra-household. Although the presence of a strong relationship indicates that relatively small improvements in SES status can significantly improve health at the household level, it is argued that the design of appropriate policy would also require an understanding of the various mechanisms through which the relationship operates.

Referral patterns and proximity to palliative care inpatient services by level of socio-economic disadvantage : a national study using spatial analysis

Background: A range of health outcomes at a population level are related to differences in levels of social disadvantage. Understanding the impact of any such differences in palliative care is important. The aim of this study was to assess, by level of socio-economic disadvantage, referral patterns to specialist palliative care and proximity to inpatient services. Methods: All inpatient and community palliative care services nationally were geocoded (using postcode) to one nationally standardised measure of socio-economic deprivation – Socio-Economic Index for Areas (SEIFA; 2006 census data). Referral to palliative care services and characteristics of referrals were described through data collected routinely at clinical encounters. Inpatient location was measured from each person’s home postcode, and stratified by socio-economic disadvantage. Results: This study covered July – December 2009 with data from 10,064 patients. People from the highest SEIFA group (least disadvantaged) were significantly less likely to be referred to a specialist palliative care service, likely to be referred closer to death and to have more episodes of inpatient care for longer time. Physical proximity of a person’s home to inpatient care showed a gradient with increasing distance by decreasing levels of socio-economic advantage. Conclusion: These data suggest that a simple relationship of low socioeconomic status and poor access to a referral-based specialty such as palliative care does not exist. Different patterns of referral and hence different patterns of care emerge.

Socioeconomic inequalities in cardiovascular mortality and the role of childhood socioeconomic conditions and adulthood risk factors : a prospective cohort study with 17-years of follow up

Background The mechanisms underlying socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are largely unknown. We studied the contribution of childhood socioeconomic conditions and adulthood risk factors to inequalities in CVD mortality in adulthood. Methods The prospective GLOBE study was carried out in the Netherlands, with baseline data from 1991, and linked with the cause of death register in 2007. At baseline, participants reported on adulthood socioeconomic position (SEP) (own educational level), childhood socioeconomic conditions (occupational level of respondent’s father), and a broad range of adulthood risk factors (health behaviours, material circumstances, psychosocial factors). This present study is based on 5,395 men and 6,306 women, and the data were analysed using Cox regression models and hazard ratios (HR). Results A low adulthood SEP was associated with increased CVD mortality for men (HR 1.84; 95% CI: 1.41-2.39) and women (HR 1.80; 95%CI: 1.04-3.10). Those with poorer childhood socioeconomic conditions were more likely to die from CVD in adulthood, but this reached statistical significance only among men with the poorest childhood socioeconomic circumstances. About half of the investigated adulthood risk factors showed significant associations with CVD mortality among both men and women, namely renting a house, experiencing financial problems, smoking, physical activity and marital status. Alcohol consumption and BMI showed a U-shaped relationship with CVD mortality among women, with the risk being significantly greater for both abstainers and heavy drinkers, and among women who were underweight or obese. Among men, being single or divorced and using sleep/anxiety drugs increased the risk of CVD mortality. In explanatory models, the largest contributor to adulthood CVD inequalities were material conditions for men (42%; 95% CI: −73 to −20) and behavioural factors for women (55%; 95% CI: -191 to −28). Simultaneous adjustment for adulthood risk factors and childhood socioeconomic conditions attenuated the HR for the lowest adulthood SEP to 1.34 (95% CI: 0.99-1.82) for men and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.65-2.15) for women. Conclusions Adulthood material, behavioural and psychosocial factors played a major role in the explanation of adulthood SEP inequalities in CVD mortality. Childhood socioeconomic circumstances made a modest contribution, mainly via their association with adulthood risk factors. Policies and interventions to reduce health inequalities are likely to be most effective when considering the influence of socioeconomic circumstances across the entire life course and in particular, poor material conditions and unhealthy behaviours in adulthood.

The association between socioeconomic status and depression in Vietnamese adults : pilot study

This study examined the prevalence of depressive symptoms and elucidated the causal pathway between socioeconomic status and depression in a community in the central region of Vietnam. The study used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Indepth interviews were applied with two local psychiatric experts and ten residents for qualitative research. A cross sectional survey with structured interview technique was implemented with 100 residents in the pilot quantitative survey. The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) was applied to valuate depressive symptoms ( CES-D score over 21) and depression ( CESD core over 25). Ordinary Least Squares Regression following the three steps of Baron and Kenny’s framework was employed for testing mediation models. There was a strong social gradient with respect to depressive symptoms. People with higher education levels reported fewer depressive symptoms (lower CES-D scores). Incomes were also inversely associated with depressive symptoms, but only the ones at the bottom of the quartile income. Low level and unstable individuals in terms of occupation were associated with higher depressive symptoms compared with the highest occupation group. Employment status showed the strongest gradient with respect to its impact on the burden of depressive symptoms compared with other indicators of SES. Findings from this pilot study suggest a pattern on the negative association between socioeconomic status and depression in Vietnamese adults.