5 resultados para socioeconomic level
Resumo:
Abstract. With this paper we discuss the differences between sustainability-related media agendas across different countries and regions. Utilising a sample of 115 leading national newspapers covering forty-one countries, we show that typically no homogeneous global trends exist with regard to sustainability-related media agendas. Instead, significant differences exist regarding the national-level prioritisations of sustainability-related issues in the countries under review. To some extent, these observed differences can be attributed to different levels of socioeconomic development as measured by Human Development Index scores and gross domestic product per capita. Here, generic differences can be identified between newspapers from the Global North and South, with a range of issues such as climate change emerging as typically Northern issues, whereas issues such as corruption and poverty show significantly higher levels of coverage across newspapers from the Global South. We conclude with a discussion of the results in the context of global environmental governance.
Resumo:
Event-related potentials (ERPs) and other electroencephalographic (EEG) evidence show that frontal brain areas of higher and lower socioeconomic status (SES) children are recruited differently during selective attention tasks. We assessed whether multiple variables related to self-regulation (perceived mental effort) emotional states (e.g., anxiety, stress, etc.) and motivational states (e.g., boredom, engagement, etc.) may co-occur or interact with frontal attentional processing probed in two matched-samples of fourteen lower-SES and higher-SES adolescents. ERP and EEG activation were measured during a task probing selective attention to sequences of tones. Pre- and post-task salivary cortisol and self-reported emotional states were also measured. At similar behavioural performance level, the higher-SES group showed a greater ERP differentiation between attended (relevant) and unattended (irrelevant) tones than the lower-SES group. EEG power analysis revealed a cross-over interaction, specifically, lower-SES adolescents showed significantly higher theta power when ignoring rather than attending to tones, whereas, higher-SES adolescents showed the opposite pattern. Significant theta asymmetry differences were also found at midfrontal electrodes indicating left hypo-activity in lower-SES adolescents. The attended vs. unattended difference in right midfrontal theta increased with individual SES rank, and (independently from SES) with lower cortisol task reactivity and higher boredom. Results suggest lower-SES children used additional compensatory resources to monitor/control response inhibition to distracters, perceiving also more mental effort, as compared to higher-SES counterparts. Nevertheless, stress, boredom and other task-related perceived states were unrelated to SES. Ruling out presumed confounds, this study confirms the midfrontal mechanisms responsible for the SES effects on selective attention reported previously and here reflect genuine cognitive differences.
Resumo:
Objective: To investigate the effect of socioeconomic deprivation on cornea graft survival in the United Kingdom.
Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Participants: All the recipients (n = 13?644) undergoing their first penetrating keratoplasty (PK) registered on the United Kingdom Transplant Registry between April 1999 and March 2011 were included.
Methods: Data of patients' demographic details, indications, graft size, corneal vascularization, surgical complication, rejection episodes, and postoperative medication were collected at the time of surgery and 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively. Patients with endophthalmitis were excluded from the study. Patients' home postcodes were used to determine the socioeconomic status using a well-validated deprivation index in the United Kingdom: A Classification of Residential Neighborhoods (ACORN). Kaplan–Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to evaluate the influence of ACORN categories on 5-year graft survival, and the Bonferroni method was used to adjust for multiple comparisons.
Main Outcome Measures: Patients' socioeconomic deprivation status and corneal graft failure.
Results: A total of 13?644 patients received their first PK during the study periods. A total of 1685 patients (13.36%) were lost to follow-up, leaving 11?821 patients (86.64%) for analysis. A total of 138 of the 11?821 patients (1.17%) developed endophthalmitis. The risk of graft failure within 5 years for the patients classified as hard-pressed was 1.3 times that of the least deprived (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1–1.5; P = 0.003) after adjusting for confounding factors and indications. There were no statistically significant differences between the causes of graft failure and the level of deprivation (P = 0.14).
Conclusions: Patients classified as hard-pressed had an increased risk of graft failure within 5 years compared with the least deprived patients.
Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article
Resumo:
Socioeconomic status (SES) differences in attitudes towards cancer have been implicated in the differential screening uptake and the timeliness of symptomatic presentation. However, the predominant emphasis of this work has been on cancer fatalism, and many studies focus on specific community subgroups. This study aimed to assess SES differences in positive and negative attitudes towards cancer in UK adults. A population-based sample of UK adults (n=6965, age≥50 years) completed the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer scale, including six belief items: three positively framed (e.g. 'Cancer can often be cured') and three negatively framed (e.g. 'A cancer diagnosis is a death sentence'). SES was indexed by education. Analyses controlled for sex, ethnicity, marital status, age, self-rated health, and cancer experience. There were few education-level differences for the positive statements, and overall agreement was high (all>90%). In contrast, there were strong differences for negative statements (all Ps<0.001). Among respondents with lower education levels, 57% agreed that 'treatment is worse than cancer', 27% that cancer is 'a death sentence' and 16% 'would not want to know if I have cancer'. Among those with university education, the respective proportions were 34, 17 and 6%. Differences were not explained by cancer experience or health status. In conclusion, positive statements about cancer outcomes attract near-universal agreement. However, this optimistic perspective coexists alongside widespread fears about survival and treatment, especially among less-educated groups. Health education campaigns targeting socioeconomically disadvantaged groups might benefit from a focus on reducing negative attitudes, which is not necessarily achieved by promoting positive attitudes.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: This study investigated the effect of socioeconomic deprivation on preoperative disease and outcome following unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR).
METHODS: 307 Oxford UKRs implanted between 2008 and 2013 under the care of one surgeon using the same surgical technique were analysed. Deprivation was quantified using the Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure. Preoperative disease severity and postoperative outcome were measured using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS).
RESULTS: There was no difference in preoperative OKS between deprivation groups. Preoperative knee range of motion (ROM) was significantly reduced in more deprived patients with 10° less ROM than least deprived patients. Postoperatively there was no difference in OKS improvement between deprivation groups (p=0.46), with improvements of 19.5 and 21.0 units in the most and least deprived groups respectively. There was no significant association between deprivation and OKS improvement on unadjusted or adjusted analysis. Preoperative OKS, Short Form 12 mental component score and length of stay were significant independent predictors of OKS improvement. A significantly lower proportion of the most deprived group (15%) reported being able to walk an unlimited distance compared to the least deprived group (41%) one year postoperatively.
CONCLUSION: More deprived patients can achieve similar improvements in OKS to less deprived patients following UKR.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b - retrospective cohort study of prognosis.