Health inequality between immigrants and natives in Spain: the loss of the healthy immigrant effect in times of economic crisis

Background: The immigrant population living in Spain grew exponentially in the early 2000s but has been particularly affected by the economic crisis. This study aims to analyse health inequalities between immigrants born in middle- or low-income countries and natives in Spain, in 2006 and 2012, taking into account gender, year of arrival and socioeconomic exposures. Methods: Study of trends using two cross-sections, the 2006 and 2012 editions of the Spanish National Health Survey, including residents in Spain aged 15–64 years (20 810 natives and 2950 immigrants in 2006, 14 291 natives and 2448 immigrants in 2012). Fair/poor self-rated health, poor mental health (GHQ-12 > 2), chronic activity limitation and use of psychotropic drugs were compared between natives and immigrants who arrived in Spain before 2006, adjusting robust Poisson regression models for age and socioeconomic variables to obtain prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Inequalities in poor self-rated health between immigrants and natives tend to increase among women (age-adjusted PR2006 = 1.39; 95% CI: 1.24–1.56, PR2012 = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.33–1.82). Among men, there is a new onset of inequalities in poor mental health (PR2006 = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.86–1.40, PR2012 = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.06–1.69) and an equalization of the previously lower use of psychotropic drugs (PR2006 = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.11–0.43, PR2012 = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.73–2.01). Conclusions: Between 2006 and 2012, immigrants who arrived in Spain before 2006 appeared to worsen their health status when compared with natives. The loss of the healthy immigrant effect in the context of a worse impact of the economic crisis on immigrants appears as potential explanation. Employment, social protection and re-universalization of healthcare would prevent further deterioration of immigrants’ health status.

Quality of pharmaceutical advertising and gender bias in medical journals (1998-2008): a review of the scientific literature

Objective: To review the scientific literature on pharmaceutical advertising aimed at health professionals in order to determine whether gender bias has decreased and the quality of information in pharmaceutical advertising has improved over time. Methods: We performed a content analysis of original articles dealing with medical drug promotion (1998-2008), according to quality criteria such as (a) the number, validity and accessibility of bibliographic references provided in pharmaceutical advertising and (b) the extent to which gender representations were consistent with the prevalence of the diseases. Databases: PUBMED, Medline, Scopus, Sociological Abstract, Eric and LILACS. Results: We reviewed 31 articles that analyzed advertising in medical journals from 1975-2005 and were published between 1998 and 2008. We found that the number of references used to support pharmaceutical advertising claims increased from 1975 but that 50% of these references were not valid. There was a tendency to depict men in paid productive roles, while women appeared inside the home or in non-occupational social contexts. Advertisements for psychotropic and cardiovascular drugs overrepresented women and men respectively. Conclusions: The use of bibliographic references increased between 1998 and 2008. However, representation of traditional male-female roles was similar in 1975 and 2005. Pharmaceutical advertisements may contribute to reinforcing the perception that certain diseases are associated with the most frequently portrayed sex.