4.6 Article

Social inequalities in the association between temperature and mortality in a South European context

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 64, Issue 1, Pages 27-37

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.1007/s00038-018-1094-6

Keywords

Socioeconomic inequalities; Mortality; Temperature; Cold; Heat; Climate change

Funding

  1. CIBER Epidemiologia y Salud Publica (CIBERESP)
  2. Medical Research Council UK [MR/M022625/1]
  3. MRC [MR/M022625/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectivesTo analyse social inequalities in the association between ambient temperature and mortality by sex, age and educational level, in the city of Barcelona for the period 1992-2015.MethodsMortality data are represented by daily counts for natural mortality. As a measure of socioeconomic position, we used the educational level of the deceased. We also considered age group and sex. We considered, as a measure of exposure, the daily maximum temperatures. Time-series Poisson regression with distributed lag non-linear models was fitted for modelling the relationship between temperature and mortality.ResultsWomen had higher risk of mortality by hot temperatures than men. Temperature-mortality association (heat and cold) was evident for the elderly, except for heat-related mortality in women which was present in all age groups. Men with primary education or more were more vulnerable to moderate or extreme temperatures than those without studies. Finally, women were vulnerable to heat-related mortality in all educational levels while women without studies were more vulnerable to cold temperatures.ConclusionsSocial and economic individual characteristics play an important role in vulnerability to high and low temperatures. It is important that decision-making groups consider identified vulnerable subgroups when redacting and implementing climate change resilience and adaptation plans.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available