4.6 Article

Contrasting socioeconomic profiles related to healthier lifestyles in China and the United States

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 159, 期 2, 页码 184-191

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwh006

关键词

China; education; health; income; life style; socioeconomic factors; United States

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R01-HD30880, R01-HD38700] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Health disparity by socioeconomic status has recently become an important public health concern. Socioeconomic status may affect health status through several pathways including lifestyle choices. The authors tested the link between socioeconomic status and lifestyle in China (in 1993) and in the United States (in 1994-1996), countries with high contrasts in development, to understand health discrepancy issues cross-nationally. Healthfulness of lifestyle was measured using the Lifestyle Index, a summary score that integrates four key lifestyle factors: diet, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Income and education were used as indicators of socioeconomic status. In China, as socioeconomic status improved, lifestyle was less healthy (relative odds for the highest socioeconomic status group = 0.19, 95% confidence interval: 0.10, 0.35). Conversely, in the United States, higher socioeconomic status was related to a healthier lifestyle (relative odds for the highest socioeconomic status group = 3.81, 95% confidence interval: 2.94, 4.94). The contrasting relation between socioeconomic status and lifestyle depicts different phases of the lifestyle transition (changes in lifestyles accompanying economic development). The differences may in part explain why nutrition-related noncommunicable diseases are more prevalent in the developing world among people with a high socioeconomic status, whereas often the opposite is found in developed societies. Public health programs may benefit by advising each socioeconomic status group separately, while considering the country's level of development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据