4.5 Article

Multiple risk behaviour: increasing socio-economic gap over time?

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 20, 期 6, 页码 634-639

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckp185

关键词

educational attainment; multiple risk behaviour; polarization; Relative Index of Inequality; socio-economic differences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Unhealthy behaviours often occur in combination. In this study the relationship between education and lifestyle, defined as a cluster of risk behaviours, has been analysed with the purpose to assess socio-economic changes in multiple risk behaviour over time. Methods: Cross-sectional data from the Belgian Health Interview Surveys 1997, 2001 and 2004 were analysed. This study is restricted to persons aged >= 15 years with information on those health behaviours and education (n = 7431, n = 8142 and n = 7459, respectively). A lifestyle index was created based on the sum of the four unhealthy behaviours: smokers vs. non-smokers, risky versus non-risky alcohol use, sedentaryness vs. physically active and poor vs. healthy diet. The lifestyle index was dichotomized as low (0-2) vs. high (3-4). For the assessment of socio-economic inequalities in multiple risk behaviour, summary measures as Odds Ratio (OR) and Relative Index of Inequality (RII) were calculated using logistic regression, stratified by sex. Results: Of the adult population, 7.5% combined three to four unhealthy behaviours. Lower educated men are the most at risk. Besides, the OR among men significantly increased from 1.6 in 2001 to 3.4 in 2004 (P = 0.029). The increase of the OR among women was less pronounced. The RII, on the other hand, did not show any gradient, neither for men nor for women. Conclusion: Multiple risk behaviour is more common among lower educated people. An increasing polarization in socio-economic inequalities is assessed from 2001 to 2004 among men. Therefore, health promotion programmes should focus on the lower socio-economic classes and target risk behaviours simultaneously.

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

4.5
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