Suchergebnisse

IMPORTANCE: Socioeconomic factors in the disparities in COVID-19 outcomes have been reported in studies from the US and other Western countries. However, no studies have documented national- or subnational-level outcome disparities in Asian countries. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between regional COVID-19 outcome disparities and socioeconomic characteristics in Japan. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study collected and analyzed confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths (through February 13, 2021) as well as population and socioeconomic data in all 47 prefectures in Japan. The data sources were government surveys for which prefecture-level data were available. EXPOSURES: Prefectural socioeconomic characteristics included mean annual household income, Gini coefficient, proportion of the population receiving public assistance, educational attainment, unemployment rate, employment in industries with frequent close contacts with the public, household crowding, smoking rate, and obesity rate. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rate ratios (RRs) of COVID-19 incidence and mortality by prefecture-level socioeconomic characteristics. RESULTS: All 47 prefectures in Japan (with a total population of 126.2 million) were included in this analysis. A total of 412 126 confirmed COVID-19 cases (326.7 per 100 000 people) and 6910 deaths (5.5 per 100 000 people) were reported as of February 13, 2021. Elevated adjusted incidence and mortality RRs of COVID-19 were observed in prefectures with the lowest household income (incidence RR: 1.45 [95% CI, 1.43-1.48] and mortality RR: 1.81 [95% CI, 1.59-2.07]); highest proportion of the population receiving public assistance (1.55 [95% CI, 1.52-1.58] and 1.51 [95% CI, 1.35-1.69]); highest unemployment rate (1.56 [95% CI, 1.53-1.59] and 1.85 [95% CI, 1.65-2.09]); highest percentage of workers in retail industry (1.36 [95% CI, 1.34-1.38] and 1.45 [95% CI, 1.31-1.61]), transportation and postal industries (1.61 [95% CI, 1.57-1.64] and 2.55 [95% CI, 2.21-2.94]), and ...

Income is robustly associated with health status. Higher income is associated with lower mortality and morbidity, both cross‐nationally and within societies. This relationship is not just confined to low levels of income, but extends well beyond median levels of income in society with diminishing marginal returns to health status with additional increments in income. Drawing upon the absolute and relative interpretations of income and conceptualising them simul‐taneously at the individual and community level, we develop a typology of income–health relationships and discuss the distinctiveness of, and connections between, each type. We conclude that a multilevel conceptual and methodological framework is most appropriate to understand the income–health relationship.

Communities may be rich or poor in a variety of stocks of social capital. Studies that have investigated relations among these forms and their simultaneous and combined health effects are sparse. Using data on a sample of 24,835 adults (more than half of whom resided in core urban areas) nested within 40 U.S. communities from the Social Capital Benchmark Survey, correlational and factor analyses were applied to determine appropriate groupings among eight key social capital indicators (social trust, informal social interactions, formal group involvement, religious group involvement, giving and volunteering, diversity of friendship networks, electoral political participation, and non-electoral political participation) at each of the community and individual levels. Multilevel logistic regression models were estimated to analyze the associations between the grouped social capital forms and individual self-rated health. Adjusting the three identified community-level social capital groupings/scales for one another and community- and individual-level sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics, each of the odds ratios of fair/poor health associated with living in a community one standard deviation higher in the respective social capital form was modestly below one. Being high on all three (vs. none of the) scales was significantly associated with 18% lower odds of fair/poor health (odds ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.69–0.98). Adding individual-level social capital variables to the model attenuated two of the three community-level social capital associations, with a few of the former characteristics appearing to be moderately significantly protective of health. We further observed several significant interactions between community-level social capital and one's proximity to core urban areas, individual-level race/ethnicity, gender, and social capital. Overall, our results suggest primarily beneficial yet modest health effects of key summary forms of community social capital, and heterogeneity in some ...

AbstractBackground: Several studies have evaluated the relationship between social capital and health in North America and Western Europe, although data remain scarce in Latin America. We examined the associations between indicators of social capital and health outcomes in nine Latin American countries. Methods: Design: Cross‐sectional ecological and individual‐level analyses of the relationships between social capital and health outcomes. Setting: Nine Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela), included in the World Values Survey. Subjects: 14,591 adults over 18 years. Main outcome measures: life expectancy at birth, infant mortality rate, under‐5 mortality rate, and maternal mortality rate (ecological analyses), and odds ratios of reporting good (as opposed to poor) self‐rated health (individual‐level analyses). Results: Trust was significantly correlated with life expectancy at the cross‐national level (r=0.72, p=0.03), and marginally significantly correlated with the maternal mortality rate (r=−0.61, p=0.09). Neither voluntary group participation nor church attendance was correlated with aggregate population health indicators. At the individual level, higher trust was significantly correlated with better self‐rated health in five of the nine countries. Group membership was correlated with better health in three countries. Church attendance was correlated with worse health in Mexico and the Dominican Republic. Conclusions: Our findings provide preliminary support for the relevance of social capital as a determinant of health in the Latin American region. However, further research is warranted on refining the measurement of social capital in this region.

Late 19th century novels provide graphic descriptions of working and living conditions and their impact on population health, in particular the detrimental effects of hunger, poor housing, environmental conditions, hazardous work and poor pay, smoking and alcohol and crime, but also the transformative possibilities of social and political action. The popularity of these novels helped raise the collective conscience of citizens and illuminated the direction for 20th century welfare reforms. Yet many of these problems remain and the pathways to and from poverty are still recognisable today. Although novels are now less central in conveying social information, re‐reading these novels enables us to understand how social and economic circumstances were understood at the time and what led to social and political change.

This is the quick, go-to-reference book for public health trainees and practitioners. It distils information from the core disciplines of public health into one concise volume. It is also packed with practical tips on professional competencies and skills development, as well as new emerging topics.