Health selection in the Whitehall II study, UK

被引:127
作者
Chandola, T
Bartley, M
Sacker, A
Jenkinson, C
Marmot, M
机构
[1] UCL, Int Ctr Hlth & Soc, Dept Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, London WC1E 6BT, England
[2] Univ Oxford, Inst Hlth Sci, Hlth Serv Res Unit, Oxford OX3 7LF, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
health selection; social causation; health inequalities; United Kingdom;
D O I
10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00201-0
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
There has been considerable debate mer the importance of the health selection hypothesis for explaining social gradients in health. Although studies have argued that it may not be an important explanation of social gradients in health, previous analyses have not estimated, simultaneously, the relative effect of health on changes in social position and of social position on changes in health (social causation). Cross-lagged longitudinal analyses using structural equation models enable the estimation of the relative size of these pathways which would be useful in determining the relative importance of the health selection hypothesis over the social causation hypothesis. Data from four phases of the Whitehall 11 study (initially consisting of 10.308 men and women aged 35-55 in the British civil service) were collected over a 10 year period. There was no evidence for an effect of mental (GHQ-30 and SF36) or physical health (SF-36) on changes in employment grade. When financial deprivation was used as a measure of social position, there was a significant effect of mental health on changes in social position among men although this health selection effect was over two and a half times smaller than the effect of social position oil changes in health. The results suggest that the development of social gradients in health in the Whitehall 11 study may not be primarily explained in terms of a health selection effect. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2059 / 2072
页数:14
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
Acheson D., 1998, Independent inquiry into inequalities in health: report
[2]  
[Anonymous], AMOS WINDOWS ANAL MO
[3]  
Arbuckle J. L., 1996, Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques, P243, DOI [10.4324/9781315827414, DOI 10.4324/9781315827414]
[4]  
ARBUCKLE JC, 1999, ADV STRUCTURAL EQUAT
[6]   Does health-selective mobility account for socioeconomic differences in health? Evidence from England and Wales, 1971 to 1991 [J].
Bartley, M ;
Plewis, I .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR, 1997, 38 (04) :376-386
[7]  
BARTLEY M, 1999, BRIT MED J, V313, P445
[8]  
BENTLER PM, 1990, PSYCHOL BULL, V107, P238, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
[9]   Does social mobility affect the size of the socioeconomic mortality differential?: evidence from the Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study [J].
Blane, D ;
Harding, S ;
Rosato, M .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 1999, 162 :59-70
[10]   AN ASSESSMENT OF THE BLACK REPORTS EXPLANATIONS OF HEALTH INEQUALITIES [J].
BLANE, D .
SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS, 1985, 7 (03) :423-445