The health implications of cumulative exposure to contextual (dis)advantage: methodological and substantive advances from a unique data linkage.

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American journal of epidemiology Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1093/aje/kwae183
Wei Xu, Christina Kamis, Megan Agnew, Amy Schultz, Sarah Salas, Kristen Malecki, Michal Engelman
{"title":"The health implications of cumulative exposure to contextual (dis)advantage: methodological and substantive advances from a unique data linkage.","authors":"Wei Xu, Christina Kamis, Megan Agnew, Amy Schultz, Sarah Salas, Kristen Malecki, Michal Engelman","doi":"10.1093/aje/kwae183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Deleterious neighborhood conditions are associated with poor health, yet the health impact of cumulative lifetime exposure to neighborhood disadvantage is understudied. Using up to 5 decades of residential histories for 4177 adult participants in the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin (SHOW) and spatiotemporally linked neighborhood conditions, we developed 4 operational approaches to characterizing cumulative neighborhood (dis)advantage over the life course. We estimated their associations with self-reported general health and compared them with estimates using neighborhood (dis)advantage at the time of study enrollment. When cumulative exposures were assessed with the most granular temporal scale (approach 4), neighborhood transportation constraints (odds ratio [OR] = 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08-1.36), residential turnover (OR = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.34), education deficit (OR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.32), racial segregation (OR = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04-1.38), and median household income (OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97) were significantly associated with risk of fair or poor health. For composite neighborhood disadvantage, cumulative exposures had a stronger association (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08) than the cross-sectional exposure (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06). Single-point-in-time neighborhood measures underestimate the relationship between neighborhood and health, underscoring the importance of a life-course approach to cumulative exposure measurement.</p>","PeriodicalId":7472,"journal":{"name":"American journal of epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"480-489"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11815491/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwae183","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Deleterious neighborhood conditions are associated with poor health, yet the health impact of cumulative lifetime exposure to neighborhood disadvantage is understudied. Using up to 5 decades of residential histories for 4177 adult participants in the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin (SHOW) and spatiotemporally linked neighborhood conditions, we developed 4 operational approaches to characterizing cumulative neighborhood (dis)advantage over the life course. We estimated their associations with self-reported general health and compared them with estimates using neighborhood (dis)advantage at the time of study enrollment. When cumulative exposures were assessed with the most granular temporal scale (approach 4), neighborhood transportation constraints (odds ratio [OR] = 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08-1.36), residential turnover (OR = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.34), education deficit (OR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.32), racial segregation (OR = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04-1.38), and median household income (OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97) were significantly associated with risk of fair or poor health. For composite neighborhood disadvantage, cumulative exposures had a stronger association (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08) than the cross-sectional exposure (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06). Single-point-in-time neighborhood measures underestimate the relationship between neighborhood and health, underscoring the importance of a life-course approach to cumulative exposure measurement.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
累积暴露于环境(不利)优势对健康的影响:从独特的数据关联中获得的方法论和实质性进展。
有害的邻里条件与健康状况不佳有关,但对终生累积暴露于邻里劣势环境对健康的影响却研究不足。我们利用威斯康星州健康调查(SHOW)中 4,177 名成年参与者长达五十年的居住历史和时空关联的邻里条件,开发了四种操作方法来描述一生中累积的邻里(不利)优势。我们估算了这些方法与自我报告的一般健康状况之间的关系,并将其与使用研究注册时的邻里(不)优势估算的结果进行了比较。34)、教育赤字(OR = 1.17,95% CI:1.04,1.32)、种族隔离(OR = 1.20,95% CI:1.04,1.38)和家庭收入中位数(OR = 0.85,95% CI:0.75,0.97)与健康状况一般或较差的风险显著相关。就综合邻里劣势而言,累积暴露(OR = 1.05,95% CI:1.02,1.08)比横截面暴露(OR = 1.03,95% CI:1.01,1.06)具有更强的关联性。单一的时间点邻里测量低估了邻里与健康之间的关系,这突出了采用生命过程方法测量累积暴露的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of epidemiology
American journal of epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Epidemiology is the oldest and one of the premier epidemiologic journals devoted to the publication of empirical research findings, opinion pieces, and methodological developments in the field of epidemiologic research. It is a peer-reviewed journal aimed at both fellow epidemiologists and those who use epidemiologic data, including public health workers and clinicians.
期刊最新文献
Using electronic health record data to identify incident uterine fibroids and endometriosis within a large, urban academic medical center: a validation study. Prenatal residential proximity to endocrine disrupting agricultural pesticides and menstrual cycle characteristics among Latina adolescents in California. Recruitment through social media ads and videocalls: Cost, effectiveness, and lessons from the Experiences of Pregnancy study. Detecting risk for depression and anxiety symptoms among older bereaved women using text-based analysis in the Nurses' Health Study II. Association of cancer incidence and randomized trial evidence for FDA approval of new cancer drugs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1