Novel indices of state- and county-level social disadvantage in older Americans and disparities in mortality

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health & Place Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2025.103438
Yi Wang , Emma X. Zang , Kendra Davis-Plourde , Thomas M. Gill , Robert D. Becher
{"title":"Novel indices of state- and county-level social disadvantage in older Americans and disparities in mortality","authors":"Yi Wang ,&nbsp;Emma X. Zang ,&nbsp;Kendra Davis-Plourde ,&nbsp;Thomas M. Gill ,&nbsp;Robert D. Becher","doi":"10.1016/j.healthplace.2025.103438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Studying and defining social contextual disadvantage in community-living older persons is vitally important, yet no composite indices of social disadvantage have been developed and validated specifically for the geriatric population. The current study aims to create two novel composite indices representing state- and county-level social contextual disadvantage in older (≥65 years) persons in the United States (US), and to evaluate whether disparities in mortality exist between index-defined disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged groups. Publicly-available state- and county-level (2006–2014) contextual factors from all 50 US states and 3132 counties were used to create indices of social contextual disadvantage. Associations of disadvantage-status with mortality (2010–2019) were assessed by negative binomial models. We found mortality rates were significantly higher in index-defined disadvantaged states/counties compared with non-disadvantaged ones for 2010–2015 and 2014–2019. For both periods, compared with non-disadvantaged states, the disadvantaged states had at least 11% increased mortality risk. At the county-level, the disadvantaged counties had an approximately 10% increased mortality risk. The findings suggest that the two indices of state- and county-level contextual disadvantage in older persons may serve as useful tools for identifying place-based disadvantaged populations of older Americans and as multidimensional factors driving mortality disparities. State- and county-level social contextual disadvantage should be considered when formulating public health policies and interventions aimed at reducing health disparities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49302,"journal":{"name":"Health & Place","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 103438"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health & Place","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353829225000279","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

Studying and defining social contextual disadvantage in community-living older persons is vitally important, yet no composite indices of social disadvantage have been developed and validated specifically for the geriatric population. The current study aims to create two novel composite indices representing state- and county-level social contextual disadvantage in older (≥65 years) persons in the United States (US), and to evaluate whether disparities in mortality exist between index-defined disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged groups. Publicly-available state- and county-level (2006–2014) contextual factors from all 50 US states and 3132 counties were used to create indices of social contextual disadvantage. Associations of disadvantage-status with mortality (2010–2019) were assessed by negative binomial models. We found mortality rates were significantly higher in index-defined disadvantaged states/counties compared with non-disadvantaged ones for 2010–2015 and 2014–2019. For both periods, compared with non-disadvantaged states, the disadvantaged states had at least 11% increased mortality risk. At the county-level, the disadvantaged counties had an approximately 10% increased mortality risk. The findings suggest that the two indices of state- and county-level contextual disadvantage in older persons may serve as useful tools for identifying place-based disadvantaged populations of older Americans and as multidimensional factors driving mortality disparities. State- and county-level social contextual disadvantage should be considered when formulating public health policies and interventions aimed at reducing health disparities.
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
美国老年人的州和县一级社会不利条件新指数及死亡率差异
研究和定义社区生活老年人的社会环境劣势是至关重要的,但目前还没有专门针对老年人口开发和验证社会劣势的综合指数。目前的研究旨在创建两个新的复合指数,代表美国老年人(≥65岁)的州和县一级的社会环境劣势,并评估指数定义的弱势群体和非弱势群体之间是否存在死亡率差异。来自美国所有50个州和3132个县的公开可用的州和县级(2006-2014)背景因素用于创建社会背景劣势指数。采用负二项模型评估劣势地位与死亡率(2010-2019)的关系。我们发现,2010-2015年和2014-2019年,指数定义的弱势州/县的死亡率明显高于非弱势州/县。在这两个时期,与非弱势州相比,弱势州的死亡风险至少增加了11%。在县一级,处境不利的县的死亡风险增加了大约10%。研究结果表明,州和县两级老年人环境劣势指数可以作为识别基于地方的美国老年人弱势群体的有用工具,并作为导致死亡率差异的多维因素。在制定旨在减少健康差距的公共卫生政策和干预措施时,应考虑到州和县一级的社会背景不利因素。
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
Health & Place
Health & Place PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
6.20%
发文量
176
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: he journal is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the study of all aspects of health and health care in which place or location matters.
期刊最新文献
A systematic review of green gentrification and mental health Navigating contested terrain: How place meanings shape health after homelessness Investigating the factors associated with preterm birth using evidence from the Growing Up in New Zealand cohort: a retrospective geospatial study How public open spaces co-construct solitary experiences in densely populated urban environments Gendered impacts of public transport on social isolation and loneliness among older adults: Evidence from a natural experiment in Hong Kong
×
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:604180095
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