IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v340y2024ics0277953623008067.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of life course trajectory methods to public health data: A comparison of sequence analysis and group-based multi-trajectory modeling for modelling childhood adversity trajectories

Author

Listed:
  • Elsenburg, Leonie K.
  • Rieckmann, Andreas
  • Bengtsson, Jessica
  • Jensen, Andreas Kryger
  • Rod, Naja Hulvej

Abstract

There is increasing awareness of the importance of modelling life course trajectories to unravel how social, economic and health factors relate to health over time. Different methods have been developed and applied in public health to classify individuals into groups based on characteristics of their life course. However, the application and results of different methods are rarely compared. We compared the application and results of two methods to classify life course trajectories of individuals, i.e. sequence analysis and group-based multi-trajectory modeling (GBTM), using public health data. We used high-resolution Danish nationwide register data on 926,160 individuals born between 1987 and 2001, including information on the yearly occurrence of 7 childhood adversities in 2 dimensions (i.e. family poverty and family dynamics). We constructed childhood adversity trajectories from 0 to 15 years by applying (1) sequence analysis using optimal matching and cluster analysis using Ward's method and (2) GBTM using logistic and zero-inflated Poisson regressions. We identified 2 to 8 cluster solutions using both methods and determined the optimal solution for both methods. Both methods generated a low adversity, a poverty, and a consistent or high adversity cluster. The 5-cluster solution using sequence analysis additionally included a household psychiatric illness and a late adversity cluster. The 4-group solution using GBTM additionally included a moderate adversity cluster. Compared with the solution obtained through sequence analysis, the solution obtained through GBTM contained fewer individuals in the low adversity cluster and more in the other clusters. We find that the two methods generate qualitatively similar solutions, but the quantitative distributions of children over the groups are different. The method of choice depends on the type of data available and the research question of interest. We provide a comprehensive overview of important considerations and benefits and drawbacks of both methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Elsenburg, Leonie K. & Rieckmann, Andreas & Bengtsson, Jessica & Jensen, Andreas Kryger & Rod, Naja Hulvej, 2024. "Application of life course trajectory methods to public health data: A comparison of sequence analysis and group-based multi-trajectory modeling for modelling childhood adversity trajectories," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:340:y:2024:i:c:s0277953623008067
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116449
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623008067
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116449?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:340:y:2024:i:c:s0277953623008067. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.