IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v51y2000i7p1019-1030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social class and self-rated health: can the gradient be explained by differences in life style or work environment?

Author

Listed:
  • Borg, Vilhelm
  • Kristensen, Tage S.

Abstract

The purpose of the present paper is to describe differences in work environment and life style factors between social classes in Denmark and to investigate to what extent these factors can explain social class differences with regard to changes in self-rated health (SRH) over a 5 year period. We used data from a prospective study of a random sample of 5001 Danish employees, 18-59 years of age, interviewed at baseline in 1990 and again in 1995. At baseline we found higher prevalence in the lower classes of repetitive work, low skill discretion, low influence at work, high job insecurity, and ergonomic, physical, chemical, and climatic exposures. High psychological demands and conflicts at work were more prevalent in the higher classes. With regard to life style factors, we found more obese people and more smokers among the lower classes. The proportion with poor SRH increased with decreasing social class at baseline. The follow-up analyses showed a clear association between social class and worsening of SRH: The lower the social class, the higher the proportion with deterioration of SRH. There was no social gradient with regard to improved SRH over time. Approximately two thirds of the social gradient with regard to worsening of SRH could be explained by the work environment and life style factors. The largest contribution came from the work environment factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Borg, Vilhelm & Kristensen, Tage S., 2000. "Social class and self-rated health: can the gradient be explained by differences in life style or work environment?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1019-1030, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:51:y:2000:i:7:p:1019-1030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00011-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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:51:y:2000:i:7:p:1019-1030. 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.