Education, income and ethnic differences in cumulative biological risk profiles in a national sample of US adults: NHANES III (1988-1994)
Data from the nationally representative US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III cohort were used to examine the hypothesis that socio-economic status is consistently and negatively associated with levels of biological risk, as measured by nine biological parameters known to predict health risks (diastolic and systolic blood pressure, pulse, HDL and total cholesterol, glycosylated hemoglobin, c-reactive protein, albumin and waist-hip ratio), resulting in greater cumulative burdens of biological risk among those of lower education and/or income. As hypothesized, consistent education and income gradients were seen for biological parameters reflecting cardiovascular, metabolic and inflammatory risk: those with lower education and income exhibiting greater prevalence of high-risk values for each of nine individual biological risk factors. Significant education and income gradients were also seen for summary indices reflecting cumulative burdens of cardiovascular, metabolic and inflammatory risks as well as overall total biological risks. Multivariable cumulative logistic regression models revealed that the education and income effects were each independently and negatively associated with cumulative biological risks, and that these effects remained significant independent of age, gender, ethnicity and lifestyle factors such as smoking and physical activity. There were no significant ethnic differences in the patterns of association between socio-economic status and biological risks, but older age was associated with significantly weaker education and income gradients.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 66 (2008)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:66:y:2008:i:1:p:72-87. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.