Turrell Gavin, Hewitt Belinda, Patterson Carla, Oldenburg Brian
Queensland University of Technology, School of Public Health, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, 4059.
Public Health Nutr. 2003 Apr;6(2):191-200. doi: 10.1079/PHN2002416.
To examine the association between socio-economic position (SEP) and diet, by assessing the unadjusted and simultaneously adjusted (independent) contributions of education, occupation and household income to food purchasing behaviour.
The sample was randomly selected using a stratified two-stage cluster design, and the response rate was 66.4%. Data were collected by face-to-face interview. Food purchasing was examined on the basis of three composite indices that reflected a household's choice of grocery items (including meat and chicken), fruit and vegetables.
Brisbane City, Australia, 2000.
: Non-institutionalised residents of private dwellings located in 50 small areas (Census Collectors Districts).
When shopping, respondents in lower socio-economic groups were less likely to purchase grocery foods that were high in fibre and low in fat, salt and sugar. Disadvantaged groups purchased fewer types of fresh fruits and vegetables, and less often, than their counterparts from more advantaged backgrounds. When the relationship between SEP and food purchasing was examined using each indicator separately, education and household income made an unadjusted contribution to purchasing behaviour for all three food indices; however, occupation was significantly related only with the purchase of grocery foods. When education and occupation were simultaneously adjusted for each other, the socio-economic patterning with food purchase remained largely unchanged, although the strength of the associations was attenuated. When household income was introduced into the analysis, the association between education, occupation and food purchasing behaviour was diminished or became non-significant; income, however, showed a strong, graded association with food choice.
The food purchasing behaviours of socio-economically disadvantaged groups were least in accord with dietary guideline recommendations, and hence are more consistent with greater risk for the development of diet-related disease. The use of separate indicators for education, occupation and household income each adds something unique to our understanding of how socio-economic position is related to diet: each indicator reflects a different underlying social process and hence they are not interchangeable, and do not serve as adequate proxies for one another.
通过评估教育程度、职业和家庭收入对食品购买行为的未调整和同时调整（独立）贡献，研究社会经济地位（SEP）与饮食之间的关联。
采用分层两阶段整群设计随机抽取样本，回复率为66.4%。通过面对面访谈收集数据。基于反映家庭对食品杂货（包括肉类和鸡肉）、水果和蔬菜选择的三个综合指数对食品购买情况进行研究。
2000年，澳大利亚布里斯班市。
居住在50个小区域（人口普查收集区）私人住宅中的非机构化居民。
购物时，社会经济地位较低群体的受访者购买高纤维、低脂肪、低盐和低糖食品杂货的可能性较小。弱势群体购买的新鲜水果和蔬菜种类比背景更优越的群体少，且购买频率更低。当分别使用每个指标研究SEP与食品购买之间的关系时，教育程度和家庭收入对所有三种食品指数的购买行为都有未调整的贡献；然而，职业仅与食品杂货的购买有显著关联。当教育程度和职业相互同时调整时，食品购买的社会经济模式基本保持不变，尽管关联强度有所减弱。当将家庭收入纳入分析时，教育程度、职业与食品购买行为之间的关联减弱或变得不显著；然而，收入与食品选择呈现出强烈的分级关联。
社会经济地位不利群体的食品购买行为最不符合饮食指南建议，因此更有可能患与饮食相关的疾病。分别使用教育程度、职业和家庭收入指标，能让我们对社会经济地位与饮食之间的关系有独特的理解：每个指标反映了不同的潜在社会过程，因此它们不可互换，也不能相互充分替代。
