Turrell G, Blakely T, Patterson C, Oldenburg B
School of Public Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Mar;58(3):208-15. doi: 10.1136/jech.2003.011031.
To examine the association between area and individual level socioeconomic status (SES) and food purchasing behaviour.
The sample comprised 1000 households and 50 small areas. Data were collected by face to face interview (66.4% response rate). SES was measured using a composite area index of disadvantage (mean 1026.8, SD = 95.2) and household income. Purchasing behaviour was scored as continuous indices ranging from 0 to 100 for three food types: fruits (mean 50.5, SD = 17.8), vegetables (61.8, 15.2), and grocery items (51.4, 17.6), with higher scores indicating purchasing patterns more consistent with dietary guideline recommendations.
Brisbane, Australia, 2000.
Persons responsible for their household's food purchasing.
Controlling for age, gender, and household income, a two standard deviation increase on the area SES measure was associated with a 2.01 unit increase on the fruit purchasing index (95% CI -0.49 to 4.50). The corresponding associations for vegetables and grocery foods were 0.60 (-1.36 to 2.56) and 0.94 (-1.35 to 3.23). Before controlling for household income, significant area level differences were found for each food, suggesting that clustering of household income within areas (a composition effect) accounted for the purchasing variability between them.
Living in a socioeconomically advantaged area was associated with a tendency to purchase healthier food, however, the association was small in magnitude and the 95% CI for area SES included the null. Although urban areas in Brisbane are differentiated on the basis of their socioeconomic characteristics, it seems unlikely that where you live shapes your procurement of food over and above your personal characteristics.
探讨地区及个体层面社会经济地位(SES)与食品购买行为之间的关联。
样本包括1000户家庭和50个小区域。通过面对面访谈收集数据(回复率为66.4%)。使用综合地区劣势指数(均值1026.8,标准差=95.2)和家庭收入来衡量社会经济地位。购买行为以三种食品类型的连续指数评分,范围从0到100:水果(均值50.5,标准差=17.8)、蔬菜(61.8,15.2)和杂货(51.4,17.6),分数越高表明购买模式越符合饮食指南建议。
2000年,澳大利亚布里斯班。
负责家庭食品采购的人员。
在控制年龄、性别和家庭收入后,地区社会经济地位衡量指标增加两个标准差与水果购买指数增加2.01单位相关(95%置信区间-0.49至4.50)。蔬菜和杂货食品的相应关联分别为0.60(-1.36至2.56)和0.94(-1.35至3.23)。在控制家庭收入之前,每种食品在地区层面都存在显著差异,这表明地区内家庭收入的聚集(构成效应)解释了它们之间购买行为的差异。
生活在社会经济优势地区与购买更健康食品的倾向相关,然而,这种关联程度较小,地区社会经济地位的95%置信区间包含零值。尽管布里斯班的城市地区根据其社会经济特征存在差异,但除个人特征外,居住地点似乎不太可能影响食品采购。