Health Systems and Services Research Unit, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 29;8(7):e71085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071085. eCollection 2013.
Social capital is said to influence health, mostly in research undertaken in high income countries' settings. Because social capital may differ from one setting to another, it is suggested that its measurement be context specific. We examine the association of individual and neighbourhood level social capital, and neighbourhood deprivation to self-rated health using a multi-level analysis.
Data are taken from the 2008 South Africa National Income Dynamic Survey. Health was self-reported on a scale from 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor). Two measures of social capital were used: individual, measured by two variables denoting trust and civic participation; and neighbourhood social capital, denoting support, association, behaviour and safety in a community.
Compared to males, females were less likely to report good health (Odds Ratio 0.82: Confidence Interval 0.73, 0.91). There were variations in association of individual social capital and self-rated health among the provinces. In Western Cape (1.37: 0.98, 1.91) and North West (1.39: 1.13, 1.71), trust was positively associated with reporting good health, while the reverse was true in Limpopo (0.56: 0.38, 0.84) and Free State (0.70: 0.48, 1.02). In Western Cape (0.60: 0.44, 0.82) and Mpumalanga (0.72: 0.55, 0.94), neighbourhood social capital was negatively associated with reporting good health. In North West (1.59: 1.27, 1.99) and Gauteng (1.90: 1.21, 2.97), increased neighbourhood social capital was positively associated with reporting good health.
Our study demonstrated the importance of considering contextual factors when analysing the relationship between social capital and health. Analysis by province showed variations in the way in which social capital affected health in different contexts. Further studies should be undertaken to understand the mechanisms through which social capital impacts on health in South Africa.
社会资本据称会影响健康,这主要是在高收入国家的研究中得出的结论。由于社会资本可能因环境而异,因此有人建议对其进行具体环境下的衡量。我们使用多水平分析方法,研究个体和社区层面的社会资本以及社区贫困与自评健康之间的关系。
数据来自 2008 年南非全国收入动态调查。健康状况采用 1 到 5 的量表进行自我报告,分数越高代表健康状况越好。我们使用了两个社会资本指标:个体层面,用两个表示信任和公民参与的变量来衡量;社区层面,用社区内的支持、联系、行为和安全感来衡量。
与男性相比,女性不太可能报告自己的健康状况良好(优势比 0.82:置信区间 0.73,0.91)。个体社会资本与自评健康之间的关联在各省之间存在差异。在西开普省(1.37:0.98,1.91)和西北省(1.39:1.13,1.71),信任与报告健康状况良好呈正相关,而林波波省(0.56:0.38,0.84)和自由州省(0.70:0.48,1.02)则相反。在西开普省(0.60:0.44,0.82)和姆普马兰加省(0.72:0.55,0.94),社区社会资本与报告健康状况良好呈负相关。在西北省(1.59:1.27,1.99)和豪登省(1.90:1.21,2.97),增加社区社会资本与报告健康状况良好呈正相关。
我们的研究表明,在分析社会资本与健康之间的关系时,考虑背景因素非常重要。按省份进行分析表明,社会资本以不同的方式影响不同环境下的健康。应该进行进一步的研究,以了解社会资本对南非健康的影响机制。