d'Errico Angelo, Ricceri Fulvio, Stringhini Silvia, Carmeli Cristian, Kivimaki Mika, Bartley Mel, McCrory Cathal, Bochud Murielle, Vollenweider Peter, Tumino Rosario, Goldberg Marcel, Zins Marie, Barros Henrique, Giles Graham, Severi Gianluca, Costa Giuseppe, Vineis Paolo
Epidemiology Unit, ASL TO3, Piedmont Region, Grugliasco, Torino, Italy.
Department of Clinical and Biological Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
PLoS One. 2017 May 30;12(5):e0178071. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178071. eCollection 2017.
Several social indicators have been used in epidemiological research to describe socioeconomic position (SEP) of people in societies. Among SEP indicators, those more frequently used are education, occupational class and income. Differences in the incidence of several health outcomes have been reported consistently, independently from the indicator employed. Main objectives of the study were to present the socioeconomic classifications of the social indicators which will be employed throughout the LIFEPATH project and to compare social gradients in all-cause mortality observed in the participating adult cohorts using the different SEP indicators.
Information on the available social indicators (education, own and father's occupational class, income) from eleven adult cohorts participating in LIFEPATH was collected and harmonized. Mortality by SEP for each indicator was estimated by Poisson regression on each cohort and then evaluated using a meta-analytical approach.
In the meta-analysis, among men mortality was significantly inversely associated with both occupational class and education, but not with father's occupational class; among women, the increase in mortality in lower social strata was smaller than among men and, except for a slight increase in the lowest education category, no significant differences were found.
Among men, the proposed three-level classifications of occupational class and education were found to predict differences in mortality which is consistent with previous research. Results on women suggest that classifying them through their sole SEP, without considering that of their partners, may imply a misclassification of their social position leading to attenuation of mortality differences.
在流行病学研究中,已使用多种社会指标来描述社会中人群的社会经济地位(SEP)。在SEP指标中,使用较为频繁的是教育程度、职业阶层和收入。无论采用何种指标,均一致报告了几种健康结局发生率的差异。本研究的主要目的是介绍将在LIFEPATH项目中全程使用的社会指标的社会经济分类,并使用不同的SEP指标比较参与研究的成年队列中全因死亡率的社会梯度。
收集并统一了参与LIFEPATH项目的11个成年队列中现有的社会指标(教育程度、本人及父亲的职业阶层、收入)信息。通过对每个队列进行泊松回归估计每个指标按SEP划分的死亡率,然后采用荟萃分析方法进行评估。
在荟萃分析中,男性死亡率与职业阶层和教育程度均呈显著负相关,但与父亲的职业阶层无关;女性中,社会阶层较低者死亡率的增幅小于男性,除最低教育类别略有增加外,未发现显著差异。
在男性中,所提出的职业阶层和教育程度的三级分类能够预测死亡率差异,这与先前的研究一致。关于女性的结果表明,仅通过其自身的SEP对其进行分类,而不考虑其伴侣的SEP,可能意味着对其社会地位的错误分类,从而导致死亡率差异的减弱。