Suppr超能文献

历史、政治与脆弱性:解读苏格兰及格拉斯哥的超额死亡率

History, politics and vulnerability: explaining excess mortality in Scotland and Glasgow.

作者信息

Walsh D, McCartney G, Collins C, Taulbut M, Batty G D

机构信息

Glasgow Centre for Population Health, Olympia Building, 2-16 Orr Street, Bridgeton Cross, Glasgow G40 2QH, Scotland, UK.

NHS Health Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.

出版信息

Public Health. 2017 Oct;151:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.05.016. Epub 2017 Jul 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

High levels of excess mortality (i.e. that not explained by deprivation) have been observed for Scotland compared with England & Wales, and especially for Glasgow in comparison with similar post-industrial cities such as Liverpool and Manchester. Many potential explanations have been suggested. Based on an assessment of these, the aim was to develop an understanding of the most likely underlying causes. Note that this paper distils a larger research report, with the aim of reaching wider audiences beyond Scotland, as the important lessons learnt are relevant to other populations.

STUDY DESIGN

Review and dialectical synthesis of evidence.

METHODS

Forty hypotheses were examined, including those identified from a systematic review. The relevance of each was assessed by means of Bradford Hill's criteria for causality alongside-for hypotheses deemed causally linked to mortality-comparisons of exposures between Glasgow and Liverpool/Manchester, and between Scotland and the rest of Great Britain. Where gaps in the evidence base were identified, new research was undertaken. Causal chains of relevant hypotheses were created, each tested in terms of its ability to explain the many different aspects of excess mortality. The models were further tested with key informants from public health and other disciplines.

RESULTS

In Glasgow's case, the city was made more vulnerable to important socioeconomic (deprivation, deindustrialisation) and political (detrimental economic and social policies) exposures, resulting in worse outcomes. This vulnerability was generated by a series of historical factors, processes and decisions: the lagged effects of historical overcrowding; post-war regional policy including the socially selective relocation of population to outside the city; more detrimental processes of urban change which impacted on living conditions; and differences in local government responses to UK government policy in the 1980s which both impacted in negative terms in Glasgow and also conferred protective effects on comparator cities. Further resulting protective factors were identified (e.g. greater 'social capital' in Liverpool) which placed Glasgow at a further relative disadvantage. Other contributory factors were highlighted, including the inadequate measurement of deprivation. A similar 'explanatory model' resulted for Scotland as a whole. This included: the components of the Glasgow model, given their impact on nationally measured outcomes; inadequate measurement of deprivation; the lagged effects of deprivation (in particular higher levels of overcrowding historically); and additional key vulnerabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The work has helped to further understanding of the underlying causes of Glasgow's and Scotland's high levels of excess mortality. The implications for policy include the need to address three issues simultaneously: to protect against key exposures (e.g. poverty) which impact detrimentally across all parts of the UK; to address the existing consequences of Glasgow's and Scotland's vulnerability; and to mitigate against the effects of future vulnerabilities which are likely to emerge from policy responses to contemporary problems which fail sufficiently to consider and to prevent long-term, unintended social consequences.

摘要

目标

与英格兰和威尔士相比,苏格兰的超额死亡率(即无法用贫困来解释的死亡率)较高,尤其是格拉斯哥与利物浦和曼彻斯特等类似的后工业化城市相比。人们提出了许多潜在的解释。基于对这些解释的评估,目的是深入了解最可能的根本原因。请注意,本文提炼了一份更大的研究报告,旨在让苏格兰以外的更广泛受众了解,因为所吸取的重要经验教训与其他人群相关。

研究设计

对证据进行综述和辩证综合。

方法

研究了40种假设,包括从系统综述中确定的假设。通过布拉德福德·希尔因果关系标准评估每种假设的相关性,对于被认为与死亡率有因果联系的假设,比较了格拉斯哥与利物浦/曼彻斯特之间以及苏格兰与大不列颠其他地区之间的暴露情况。在确定证据基础存在差距的地方,开展了新的研究。创建了相关假设的因果链,每个因果链都根据其解释超额死亡率诸多不同方面的能力进行了检验。这些模型还与公共卫生和其他学科的关键信息提供者进行了进一步检验。

结果

就格拉斯哥而言,该市更容易受到重要的社会经济(贫困、去工业化)和政治(有害的经济和社会政策)暴露的影响,从而导致更糟糕的结果。这种脆弱性是由一系列历史因素、进程和决策造成的:历史上过度拥挤的滞后影响;战后区域政策,包括将人口有选择地重新安置到城外;更有害的城市变化进程,影响了生活条件;以及地方政府对20世纪80年代英国政府政策的不同反应,这些反应对格拉斯哥产生了负面影响,同时也给对比城市带来了保护作用。还确定了进一步产生保护作用的因素(例如利物浦有更强的“社会资本”),这使格拉斯哥处于进一步的相对劣势。还强调了其他促成因素,包括对贫困的衡量不足。整个苏格兰也得出了类似的“解释模型”。这包括:格拉斯哥模型的各个组成部分,因为它们对全国性衡量结果有影响;对贫困的衡量不足;贫困的滞后影响(特别是历史上更高的过度拥挤水平);以及其他关键脆弱性。

结论

这项工作有助于进一步了解格拉斯哥和苏格兰超额死亡率高的根本原因。对政策的影响包括需要同时解决三个问题:防范对英国各地都有不利影响的关键暴露因素(例如贫困);解决格拉斯哥和苏格兰脆弱性的现有后果;减轻未来可能因对当代问题的政策应对未能充分考虑和预防长期意外社会后果而产生的脆弱性影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验