Department of Psychology, Durham University, South Rd, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.
Department of Psychology, Durham University, South Rd, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2024 Feb;343:116542. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116542. Epub 2023 Dec 25.
Meta-reviews synthesising research on social class and mental health and wellbeing are currently limited and focused on specific facets of social class (e.g., social capital) or mental health and wellbeing (e.g., mental health disorders), and none sought to identify mechanisms in this relationship.
The present meta-review sought to (1) assess the overall relationship between social class and mental health and wellbeing, (2) determine the mechanisms that act in this relationship, and (3) evaluate the strength of evidence available.
The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021214731). We systematically searched twelve databases in September 2022 and identified 149 eligible reviews from 38,257 records screened. Quality of evidence was assessed with the JBI levels of evidence and risk of bias with the ROBIS tool.
A large but low-quality evidence base points to class-based inequalities in mental health and wellbeing, with the strongest available evidence linking lower social positions to an increased risk of depression. In terms of different facets of stratification, the best available evidence suggests that deprivation (e.g., poverty), socioeconomic status, income, and subjective social status are consequential for individuals' mental health and wellbeing. However, high-quality evidence for the roles of education, occupation, other economic resources (e.g., wealth), and social capital is currently limited. Most reviews employed individual-level measures (e.g., income), as opposed to interpersonal- (e.g., social capital) or community-level (e.g., neighbourhood deprivation) measures. Considering mechanisms, we found some evidence for mediation via subjective social status, sense of control, and experiences of stress and trauma. There was also some evidence that higher socioeconomic status can provide a buffer for neighbourhood deprivation, lower social capital, and lower subjective social status.
Future research employing experimental or quasi-experimental methods, and systematic reviews with a low risk of bias, are necessary to advance this area of research.
目前,综合研究社会阶层与心理健康和幸福感关系的元综述数量有限,且主要集中在社会阶层的特定方面(如社会资本)或心理健康和幸福感(如精神健康障碍),没有研究试图确定这种关系中的机制。
本元综述旨在:(1)评估社会阶层与心理健康和幸福感之间的总体关系;(2)确定该关系中的作用机制;(3)评估现有证据的强度。
本研究方案在 PROSPERO 上进行了前瞻性注册(CRD42021214731)。我们于 2022 年 9 月系统地检索了 12 个数据库,从筛选出的 38257 条记录中确定了 149 篇符合条件的综述。使用 JBI 证据水平和 ROBIS 工具评估证据质量和偏倚风险。
一个较大但质量较低的证据基础表明,心理健康和幸福感存在基于阶层的不平等,现有最强证据表明,社会地位较低与抑郁风险增加有关。就分层的不同方面而言,最佳现有证据表明,贫困(如贫困)、社会经济地位、收入和主观社会地位对个人的心理健康和幸福感具有重要意义。然而,目前高质量证据表明,教育、职业、其他经济资源(如财富)和社会资本在这方面的作用有限。大多数综述采用了个体层面的指标(如收入),而不是人际层面(如社会资本)或社区层面(如邻里贫困)的指标。考虑到作用机制,我们发现一些证据表明,主观社会地位、控制感以及压力和创伤经历在其中起中介作用。也有一些证据表明,较高的社会经济地位可以缓冲邻里贫困、较低的社会资本和较低的主观社会地位的影响。
未来的研究需要采用实验或准实验方法,以及偏倚风险较低的系统综述,以推动这一研究领域的发展。