schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Associations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data

Abstract Background The UK Government has recently proposed the abolition of income-based measures of child poverty in favour of environmental, educational, and employment measures of deprivation. We aimed to study how strongly these proposed measures are associated with health outcomes among childr... Full description

Journal Title: The Lancet (British edition) 2016, Vol.388, p.S53-S53
Main Author: Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
Other Authors: Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB , de Sa, Joia, MBBS , Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
Quelle: Alma/SFX Local Collection
Publisher: London: Elsevier Ltd
ID: ISSN: 0140-6736
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: cdi_proquest_journals_1846738441
title: Associations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data
format: Article
creator:
  • Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
  • Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB
  • de Sa, Joia, MBBS
  • Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
subjects:
  • Children
  • Health aspects
  • Internal Medicine
  • Observational studies
  • Poverty
ispartof: The Lancet (British edition), 2016, Vol.388, p.S53-S53
description: Abstract Background The UK Government has recently proposed the abolition of income-based measures of child poverty in favour of environmental, educational, and employment measures of deprivation. We aimed to study how strongly these proposed measures are associated with health outcomes among children and young people compared with a relative income measure. Methods With data from Hospital Episode Statistics for 2013–14 (n=16·4 million), we compared inequalities in inpatient admissions of children and young people aged 0–24 years per thousand (total and chronic conditions) using five deprivation measures (deciles of area-based measures: index of multiple deprivation [IMD], income, index of income deprivation affecting children [IDACI], education, living environment). With data from Health Survey for England for 2014 (n=3085), we compared inequalities in general health and long-standing illness reported by an individual, parent, or carer using equivalised household income quintiles, IMD quintiles, and whether the household reference person was employed (n=2417, 78·3%); not working (397, 12·9%); or retired, long-term sick, or other (274, 8·9%). The ratios of hospital admission rates and weighted prevalence of poor self-reported health were compared between the most and least deprived groups within each measure. Findings Total admission rates were higher among the most versus least deprived IMD deciles (ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·59–1·61). The ratio was greater when income deciles were compared (1·69, 1·68–1·71) and smaller when analysis was by education (1·59, 1·58–1·60), IDACI (1·52, 1·51–1·53), and living environment (1·01, 1·00–1·02). The ratio was lower for admissions for chronic conditions (IMD 1·18, 1·16–1·20). Inequalities were largest when analysis was by income decile (1·25, 1·22–1·27). In the household-level analyses, inequalities in fair or poor, self or parent-reported health were seen when comparing lowest versus highest income quintiles (12·2% vs 3·9; ratio 3·12, 1·99–5·87), not working versus being employed (14·1 vs 6·1; 2·30, 1·68–3·03), and most versus least deprived IMD quintiles (9·8 vs 6·5; 1·49, 1·05–2·21). For long-standing illness, the equivalent data were: income (22·0 vs 11·0; 1·99, 1·50–2·77), employment (23·6 vs 15·8; 1·50, 1·21–1·81), and IMD (18·9 vs 17·2; 1·10, 0·88–1·39). Interpretation Although some important aspects of health such as use of primary care and community services are not included, this study shows that child poverty me
language: eng
source: Alma/SFX Local Collection
identifier: ISSN: 0140-6736
fulltext: fulltext
issn:
  • 0140-6736
  • 1474-547X
url: Link


@attributes
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
RANK2.4500535
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourceidgale_proqu
recordidTN_cdi_proquest_journals_1846738441
sourceformatXML
sourcesystemPC
galeidA472808857
sourcerecordidA472808857
originalsourceidFETCH-LOGICAL-c3121-2bed788feff3f205ba5a4b03c380f6be4ec395e6cab02bdd6d9f425506de9a803
addsrcrecordideNqFkl1rFDEYhQdRcK3-BCXgjcJOTWYyX14oS6kfUPBCBe9CJnmzmzqbbPNmVuZ39A83-4FtpSCBhBzOeRJeTpa9ZPSUUVa_-04Zp3ndlPUbVr8ti6Lt8u5RNmO84XnFm1-Ps9lfy9PsGeIlpZTXtJpl1wtEr6yM1jskPcQ_AI6sQeIYAIk3RK3soMnGbyHEaU5WIIe4ypUMQEaEOZFOH0Xix6j8GvA98T1C2O6pciAYRz3tWO6oDBMJsEkPgItJ2gI5d8vB4opoGeXz7ImRA8KL43mS_fx0_uPsS37x7fPXs8VFrkpWsLzoQTdta8CY0hS06mUleU9LVbbU1D1wUGVXQa1kT4te61p3hhdVRWsNnWxpeZK9PnA3wV-NgFFc-jGk76FgLU_Dajlnt66lHEBYZ3wMUq0tKrHgTdHStq2a5Dp9wJWWhrVV3oGxSb8XePVAQNw1zO8Y-hGtA0wb2uUq4lKOiPd51cGugkcMYMQm2LUMk2BU7Goi9jURuw6IdNvXRHQp9_GQgzTprYUgUFlwCrQNoKLQ3v6X8OEfghqss0oOv2ECvJ2pwELQA2THYPWe0JU3-STaKw
sourcetypeAggregation Database
isCDItrue
recordtypearticle
pqid1846738441
display
typearticle
titleAssociations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data
sourceAlma/SFX Local Collection
creatorHargreaves, Dougal S, Dr ; Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB ; de Sa, Joia, MBBS ; Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
creatorcontribHargreaves, Dougal S, Dr ; Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB ; de Sa, Joia, MBBS ; Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
descriptionAbstract Background The UK Government has recently proposed the abolition of income-based measures of child poverty in favour of environmental, educational, and employment measures of deprivation. We aimed to study how strongly these proposed measures are associated with health outcomes among children and young people compared with a relative income measure. Methods With data from Hospital Episode Statistics for 2013–14 (n=16·4 million), we compared inequalities in inpatient admissions of children and young people aged 0–24 years per thousand (total and chronic conditions) using five deprivation measures (deciles of area-based measures: index of multiple deprivation [IMD], income, index of income deprivation affecting children [IDACI], education, living environment). With data from Health Survey for England for 2014 (n=3085), we compared inequalities in general health and long-standing illness reported by an individual, parent, or carer using equivalised household income quintiles, IMD quintiles, and whether the household reference person was employed (n=2417, 78·3%); not working (397, 12·9%); or retired, long-term sick, or other (274, 8·9%). The ratios of hospital admission rates and weighted prevalence of poor self-reported health were compared between the most and least deprived groups within each measure. Findings Total admission rates were higher among the most versus least deprived IMD deciles (ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·59–1·61). The ratio was greater when income deciles were compared (1·69, 1·68–1·71) and smaller when analysis was by education (1·59, 1·58–1·60), IDACI (1·52, 1·51–1·53), and living environment (1·01, 1·00–1·02). The ratio was lower for admissions for chronic conditions (IMD 1·18, 1·16–1·20). Inequalities were largest when analysis was by income decile (1·25, 1·22–1·27). In the household-level analyses, inequalities in fair or poor, self or parent-reported health were seen when comparing lowest versus highest income quintiles (12·2% vs 3·9; ratio 3·12, 1·99–5·87), not working versus being employed (14·1 vs 6·1; 2·30, 1·68–3·03), and most versus least deprived IMD quintiles (9·8 vs 6·5; 1·49, 1·05–2·21). For long-standing illness, the equivalent data were: income (22·0 vs 11·0; 1·99, 1·50–2·77), employment (23·6 vs 15·8; 1·50, 1·21–1·81), and IMD (18·9 vs 17·2; 1·10, 0·88–1·39). Interpretation Although some important aspects of health such as use of primary care and community services are not included, this study shows that child poverty measures differ significantly in their association with key indicators of population health and health-care use. Of the deprivation measures studied here, hospital admissions were most strongly associated with income inequality. Self-reported health outcomes were also more strongly linked to household income than area-level IMD. Funding None.
identifier
0ISSN: 0140-6736
1EISSN: 1474-547X
2DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32289-9
languageeng
publisherLondon: Elsevier Ltd
subjectChildren ; Health aspects ; Internal Medicine ; Observational studies ; Poverty
ispartofThe Lancet (British edition), 2016, Vol.388, p.S53-S53
rights
0Elsevier Ltd
12016 Elsevier Ltd
2COPYRIGHT 2016 Elsevier B.V.
3Copyright Elsevier Limited Nov 1, 2016
lds50peer_reviewed
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
openurlfulltext$$Topenurlfull_article
thumbnail$$Usyndetics_thumb_exl
search
creatorcontrib
0Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
1Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB
2de Sa, Joia, MBBS
3Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
title
0Associations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data
1The Lancet (British edition)
descriptionAbstract Background The UK Government has recently proposed the abolition of income-based measures of child poverty in favour of environmental, educational, and employment measures of deprivation. We aimed to study how strongly these proposed measures are associated with health outcomes among children and young people compared with a relative income measure. Methods With data from Hospital Episode Statistics for 2013–14 (n=16·4 million), we compared inequalities in inpatient admissions of children and young people aged 0–24 years per thousand (total and chronic conditions) using five deprivation measures (deciles of area-based measures: index of multiple deprivation [IMD], income, index of income deprivation affecting children [IDACI], education, living environment). With data from Health Survey for England for 2014 (n=3085), we compared inequalities in general health and long-standing illness reported by an individual, parent, or carer using equivalised household income quintiles, IMD quintiles, and whether the household reference person was employed (n=2417, 78·3%); not working (397, 12·9%); or retired, long-term sick, or other (274, 8·9%). The ratios of hospital admission rates and weighted prevalence of poor self-reported health were compared between the most and least deprived groups within each measure. Findings Total admission rates were higher among the most versus least deprived IMD deciles (ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·59–1·61). The ratio was greater when income deciles were compared (1·69, 1·68–1·71) and smaller when analysis was by education (1·59, 1·58–1·60), IDACI (1·52, 1·51–1·53), and living environment (1·01, 1·00–1·02). The ratio was lower for admissions for chronic conditions (IMD 1·18, 1·16–1·20). Inequalities were largest when analysis was by income decile (1·25, 1·22–1·27). In the household-level analyses, inequalities in fair or poor, self or parent-reported health were seen when comparing lowest versus highest income quintiles (12·2% vs 3·9; ratio 3·12, 1·99–5·87), not working versus being employed (14·1 vs 6·1; 2·30, 1·68–3·03), and most versus least deprived IMD quintiles (9·8 vs 6·5; 1·49, 1·05–2·21). For long-standing illness, the equivalent data were: income (22·0 vs 11·0; 1·99, 1·50–2·77), employment (23·6 vs 15·8; 1·50, 1·21–1·81), and IMD (18·9 vs 17·2; 1·10, 0·88–1·39). Interpretation Although some important aspects of health such as use of primary care and community services are not included, this study shows that child poverty measures differ significantly in their association with key indicators of population health and health-care use. Of the deprivation measures studied here, hospital admissions were most strongly associated with income inequality. Self-reported health outcomes were also more strongly linked to household income than area-level IMD. Funding None.
subject
0Children
1Health aspects
2Internal Medicine
3Observational studies
4Poverty
issn
00140-6736
11474-547X
fulltexttrue
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2016
recordtypearticle
recordideNqFkl1rFDEYhQdRcK3-BCXgjcJOTWYyX14oS6kfUPBCBe9CJnmzmzqbbPNmVuZ39A83-4FtpSCBhBzOeRJeTpa9ZPSUUVa_-04Zp3ndlPUbVr8ti6Lt8u5RNmO84XnFm1-Ps9lfy9PsGeIlpZTXtJpl1wtEr6yM1jskPcQ_AI6sQeIYAIk3RK3soMnGbyHEaU5WIIe4ypUMQEaEOZFOH0Xix6j8GvA98T1C2O6pciAYRz3tWO6oDBMJsEkPgItJ2gI5d8vB4opoGeXz7ImRA8KL43mS_fx0_uPsS37x7fPXs8VFrkpWsLzoQTdta8CY0hS06mUleU9LVbbU1D1wUGVXQa1kT4te61p3hhdVRWsNnWxpeZK9PnA3wV-NgFFc-jGk76FgLU_Dajlnt66lHEBYZ3wMUq0tKrHgTdHStq2a5Dp9wJWWhrVV3oGxSb8XePVAQNw1zO8Y-hGtA0wb2uUq4lKOiPd51cGugkcMYMQm2LUMk2BU7Goi9jURuw6IdNvXRHQp9_GQgzTprYUgUFlwCrQNoKLQ3v6X8OEfghqss0oOv2ECvJ2pwELQA2THYPWe0JU3-STaKw
startdate2016
enddate2016
creator
0Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
1Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB
2de Sa, Joia, MBBS
3Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
general
0Elsevier Ltd
1Elsevier B.V
2Elsevier Limited
scope
0AAYXX
1CITATION
2BKMMT
3BSHEE
40TT
50TZ
60U~
73V.
87QL
97QP
107RV
117TK
127U7
137U9
147X7
157XB
1688A
1788C
1888E
1988G
2088I
218AF
228AO
238C1
248C2
258FE
268FH
278FI
288FJ
298FK
308G5
31ABUWG
32AN0
33ASE
34AZQEC
35BBNVY
36BEC
37BENPR
38BHPHI
39C1K
40DWQXO
41FPQ
42FYUFA
43GHDGH
44GNUQQ
45GUQSH
46H94
47HCIFZ
48K6X
49K9-
50K9.
51KB0
52KB~
53LK8
54M0R
55M0S
56M0T
57M1P
58M2M
59M2O
60M2P
61M7N
62M7P
63MBDVC
64NAPCQ
65PQEST
66PQQKQ
67PQUKI
68Q9U
69S0X
sort
creationdate2016
titleAssociations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data
authorHargreaves, Dougal S, Dr ; Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB ; de Sa, Joia, MBBS ; Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
facets
frbrtype5
frbrgroupidcdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3121-2bed788feff3f205ba5a4b03c380f6be4ec395e6cab02bdd6d9f425506de9a803
rsrctypearticles
prefilterarticles
languageeng
creationdate2016
topic
0Children
1Health aspects
2Internal Medicine
3Observational studies
4Poverty
toplevel
0peer_reviewed
1online_resources
creatorcontrib
0Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
1Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB
2de Sa, Joia, MBBS
3Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
collection
0CrossRef
1Gale General OneFile (A&I only)
2Academic OneFile (A&I only)
3News PRO
4Pharma and Biotech Premium PRO
5Global News & ABI/Inform Professional
6ProQuest Central (Corporate)
7Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)
8Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts
9Nursing & Allied Health Database
10Neurosciences Abstracts
11Toxicology Abstracts
12Virology and AIDS Abstracts
13Health & Medical Collection
14ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
15Biology Database (Alumni Edition)
16Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)
17Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
18Psychology Database (Alumni)
19Science Database (Alumni Edition)
20STEM Database
21ProQuest Pharma Collection
22Public Health Database
23Lancet Titles
24ProQuest SciTech Collection
25ProQuest Natural Science Collection
26Hospital Premium Collection
27Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
28ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
29Research Library (Alumni Edition)
30ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
31British Nursing Database
32British Nursing Index
33ProQuest Central Essentials
34Biological Science Collection
35eLibrary
36ProQuest Central
37Natural Science Collection
38Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management
39ProQuest Central Korea
40British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)
41Health Research Premium Collection
42Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
43ProQuest Central Student
44Research Library Prep
45AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts
46SciTech Premium Collection
47British Nursing Index
48Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)
49ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
50Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)
51ProQuest Newsstand Professional
52ProQuest Biological Science Collection
53Consumer Health Database
54Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)
55Healthcare Administration Database
56Medical Database
57Psychology Database
58Research Library
59Science Database
60Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)
61Biological Science Database
62Research Library (Corporate)
63Nursing & Allied Health Premium
64ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
65ProQuest One Academic
66ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
67ProQuest Central Basic
68SIRS Editorial
jtitleThe Lancet (British edition)
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextfulltext
addata
au
0Hargreaves, Dougal S, Dr
1Pitchforth, Jacqueline M, MBChB
2de Sa, Joia, MBBS
3Cheung, C Ronny, BMBCh
formatjournal
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
atitleAssociations between measures of child poverty, health-care use, and health outcomes: observational study of nationally representative English data
jtitleThe Lancet (British edition)
date2016
risdate2016
volume388
spageS53
epageS53
pagesS53-S53
issn0140-6736
eissn1474-547X
abstractAbstract Background The UK Government has recently proposed the abolition of income-based measures of child poverty in favour of environmental, educational, and employment measures of deprivation. We aimed to study how strongly these proposed measures are associated with health outcomes among children and young people compared with a relative income measure. Methods With data from Hospital Episode Statistics for 2013–14 (n=16·4 million), we compared inequalities in inpatient admissions of children and young people aged 0–24 years per thousand (total and chronic conditions) using five deprivation measures (deciles of area-based measures: index of multiple deprivation [IMD], income, index of income deprivation affecting children [IDACI], education, living environment). With data from Health Survey for England for 2014 (n=3085), we compared inequalities in general health and long-standing illness reported by an individual, parent, or carer using equivalised household income quintiles, IMD quintiles, and whether the household reference person was employed (n=2417, 78·3%); not working (397, 12·9%); or retired, long-term sick, or other (274, 8·9%). The ratios of hospital admission rates and weighted prevalence of poor self-reported health were compared between the most and least deprived groups within each measure. Findings Total admission rates were higher among the most versus least deprived IMD deciles (ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·59–1·61). The ratio was greater when income deciles were compared (1·69, 1·68–1·71) and smaller when analysis was by education (1·59, 1·58–1·60), IDACI (1·52, 1·51–1·53), and living environment (1·01, 1·00–1·02). The ratio was lower for admissions for chronic conditions (IMD 1·18, 1·16–1·20). Inequalities were largest when analysis was by income decile (1·25, 1·22–1·27). In the household-level analyses, inequalities in fair or poor, self or parent-reported health were seen when comparing lowest versus highest income quintiles (12·2% vs 3·9; ratio 3·12, 1·99–5·87), not working versus being employed (14·1 vs 6·1; 2·30, 1·68–3·03), and most versus least deprived IMD quintiles (9·8 vs 6·5; 1·49, 1·05–2·21). For long-standing illness, the equivalent data were: income (22·0 vs 11·0; 1·99, 1·50–2·77), employment (23·6 vs 15·8; 1·50, 1·21–1·81), and IMD (18·9 vs 17·2; 1·10, 0·88–1·39). Interpretation Although some important aspects of health such as use of primary care and community services are not included, this study shows that child poverty measures differ significantly in their association with key indicators of population health and health-care use. Of the deprivation measures studied here, hospital admissions were most strongly associated with income inequality. Self-reported health outcomes were also more strongly linked to household income than area-level IMD. Funding None.
copLondon
pubElsevier Ltd
doi10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32289-9