Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29232621›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2018

Timing of poverty in childhood and adolescent health: Evidence from the US and UK.

Michael J Green, Haley Stritzel, Chelsea Smith, Frank Popham, Robert Crosnoe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Childhood Adversity and Telomere Length.Biological research for nursing · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Poverty and intellectual development in childhood.International journal of population data science · 2025
    Article
  9. The effect of childhood socioeconomic status on adult self-rated health by age and race.Longitudinal and life course studies : international journal · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Michael J GreenMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom. Electronic address: michael.green@glasgow.ac.uk.
Haley StritzelDepartment of Sociology and Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, United States.
Chelsea SmithDepartment of Sociology and Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, United States.
Frank PophamMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Robert CrosnoeDepartment of Sociology and Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, United States.

Funding

Population Research CenterR24HD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI HAYWARD, MARK D. · 2002 to 2016
$8.4M
Training Program in Population StudiesT32HD007081 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI Aprile Dawn Benner, Christy L. Erving · 1985 to 2026
$6.8M
Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI MARK D. HAYWARD · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
Chief Scientist Office SPHSU13Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/13NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD042849NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007081
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Childhood poverty is associated with poorer adolescent health and health behaviours, but the importance of the timing of poverty remains unclear. There may be critical or sensitive periods in early life or early adolescence, or poverty may have cumulative effects throughout childhood. Understanding when poverty is most important can support efficient timing of interventions to raise family income or buffer against the effects of low income, but answers may vary across social contexts. The US and the UK are a useful comparison with similar liberal approaches to cash transfers, but very different approaches to healthcare provision. Utilising data from large population studies in the US (n = 9408; born 1979-1996) and UK (n = 1204; born 1991-1997), this study employs a structured life course approach to compare competing hypotheses about the importance of the timing or pattern of childhood exposure to poverty in predicting adolescent health limitations, symptoms of psychiatric distress, and smoking at age 16 (age 15/16 in US). Household income histories identified experience of poverty (measured as <60% of the national median equivalised income for a given year) in early life (ages 0-5), mid-childhood (ages 6-10) and early adolescence (ages 11-15). The Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) compared fit across models with variables representing different life course patterns of exposure to poverty. Adolescent distress was not associated with poverty in either country. In both countries, however, variables representing cumulative or persistent experiences of poverty exhibited optimal fit of all poverty exposure variables in predicting adolescent smoking and health limitations. There was also evidence of an early life sensitive period for smoking in the US. Poverty was more persistent in the US, but associations between poverty and outcomes were consistent across countries. Although poverty can have cumulative effects on health and behaviour, early interventions may offer the best long-term protection.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonHealth Status DisparitiesAdolescentAdolescent HealthChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesMalePovertySmokingStress, PsychologicalTime FactorsAdolescent healthCross-nationalIncomeLife coursePovertySmoking

Identifiers

PMID29232621
PMCPMC5777828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.