Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30105754›Full record

ArticleSociology of health & illness2018

Social practice, plural lifestyles and health inequalities in the United Kingdom.

Jens Kandt

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. The Rise of Gastrointestinal Cancers as a Global Phenomenon: Unhealthy Behavior or Progress?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jens KandtThe Bartlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GB

Funding

UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) ES/J500185/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Persistent health inequalities pose a continued research and policy challenge in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Current approaches to health research and promotion are predicated on a distinction between wider, social structural causes and individual, health-related behaviours often conceived of as lifestyle choices. Drawing on Bourdieu's theory of social practice, this paper develops an integrated perspective by observing associations between health and structured lifestyle practices. Using the UK Understanding Society household survey, a taxonomy of eight lifestyle clusters is identified, which exhibit significant health inequalities on a number of indicators. But the plurality of practices and subjective orientations inherent in the taxonomy reveals a finer, more complex differentiation of the social gradient in health. In addition, lifestyle appears to at least in parts mediate the relationship between social, material conditions and health. A feature of the taxonomy is that it admits a relational and contextual apprehension of health-relevant, behavioural aspects within a more holistic notion of lifestyles. Based on this view, strategic approaches can be developed that respond to group-specific situations and pathways and their varying roots in upstream or downstream domains of policy.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthHealth BehaviorHealth Status DisparitiesLife StyleAdultAgedChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomcluster analysishealth inequalitieshealth-related behaviourslifestylessocial practice

Identifiers

PMID30105754
PMCPMC6849800
OpenAlexW2887706840

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.