Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35027043›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

What's important to you? Socioeconomic inequalities in the perceived importance of health compared to other life domains.

Sanne E Verra, Maartje P Poelman, Andrea L Mudd, Emely de Vet, Sofie van Rongen, John de Wit, Carlijn B M Kamphuis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Sanne E VerraDepartment of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands. s.e.verra@uu.nl.
Maartje P PoelmanChair group Consumption and Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Andrea L MuddDepartment of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Emely de VetChair group Consumption and Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Sofie van RongenChair group Consumption and Healthy Lifestyles, Wageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
John de WitDepartment of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Carlijn B M KamphuisDepartment of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPressing issues, like financial concerns, may outweigh the importance people attach to health. This study tested whether health, compared to other life domains, was considered more important by people in high versus low socioeconomic positions, with future focus and financial strain as potential explanatory factors.

methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2019 among N=1,330 Dutch adults. Participants rated the importance of two health-related domains (not being ill, living a long life) and seven other life domains (e.g., work, family) on a five-point scale. A latent class analysis grouped participants in classes with similar patterns of importance ratings. Differences in class membership according to socioeconomic position (indicated by income and education) were examined using structural equation modelling, with future focus and financial strain as mediators.

resultsThree classes were identified, which were defined as: neutralists, who found all domains neutral or unimportant (3.5% of the sample); hedonists, who found most domains important except living a long life, work, and religion (36.2%); and maximalists, who found nearly all domains important, including both health domains (60.3%). Of the neutralists, 38% considered not being ill important, and 30% considered living a long life important. For hedonists, this was 92% and 39%, respectively, and for maximalists this was 99% and 87%, respectively. Compared to belonging to the maximalists class, a low income predicted belonging to the neutralists, and a higher educational level and unemployment predicted belonging to the hedonists. No mediation pathways via future focus or financial strain were found.

conclusionsLower income groups were less likely to consider not being ill important. Those without paid employment and those with a higher educational level were less likely to consider living a long life important. Neither future focus nor financial strain explained these inequalities. Future research should investigate socioeconomic differences in conceptualisations of health, and if inequalities in the perceived importance of health are associated with inequalities in health. To support individuals dealing with challenging circumstances in daily life, health-promoting interventions could align to the life domains perceived important to reach their target group and to prevent widening socioeconomic health inequalities.

Indexed as

IncomeUnemploymentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEmploymentHumansPovertySocial ClassSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID35027043
PMCPMC8759269

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.