ArticleBMC public health2025
Changes over time in social inequality in adult self-rated health: the case of Norway 2002-2019.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFindings on how social inequality in self-rated health (SRH) has changed over time are not uniform. To inform public health policies aimed at reducing unwarranted social differences in health, we examine time trends in relative and absolute associations between SRH and three different socioeconomic measures using Norway as a case.
methodsSix rounds (2002–2019) of repeated national, cross-sectional, data from Statistics Norway’s Survey on Living Conditions (response rates 57–70%) were linked to register information on socioeconomic measures (education, household income and occupation). A set of logistic regression models of good SRH (GSRH) with blockwise inclusion of predictors were employed to 29,012 adults (25–66 years). Absolute and relative differences in GSRH across education, income and occupation were calculated across survey years, net of other sociodemographic characteristics and risk factors.
resultsRegardless of model, the probability of reporting GSRH was high (around 80%) across sex for most years. Considering only statistically significant results, men with the short education had a 2-4% points lower probability of GSRH than men with long education, across years. The time trend in income differences was also stable, albeit the difference between the highest and lowest quintile was larger (around 7% points). Those outside the labor force were substantially less likely (23% points) to report GSRH compared to men in high skilled white-collar occupations. Among women, GSRH was 6% points lower among those with short compared to long education, and 8% points lower in the 1st compared to the 5th income quintile. Being outside the labour force was associated with a 28% points lower probability of GSRH among women. Otherwise, there were minor differences in GSRH between occupational groups. On a relative scale (percent difference), differences between socioeconomic groups were slightly more pronounced, but with similar trends for men and women.
conclusionsIrrespective of socioeconomic measure, social inequalities in SRH have remained remarkably stable over time across socioeconomic measures in Norway, in both absolute and relative terms. The national strategy may have worked to prevent increasing social inequalities in health, but system changes and further actions appear warranted to reduce existing differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.