Courtney McNamara

The socioeconomic distribution of non-communicable diseases in Europe: findings from the European Social Survey (2014) special module on the social determinants of health

Background: A range of non‐communicable diseases (NCDs) has been found to follow a social pattern whereby socioeconomic status predicts either a higher or lower risk of disease. Comprehensive evidence on the socioeconomic distribution of NCDs across Europe, however, has been limited. Methods: Using cross‐sectional 2014 European Social Survey data from 20 countries, this paper examines socioeconomic inequalities in 14 self‐reported NCDs separately for women and men: heart/circulatory problems, high blood pressure, back pain, arm/hand pain, foot/leg pain, allergies, breathing problems, stomach/digestion problems, skin conditions, diabetes, severe headaches, cancer, obesity and depression. Using education to measure socioeconomic status, age‐controlled adjusted risk ratios were calculated and separately compared a lower and medium education group with a high education group. Results: At the pooled European level, a social gradient in health was observed for 10 NCDs: depression, diabetes, obesity, heart/circulation problems, hand/arm pain, high blood pressure, breathing problems, severe headaches, foot/leg pain and cancer. An inverse social gradient was observed for allergies. Social gradients were observed among both genders, but a greater number of inequalities were observed among women. Country‐specific analyses show that inequalities in NCDs are present everywhere across Europe and that inequalities exist to different extents for each of the conditions. Conclusion: This study provides the most up‐to‐date overview of socioeconomic inequalities for a large number of NCDs across 20 European countries for both women and men. Future investigations should further consider the diseases, and their associated determinants, for which socioeconomic differences are the greatest.

The effects of public health policies on population health and health inequalities in European welfare states: protocol for an umbrella review

BackgroundThe welfare state is potentially an important macro-level determinant of health that also moderates the extent, and impact, of socio-economic inequalities in exposure to the social determinants of health. The welfare state has three main policy domains: health care, social policy (e.g. social transfers and education) and public health policy. This is the protocol for an umbrella review to examine the latter; its aim is to assess how European welfare states influence the social determinants of health inequalities institutionally through public health policies.Methods/designA systematic review methodology will be used to identify systematic reviews from high-income countries (including additional EU-28 members) that describe the health and health equity effects of upstream public health interventions. Interventions will focus on primary and secondary prevention policies including fiscal measures, regulation, education, preventative treatment and screening across ten public health domains (tobacco; alcohol; food and nutrition; reproductive health services; the control of infectious diseases; screening; mental health; road traffic injuries; air, land and water pollution; and workplace regulations). Twenty databases will be searched using a pre-determined search strategy to evaluate population-level public health interventions.DiscussionUnderstanding the impact of specific public health policy interventions will help to establish causality in terms of the effects of welfare states on population health and health inequalities. The review will document contextual information on how population-level public health interventions are organised, implemented and delivered. This information can be used to identify effective interventions that could be implemented to reduce health inequalities between and within European countries.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016025283

Trade liberalization and social determinants of health: A state of the literature review

The health impacts of trade liberalization are often described in relation to access to medicines, changing dietary patterns, tobacco use and alcohol consumption. The impacts of trade liberalization on the social determinants of health (SDH), are by contrast, less well known. Missing is an account of how liberalizing processes identified across different research areas relate to each other and how the association between trade liberalization and health is conceptualized within each of them, especially with reference to SDH. This paper presents a systematic review which provides a more complete picture of the pathways between trade liberalization and health, with special attention to SDH pathways. This picture captures the interrelationships between different areas of investigation, along with current limitations of our understanding and recommendations for future research.

Trade, Labour Markets and Health

Previous analyses indicate that there are a number of potentially serious health risks associated with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The objective of this work is to provide further insight into the potential health impacts of the TPP by investigating labour market pathways. The impact of the TPP on employment and working conditions is a major point of contention in broader public debates. In public health literature, these factors are considered fundamental determinants of health, yet they are rarely addressed in analyses of trade and investment agreements. We therefore undertake a prospective policy analysis of the TPP through a content analysis of the agreement’s Labour Chapter. Provisions of the Chapter are analyzed with reference to the health policy triangle and four main areas through which labour markets influence health: power relations, social policies, employment conditions and working conditions. Findings indicate that implementation of the TPP can have important impacts on health through labour market pathways. While the Labour Chapter is being presented by proponents of the agreement as a vehicle for improvement in labour standards, we find little evidence to support this view. Instead, we find several ways the TPP may weaken employment relations to the detriment of health.

Exploring the differences in general practitioner and health care specialist utilization according to education, occupation, income and social networks across Europe: findings from the European social survey (2014) special module on the social determinants of health.

Background: Low socioeconomic position (SEP) tends to be linked to higher use of general practitioners (GPs), while the use of health care specialists is more common in higher SEPs. Despite extensive literature in this area, previous studies have, however, only studied health care use by income or education. The aim of this study is, therefore, to examine inequalities in GP and health care specialist use by four social markers that may be linked to health care utilization (educational level, occupational status, level of financial strain and size and frequency of social networks) across 20 European countries and Israel. Methods: Logistic regression models were employed using data from the seventh round of the European Social Survey; this study focused upon people aged 25–75 years, across 21 countries. Health care utilization was measured according to self‐reported use of GP or specialist care within 12 months. Analyses tested four social markers: income (financial strain), occupational status, education and social networks. Results: We observed a cross‐national tendency that countries with higher or equal probability of GP utilization by lower SEP groups had a more consistent probability of specialist use among high SEP groups. Moreover, countries with inequalities in GP use in favour of high SEP groups had comparable levels of inequalities in specialist care utilization. This was the case for three social markers (education, occupational class and social networks), while the pattern was less pronounced for income (financial strain). Conclusion: There are significant inequalities associated with GP and specialist health care use across Europe—with higher SEP groups more likely to use health care specialists, compared with lower SEP groups. In the context of health care specialist use, education and occupation appear to be particularly important factors.

The social determinants of inequalities in self-reported health in Europe: findings from the European social survey (2014) special module on the social determinants of health

Background: Health inequalities persist between and within European countries. Such inequalities are usually explained by health behaviours and according to the conditions in which people work and live. However, little is known about the relative contribution of these factors to health inequalities in European countries. This paper aims to investigate the independent and joint contribution of a comprehensive set of behavioural, occupational and living conditions factors in explaining social inequalities in self‐rated health (SRH). Method: Data from 21 countries was obtained from the 2014 European Social Survey and examined for respondents aged 25–75. Adjusted rate differences (ARD) and adjusted rate risks (ARR), generated from binary logistic regression models, were used to measure health inequalities in SRH and the contribution of behavioural, occupational and living conditions factors. Result: Absolute and relative inequalities in SRH were found in all countries and the magnitude of socio‐economic inequalities varied considerably between countries. While factors were found to differentially contribute to the explanation of educational inequalities in different European countries, occupational and living conditions factors emerged as the leading causes of inequalities across most of the countries, contributing both independently and jointly with behavioural factors. Conclusion: The observed shared effects of different factors to health inequalities points to the interdependent nature of occupational, behavioural and living conditions factors. Tackling health inequalities should be a concentred effort that goes beyond interventions focused on single factors.

Is trade policy a missing piece to a public health puzzle

Health outcomes vary across different welfare state arrangements (Bergqvist et al., 2013). Strikingly, while overall health is typically better in social democratic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden), these countries do not always have the smallest health inequalities. A range of potential explanations has been put forth to explain this ‘Nordic Paradox’ (Bambra, 2011a). A commonly invoked one is that the welfare state itself plays a major role in determining health inequalities as welfare states both distribute major determinants of health (such as income, education, and employment) and mediate their health impact (Beckfield et al., 2015). Global processes have also been acknowledged as important influences on these broader, social determinants of health (Blouin et al., 2009; McNamara, 2017), but little is known about how global processes interact with welfare state policies to influence health inequalities (see also Huijts and McNamara, 2018). It has been found that social policies can both moderate the health impact of trade liberalization and influence the type of health-related pathways resulting from it (McNamara, 2015), but we lack studies on whether global processes might influence how social policies shape health. This is the focus of this article which specifically asks whether the persistence of health inequalities in Nordic states can be partly seen as a failure of welfare states to compensate for the impacts of greater global market integration. Two trade-related mechanisms that may in part explain the Nordic paradox are explored with the aim of laying the ground work for a more in-depth investigation and bringing a global perspective into the fold of health inequality research.

Regional inequalities in self-reported conditions and non-communicable diseases in European countries: Findings from the European Social Survey (2014) special module on the social determinants of health

Background: Within the European Union (EU), substantial efforts are being made to achieve economic and social cohesion, and the reduction of health inequalities between EU regions is integral to this process. This paper is the first to examine how self‐reported conditions and non‐communicable diseases (NCDs) vary spatially between and within countries. Methods: Using 2014 European Social Survey (ESS) data from 20 countries, this paper examines how regional inequalities in self‐reported conditions and NCDs vary for men and women in 174 regions (levels 1 and 2 Nomenclature of Statistical Territorial Units, ‘NUTS’). We document absolute and relative inequalities across Europe in the prevalence of eight conditions: general health, overweight/obesity, mental health, heart or circulation problems, high blood pressure, back, neck, muscular or joint pain, diabetes and cancer. Results: There is considerable inequality in self‐reported conditions and NCDs between the regions of Europe, with rates highest in the regions of continental Europe, some Scandinavian regions and parts of the UK and lowest around regions bordering the Alps, in Ireland and France. However, for mental health and cancer, rates are highest in regions of Eastern European and lowest in some Nordic regions, Ireland and isolated regions in continental Europe. There are also widespread and consistent absolute and relative regional inequalities in all conditions within countries. These are largest in France, Germany and the UK, and smallest in Denmark, Sweden and Norway. There were higher inequalities amongst women. Conclusion: Using newly available harmonized morbidity data from across Europe, this paper shows that there are considerable regional inequalities within and between European countries in the distribution of self‐reported conditions and NCDs.

The contribution of housing and neighbourhood conditions to educational inequalities in non-communicable diseases in Europe: findings from the European Social Survey (2014) special module on the social determinants of health

Background: Social gradients have been found across European populations, where less affluent groups are more often affected by poor housing and neighbourhood conditions. While poor housing and neighbourhood quality have been associated with a range of non‐communicable diseases (NCDs), these conditions have rarely been applied to the examination of socioeconomic differences in NCDs. This study therefore asks ‘to what extent does adjusting for poor housing and neighbourhood conditions reduce inequalities in NCDs among men and women in Europe’? Methods: Our analysis used pooled‐data from 20 European countries for women (n= 12 794) and men (n= 11 974), aged 25–75, from round 7 of the European Social Survey. Fourteen NCDs were investigated: heart/circulatory problems, high blood pressure, back pain, arm/hand pain, foot/leg pain, allergies, breathing problems, stomach/digestion problems, skin conditions, diabetes, severe headaches, cancer, obesity and depression. We used binary logistic regression models, stratified by gender, and adjusted rate ratios to examine whether educational inequalities in NCDs were reduced after controlling for poor housing and neighbourhood quality. Results: Overall, we find that adjusting for poor housing and neighbourhood quality reduces inequalities in NCDs. While reductions were relatively small for some NCDs–for high blood pressure, reductions were found in the range of 0–4.27% among women—for other conditions reductions were more considerable. Controlling for both housing and neighbourhood conditions for example, reduced inequalities by 16–24% for severe headaches and 14–30% for breathing problems. Conclusions: Social gradients in poor housing and neighbourhood quality could be an important contributor to educational inequalities in some NCDs.

Financial difficulties in childhood and adult depression in Europe

Background: Financial difficulties in childhood may be associated with immediate and long‐term consequences for mental health. The aim of the current paper is to investigate the association between childhood financial difficulties and adult depression, and assess the relative contribution of financial difficulties in childhood to symptoms of adult depression across different age groups. Methods: Using three age cohorts (25–40, 41–59, 60–75) from 19 countries in the European Social Survey Round 7 (N =18 401), multi‐level and country‐wise OLS regression analyses were used to investigate the association between financial difficulties in childhood and adult depression, while adjusting for age, education, gender, highest education in family, level of family conflict, number of social meetings and marital status. Results: Financial difficulties in childhood was found to be influential predictors of depression scores for 25–40 year olds in 10 out of 19 countries in fully adjusted models. In older participants, depression scores were mostly influenced by frequency of social meetings and marital status. There was great variation in the pattern of influential risk factors across countries, and the predicted effect childhood financial difficulties had on adult depression scores. Conclusion: Childhood financial difficulties as predictors of depression appear to, by themselves, exert the strongest influence in younger adults. There was, however, large variation between countries in the magnitude of associated risk, and in the pattern of risk factors contributing to adult depression, which underscores the need to account for country‐level factors when aiming to gain knowledge about mental health.