↓ Skip to main content

Gender and the double burden of economic and social disadvantages on healthy eating: cross-sectional study of older adults in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Gender and the double burden of economic and social disadvantages on healthy eating: cross-sectional study of older adults in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1895-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annalijn I. Conklin, Nita G. Forouhi, Paul Surtees, Nicholas J. Wareham, Pablo Monsivais

Abstract

Multiple economic factors and social relationships determine dietary behaviours, but the inter-relations between determinants is unknown. Whether women and men differ in the vulnerability to, and impact of, combined disadvantages is also unclear. We examined associations between diverse combinations of economic resources and social relationships, and healthy eating in British older women and men. Our sample comprised 9,580 over-50s (47 % of over-50 respondents) in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort study. We examined six economic factors (education, social class, home-ownership, money for needs, frequency of insufficient money for food/clothing, paying bills) and three social relationships (marital status, living arrangement and friend contact), independently and in combination, in relation to fruit variety and vegetable variety. We analysed gender-specific associations using multivariable linear regression with interaction terms. Lower social class, lower education, and difficulty paying bills were associated with lower fruit and vegetable variety in both genders, independent of social relationships. All social relationships were independently associated with fruit variety in men and with vegetable variety in both genders. Substantially lower variety was found for all combinations of low economic resources and lack of social relationship than for either measure alone, with men faring worse in the majority of combined disadvantages. For example, the difference in vegetable variety for men reporting low social class and non-married was much greater (β -4.1, [-4.8, -3.4]), than the independent association of low social class (β -1.5, [-1.8,-1.2]), or non-married (β -1.8, [-2.3,-1.3]). Variety was also lower among men with high economic resources but non-married or lone-living. A double burden of low economic resources and lack of social relationships suggested they are unique joint determinants, particularly in older men, and that public health efforts to improve healthy eating would offer most benefit to older adults with intersecting economic and social disadvantages.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 18 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Psychology 4 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 23 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2018.
All research outputs
#6,587,986
of 24,187,394 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,826
of 15,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,464
of 268,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#107
of 272 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,187,394 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,934 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 272 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.