Subjective socioeconomic status: an alternative to objective socioeconomic status.
Subjective socioeconomic status: an alternative to objective socioeconomic status.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12874-023-01890-z
复制
发表时间：
2023-03-28
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
社会经济地位的主观“阶梯”测量(SES)是一种易于管理的工具，要求受访者对自己的社会经济地位进行评级，让他们评估自己的物质资源，并确定其相对于所在社区的位置。在这里，我们试图将麦克阿瑟主观社会地位量表与WAMI进行比较，后者是一种客观的社会经济地位衡量标准，包括水和卫生设施、资产所有权、教育和收入等数据。利用对秘鲁利马595名结核病患者的研究，我们使用加权Kappa评分和Spearman等级相关系数比较了麦克阿瑟阶梯评分和WAMI评分。我们确定了超出第95个百分位数的离群值，并通过重新测试参与者的子集来评估分数之间不一致的持久性。然后，我们使用Akaike信息标准(AIC)比较Logistic回归模型的预测性，评估两种SES评分系统与哮喘病史之间的关联。麦克阿瑟阶梯与WAMI评分的相关系数为0.37，加权Kappa值为0.26。相关系数相差不到0.04，Kappa在0.26~0.34之间，表明符合较好。当我们用重测分数取代最初的麦克阿瑟阶梯分数时，两个分数之间存在分歧的个体数量从21个减少到10个，相关系数和加权Kappa都增加了至少0.03。最后，我们发现，当我们将WAMI和麦克阿瑟阶梯评分分为三组时，两组都与哮喘史和有效大小和AICS呈线性趋势关联，分别相差不到15%和2分。我们的发现表明，麦克阿瑟阶梯和WAMI分数之间的一致性很好。当进一步将SES分为3-5类时，两种SES测量之间的一致性增加，这是流行病学研究中经常使用的SES形式。在预测社会经济敏感的健康结果方面，麦克阿瑟评分也表现出与WAMI类似的表现。研究人员应考虑将主观SES工具作为测量SES的替代方法，特别是在数据收集成为负担的大型健康研究中。网上版载有补充材料，可在10.1186/s12874-023-01890-z查阅。
Subjective “ladder” measurements of socio-economic status (SES) are easy-to-administer tools that ask respondents to rate their own SES, allowing them to evaluate their own material resources and determine where it places them relative to their community. Here, we sought to compare the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social status to the WAMI, an objective measure of SES that includes data on water and sanitation, asset ownership, education, and income. Leveraging a study of 595 tuberculosis patients in Lima, Peru, we compared the MacArthur ladder score to the WAMI score using weighted Kappa scores and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. We identified outliers that fell outside the 95th percentile and assessed the durability of the inconsistencies between scores by re-testing a subset of participants. We then used Akaike information criterion (AIC) to compare the predictability of logistic regression models evaluating the association between the two SES scoring systems and history of asthma. The correlation coefficient between the MacArthur ladder and WAMI scores was 0.37 and the weighted Kappa was 0.26. The correlation coefficients differed by less than 0.04 and the Kappa ranged from 0.26 to 0.34, indicating fair agreement. When we replaced the initial MacArthur ladder scores with retest scores, the number of individuals with disagreements between the two scores decreased from 21 to 10 and the correlation coefficient and weighted Kappa both increased by at least 0.03. Lastly, we found that when we categorized WAMI and MacArthur ladder scores into three groups, both had a linear trend association with history of asthma with effect sizes and AICs that differed by less than 15% and 2 points, respectively. Our findings demonstrated fair agreement between the MacArthur ladder and WAMI scores. The agreement between the two SES measurements increased when they were further categorized into 3–5 categories, the form in which SES is often used in epidemiologic studies. The MacArthur score also performed similarly to WAMI in predicting a socio-economically sensitive health outcome. Researchers should consider subjective SES tools as an alternative method for measuring SES, particularly in large health studies where data collection is a burden. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-023-01890-z.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.5539/gjhs.v13n4p86
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
Global journal of health science
影响因子：
--
作者：
Hanna DR;Campbell JA;Walker RJ;Dawson AZ;Egede LE
通讯作者：
Egede LE
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
D'Uva, Teresa Bago;Van Doorslaer, Eddy;O'Donnell, Owen
通讯作者：
O'Donnell, Owen
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Cundiff, Jenny M.;Smith, TimothyW.;Berg, Cynthia A.
通讯作者：
Berg, Cynthia A.
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
FLEISS, JL;COHEN, J
通讯作者：
COHEN, J
影响因子：
6.3
作者：
Homenauth, Esha;Kajeguka, Debora;Kulkarni, Manisha A.
通讯作者：
Kulkarni, Manisha A.