Impact of socioeconomic status and subjective social class on overall and health-related quality of life.
Impact of socioeconomic status and subjective social class on overall and health-related quality of life.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-015-2014-9
复制
发表时间：
2015-08-15
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Park EC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kim JH;Park EC
我们的目的是调查社会经济地位和主观社会阶层对健康相关生活质量（HRQOL）和总体生活质量（QOL）的影响。我们使用来自韩国老龄化纵向研究（KLoSA）的8250个人的数据进行了纵向分析。我们在基线（2009年）分析了不同社会经济阶层（高、中、低家庭收入和教育水平）和主观社会阶层（高、中、低）个体的HRQOL和QOL之间的差异。家庭收入低、主观社会阶层低的个体出现HRQOL和QOL评分差异的概率最高（B: 4.796, P < 0.0001），家庭收入高、主观社会阶层高的个体出现HRQOL和QOL评分差异的概率最低（B:−3.625,P = 0.000）。当教育被用作社会经济地位的代表时，也出现了类似的趋势。综上所述，家庭收入/主观社会阶层和教育程度/主观社会阶层对生活质量和HRQOL的差异程度都有影响。因此，在设计干预措施时，应通过使用多维测量工具来考虑社会经济不平等。
Our objective was to investigate the impact of socioeconomic status and subjective social class on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) vs. overall quality of life (QOL). We performed a longitudinal analysis using data regarding 8250 individuals drawn from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Aging (KLoSA). We analyzed differences between HRQOL and QOL in individuals of various socioeconomic strata (high, middle, or low household income and education levels) and subjective social classes (high, middle, or low) at baseline (2009). Individuals with low household incomes and of low subjective social class had the highest probability of reporting discrepant HRQOL and QOL scores (B: 4.796; P < 0.0001), whereas individuals with high household incomes and high subjective social class had the lowest probability of discrepant HRQOL and QOL scores (B: −3.625; P = 0.000). Similar trends were seen when education was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status. In conclusion, both household income/subjective social class and education/subjective social class were found to have an impact on the degree of divergence between QOL and HRQOL. Therefore, in designing interventions, socioeconomic inequalities should be taken into account through the use of multi-dimensional measurement tools.