Articlebronze2005

Is There a Biomedical Explanation for Socioeconomic Differences in Incident Mobility Limitation?

Annemarie Koster · Brenda W.J.H. Penninx · Hans Bosma · Gertrudis I. J. M. Kempen · Tamara B. Harris · Anne B. Newman +5 more

71 citations0/0 files storedThe Journals of Gerontology Series A

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Health disparities and outcomes Aging, Health, and Disability Frailty in Older Adults

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The association between low socioeconomic status and poor physical functioning has been well described; biomedical factors may play an important role in explaining these differences. This study examines the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation in well-functioning older adults, and seeks to determine whether this link could be explained by biomedical factors. METHODS: Data were obtained from 3066 men and women, aged 70--79 years from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Memphis, Tennessee participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (Health ABC) study. Three indicators of socioeconomic status were used: education, income, and ownership of financial assets. Mobility limitation was defined as reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile or climbing 10 steps during two consecutive semiannual assessments over 4.5 years. Biomedical factors included a wide range of diseases (e.g., heart and cerebrovascular disease) and biological risk factors (e.g. hypertension, poor pulmonary function, and high serum levels of inflammatory markers). RESULTS: Adjusted hazard ratios of incident mobility limitation were significantly higher in those persons with low education, low income, and few assets. Hazard ratios ranged from 1.66 to 2.80 in the lowest socioeconomic groups. Additional adjustment for biomedical factors reduced the hazard ratios by an average of 41% for education, 17% for income, and 29% for assets. CONCLUSION: Biomedical factors can account for some of the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation. However, to reduce physical disabilities and, in particular, the socioeconomic differences therein, it may not be sufficient to solely intervene upon biological risk factors and risks of diseases.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 71 citations exist upstream.

References

1994Socioeconomic status and health: The challenge of the gradient.1994Socioeconomic status and health: The challenge of the gradient.1993Socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular disease: a review of the literature.1999Socioeconomic Status and Health: What We Know and What We Don't 1984INEQUALITIES IN DEATH—SPECIFIC EXPLANATIONS OF A GENERAL PATTERN?1997Contribution of job control and other risk factors to social variations in coronary heart disease incidence 2002Epidemiologic evidence for the relation between socioeconomic status and depression, obesity, and diabetes 2002Socioeconomic Status And Health

Cited by

2007Educational differences in mobility: the contribution of physical workload, obesity, smoking and chronic conditions 2011Racial Differences in Mortality in Older Adults: Factors Beyond Socioeconomic Status 2010Do biological measures mediate the relationship between education and health: A comparative study 2010Social Inequality in Onset of Mobility Disability Among Older Danes: The Mediation Effect of Social Relations 2016

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.