Does area-based social capital matter for the health of Australians? A multilevel analysis of self-rated health in Tasmania

BACKGROUND: Material circumstances and collective psychosocial processes have been invoked as potential explanations for socioeconomic inequalities in health; and, linking social capital has been proposed as a way of reconciling these apparently opposing explanations. METHODS: We conducted multilevel logistic regression of self-rated health (fair or poor vs excellent, very good, or good) on 14 495 individuals living within 41 statistical local areas who were respondents to the 1998 Tasmanian Healthy Communities Study. We modelled the effects of area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and social capital (neighbourhood integration, neighbourhood alienation, neighbourhood safety, social trust, trust in public/private institutions, and political participation), and adjusted for the effects of individual characteristics. RESULTS: Area-level socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with poor self-rated health (beta = 0.0937, P < 0.001) an effect that was attenuated, but remained significant, after adjusting for individual characteristics (beta = 0.0419, P < 0.001). Social trust was associated with a reduction in poor self-rated health (beta = -0.0501, p = 0.008) and remained significant when individual characteristics (beta = -0.0398, P = 0.005) were included. Political participation was non-significant in the unadjusted model but became significant when adjusted for individual characteristics (beta = -0.2557, P = 0.045). The effects of social trust and political participation were attenuated and became non-significant when area-level socioeconomic disadvantage was included. CONCLUSION: Area-based socioeconomic disadvantage is a determinant of self-rated health in Tasmania, but we did not find an independent effect of area-level social capital. These findings suggest that in Tasmania investments in improving the material circumstances in which people live are likely to lead to greater improvements in population health than attempts to increase area-level social capital.     

Individual-level analysis of social capital and health: a comparison of Arab and Jewish Israelis

Discrepancies exist in existing research regarding the association between social capital and self-rated health, most of which has been undertaken in the developed world. The aim of this study is first to assess the levels of the various variables describing individual social capital in Jews and Arab residing in Israel, and second to assess the association between individual social capital and self-rated health in these two population groups. The data were obtained from an Israeli health interview survey (knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP)) conducted during 2004-2005, which is based on 3,365 interviews with adult Jews and 985 adult Arabs. Social capital measures included social trust, neighborhood safety, perceived helpfulness, trust in local and national authorities and social support. Data were also obtained on self-rated health and socioeconomic and demographic variables. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that Jews reported higher levels of social trust, perceived helpfulness, trust in authorities, and social support compared to Arabs, after adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic variables. Social contacts, however, were reported more frequently in the Arab population. Neighborhood safety was similar in the two population groups. Among Jews, those reporting higher levels of individual social capital reported better self-rated health after adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic variables. Among Arabs, only those reporting higher levels of social support reported better self-rated health. In Israel, individual levels of social capital seem to be lower in the Arab minority than in the Jewish majority. Individual social capital was associated with better self-rated health mainly in the Jewish population and less so in the Arab population. Social capital factors may be associated with health to a higher extent in affluent populations with relatively high social capital and less so in low social capital and more traditional communities. More research is needed to verify these differences.     

Location, location, location: contextual and compositional health effects of social capital in British Columbia, Canada

After decades of epidemiological exploration into individual-level risk factors for ill health, a recent surge of interest in the health effects of socially patterned attributes of geographically defined 'places' has given the structural side of the agency-structure debate new prominence in population health research. Utilizing two original data sets, one pertaining to features of communities in British Columbia, Canada and the other to characteristics of individuals living in them, this article distinguishes the health effects of socially patterned attributes of communities, including the social capital of communities, from the health effects of characteristics of residents that contribute to social capital, e.g., trust and participation in voluntary associations. Results from multilevel analysis demonstrated that, of three different individual-level measures of health and well-being (and including measures of long-term limiting illness and self-rated health), only a measure of depressive symptoms had variability that could be reasonably attributed to the level of the community. The social capital of communities in the form of the availability of public spaces explained some of this variability, but in the direction contrary to expectations. Overall, location (community of residence) did little to explicate health inequalities in this context. The strongest predictors of health in multivariate and multilevel models were characteristics of individual survey respondents, namely, income, trust in politicians and governments, and trust in other members of the community. Breadth of participation in networks of voluntary association was not significantly related to health in multivariate models.     

A multilevel analysis of social capital and self-rated health: Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey

Social capital is often described as a collective benefit engendered by generalised trust, civic participation, and mutual reciprocity. This feature of communities has been shown to associate with an assortment of health outcomes at several levels of analysis. The current study assesses the evidence for an association between area-level social capital and individual-level subjective health. Respondents participating in waves 8 (1998) and 9 (1999) of the British Household Panel Survey were identified and followed-up 5 years later in wave 13 (2003). Area social capital was measured by two aggregated survey items: social trust and civic participation. Multilevel logistic regression models were fitted to examine the association between area social capital indicators and individual poor self-rated health. Evidence for a protective association with current self-rated health was found for area social trust after controlling for individual characteristics, baseline self-rated health and individual social trust. There was no evidence for an association between area civic participation and self-rated health after adjustment. The findings of this study expand the literature on social capital and health through the use of longitudinal data and multilevel modelling techniques.     

The association between state income inequality and worse health is not confounded by race

BACKGROUND: The relationship between income inequality and health across US states has been challenged recently on grounds that this relationship may be confounded by the effect of racial composition, measured as the proportion of the state's population who are black. METHODS: Using multilevel statistical models, we examined the association between state income inequality and poor self-rated health. The analysis was based on the pooled 1995 and 1997 Current Population Surveys, comprising 201 221 adults nested within 50 US states. RESULTS: Controlling for the individual effects of age, sex, race, marital status, education, income, health insurance coverage, and employment status, we found a significant effect of state income inequality on poor self-rated health. For every 0.05-increase in the Gini coefficient, the odds ratio (OR) of reporting poor health increased by 1.39 (95% CI: 1.26, 1.51). Additionally controlling for the proportion of the state population who are black did not explain away the effect of income inequality (OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.45). While being black at the individual level was associated with poorer self-rated health, no significant relationship was found between poor self-rated health and the proportion of black residents in a state. CONCLUSION: Our finding demonstrates that neither race, at the individual level, nor racial composition, as measured at the state level, explain away the previously reported association between income inequality and poorer health status in the US.     

Self-rated health and trust in low-income Mexican-origin individuals in Texas

The evidence suggests that trust is an important determinant of health. Trust tends to be lower in low-income and minority individuals, who already suffer from worse health. Therefore, it is particularly important to investigate the predictors of trust in disadvantaged individuals. In this article we use multilevel models to investigate the individual and neighborhood predictors of trust in Mexican-Americans living in low-income neighborhoods (defined as census block groups) in Texas. Detailed survey data on 1754 Mexican-origin respondents provided information on self-rated health and individual characteristics including sociodemographic and sociocultural personal characteristics (frequency of association with people of other races/ethnicities, social support, perceived racism, perceived personal opportunity, and religiosity). Neighborhood heterogeneities and socioeconomic status, computed from census data, were supplemented by community social characteristics (collective efficacy and public disorder) obtained from survey data. Trust was a significant predictor of self-rated health in our sample. This study suggests that Mexican-Americans tend to trust more those with whom there is likely to be a personal acquaintance than other Mexican-Americans. Furthermore, while the results of this study support that people tend to trust more those who are like themselves, for Mexican-Americans, the identification of who is more alike is not based exclusively on racial/ethnic identity, but is a complex process based also on linguistic and socioeconomic similarities. In our sample, linguistic fragmentation, but not racial/ethnic diversity nor neighborhood impoverishment, correlated with trust. Ease of communication seemed to be more important than racial/ethnic homogeneity in encouraging interpersonal trust among Mexican-Americans at the neighborhood level. The findings in this study imply it may be possible to develop neighborhood level interventions, focusing on encouraging social interaction in racially/ethnically and linguistically diverse communities, with the aim of promoting trust to improve health outcomes.     

Bonding versus bridging social capital and their associations with self rated health: a multilevel analysis of 40 US communities

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Few studies have distinguished between the effects of different forms of social capital on health. This study distinguished between the health effects of summary measures tapping into the constructs of community bonding and community bridging social capital. DESIGN: A multilevel logistic regression analysis of community bonding and community bridging social capital in relation to individual self rated fair/poor health. SETTING: 40 US communities. PARTICIPANTS: Within community samples of adults (n = 24 835), surveyed by telephone in 2000-2001. MAIN RESULTS: Adjusting for community sociodemographic and socioeconomic composition and community level income and age, the odds ratio of reporting fair or poor health was lower for each 1-standard deviation (SD) higher community bonding social capital (OR = 0.86; 95% = 0.80 to 0.92) and each 1-SD higher community bridging social capital (OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.02). The addition of indicators for individual level bonding and bridging social capital and social trust slightly attenuated the associations for community bonding social capital (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.97) and community bridging social capital (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.89 to 1.03). Individual level high formal bonding social capital, trust in members of one's race/ethnicity, and generalised social trust were each significantly and inversely related to fair/poor health. Furthermore, significant cross level interactions of community social capital with individual race/ethnicity were seen, including weaker inverse associations between community bonding social capital and fair/poor health among black persons compared with white persons. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest modest protective effects of community bonding and community bridging social capital on health. Interventions and policies that leverage community bonding and bridging social capital might serve as means of population health improvement.     

Self-rated health and trust in low-income Mexican-origin individuals in Texas

The evidence suggests that trust is an important determinant of health. Trust tends to be lower in low-income and minority individuals, who already suffer from worse health. Therefore, it is particularly important to investigate the predictors of trust in disadvantaged individuals. In this article we use multilevel models to investigate the individual and neighborhood predictors of trust in Mexican-Americans living in low-income neighborhoods (defined as census block groups) in Texas. Detailed survey data on 1754 Mexican-origin respondents provided information on self-rated health and individual characteristics including sociodemographic and sociocultural personal characteristics (frequency of association with people of other races/ethnicities, social support, perceived racism, perceived personal opportunity, and religiosity). Neighborhood heterogeneities and socioeconomic status, computed from census data, were supplemented by community social characteristics (collective efficacy and public disorder) obtained from survey data. Trust was a significant predictor of self-rated health in our sample. This study suggests that Mexican-Americans tend to trust more those with whom there is likely to be a personal acquaintance than other Mexican-Americans. Furthermore, while the results of this study support that people tend to trust more those who are like themselves, for Mexican-Americans, the identification of who is more alike is not based exclusively on racial/ethnic identity, but is a complex process based also on linguistic and socioeconomic similarities. In our sample, linguistic fragmentation, but not racial/ethnic diversity nor neighborhood impoverishment, correlated with trust. Ease of communication seemed to be more important than racial/ethnic homogeneity in encouraging interpersonal trust among Mexican-Americans at the neighborhood level. The findings in this study imply it may be possible to develop neighborhood level interventions, focusing on encouraging social interaction in racially/ethnically and linguistically diverse communities, with the aim of promoting trust to improve health outcomes.     

Social capital and self-rated health: a contextual analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Social capital consists of features of social organization--such as trust between citizens, norms of reciprocity, and group membership--that facilitate collective action. This article reports a contextual analysis of social capital and individual self-rated health, with adjustment for individual household income, health behaviors, and other covariates. METHODS: Self-rated health ("Is your overall health excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor?") was assessed among 167,259 individuals residing in 39 US states, sampled by the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Social capital indicators, aggregated to the state level, were obtained from the General Social Surveys. RESULTS: Individual-level factors (e.g., low income, low education, smoking) were strongly associated with self-rated poor health. However, even after adjustment for these proximal variables, a contextual effect of low social capital on risk of self-rated poor health was found. For example, the odds ratio for fair or poor health associated with living in areas with the lowest levels of social trust was 1.41 (95% confidence interval = 1.33, 1.50) compared with living in high-trust states. CONCLUSIONS: These results extend previous findings on the health advantages stemming from social capital.     

A multilevel analysis of social capital and self-rated health: Evidence from China

We investigate relationship between social capital and self-rated health (SRH) in urban and rural China. Using a nationally representative data collected in 2005, we performed multilevel analyses. The social capital indicators include bonding trust, bridging trust, social participation and Chinese Communist Party membership. Results showed that only trust was beneficial for SRH in China. Bonding trust mainly promoted SRH at individual level and bridging trust mainly at county level. Moreover, the individual-level bridging trust was only positively associated with SRH of urban residents, which mirrored the urban–rural dual structure in China. We also found a cross-level interaction effect of bonding trust in urban area. In a county with high level of bonding trust, high-bonding-trust individuals obtained more health benefit than others; in a county with low level of bonding trust, the situation was the opposite.     

Contextual social capital as a risk factor for poor self-rated health: a multilevel analysis

In this study, we critically examine whether contextual social capital (CSC) is associated with self-rated health, with an emphasis on the problem of confounding. We also examine different components of CSC and their association with self-rated health. Finally, we look at differences in susceptibility between different socio-demographic groups. We use the cross-sectional base line study of the Stockholm Public Health Cohort, conducted in 2002. A postal questionnaire was answered by 31,182 randomly selected citizens, 18-84 years old, in Stockholm County. We used four measures of social capital: horizontal (civic trust and participation), vertical (political trust and participation), cognitive (civic and political trust) and structural (civic and political participation). CSC was measured at parish level from aggregated individual data, and multilevel regression procedures were employed. We show a twofold greater risk of poor self-rated health in areas with very low CSC compared with areas with very high CSC. Adjustments for individual socio-demographic factors, contextual economic factors and individual social capital lowered the excess risk. Simultaneous adjustment for all three forms of confounding further weakened the association and rendered it insignificant. Cognitive and structural social capital show relatively similar associations with self-rated health, while horizontal CSC seems to be more strongly related to self-rated health than vertical CSC. In conclusion, whether there is none or a moderate association between CSC and self-rated health, depends on the extent to which individual social capital is seen as a mediator or confounder. The association with self-rated health is similar independent of the measure of CSC used. It is also similar in different socio-demographic groups.     

Covariation in the socioeconomic determinants of self rated health and happiness: a multivariate multilevel analysis of individuals and communities in the USA

OBJECTIVE: To investigate individual level determinants of self rated health and happiness, as well as the extent of community level covariation in health and happiness. DESIGN: Multivariate multilevel regression analysis of self rated poor health and unhappiness at level 1, nested within 24 118 people at level 2, nested within 36 communities at level 3. Data were obtained from the 2000 social capital benchmark survey. SETTING: USA communities. PARTICIPANTS: 24 118 adults. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self reported fair/poor health; and a single item measure of subjective wellbeing. RESULTS: Controlling for demographic markers, a strong income and education gradient was seen for self rated poor health and unhappiness, with the gradient being stronger for poor health. Community level correlations between self rated poor health and happiness were stronger (0.65) than the individual level correlations (0.16) between the two outcomes. CONCLUSION: Poor health and unhappiness are highly positively correlated within individuals, and communities that are healthier tend to be happier and vice versa.     

The relationships of social participation and community ratings to health and health behaviors in areas with high and low population density

Previous studies have linked social participation and community levels of trust with improved health status. We examined the associations between levels of community participation, self-reported community ratings (trust), and health within a public health surveillance survey conducted in Kansas (N=4601). Independent variables were individual ratings of their communities (excellent, very good, good/ fair, poor), and their involvement in community groups or organizations in the last 5 years (yes/no). Dependent variables were self-rated health status, depressive symptoms, physical activity, smoking, obesity, and binge drinking. After controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and having a medical doctor, self-rated health status (p<0.001) and physical activity (PA) (p<0.001) were positively, and smoking (p<0.001) and depressive symptoms (p<0.001) were negatively associated with community ratings. Only PA (p<0.001) remained associated with community involvement in a multivariate analyses. Multilevel analysis using county-level data showed no significant interactions between population density and dependent variables. Individuals from rural areas had the highest community involvement but relatively low levels of community ratings. Our findings suggest that individuals in rural areas, especially in densely settled rural areas, may face increased risks of poor health.     

The neighborhood context of relative position, trust, and self-rated health

The relative position hypothesis proposes that an individual's relative position in a community or population influences their health because (1) unfavorable comparisons lead those with a lower position to experience negative emotions that cause stress and detrimentally impact health and well-being, and (2) individuals with different statuses are less likely to develop trust and cohesion with one another. These processes are important for individual health and also because their results may detract from community level social resources. Surprisingly little work has investigated this hypothesis within small units of analysis such as neighborhoods. In this research, logistic regression analyses were conducted on data from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey to test the relative position hypothesis as it applies to distrust of neighbors and fair or poor self-rated health, and whether the relationship varies across neighborhood income inequality. Results indicate that relative position significantly predicts distrust, such that those with higher local position are more likely to distrust their comparatively lower income neighbors. Relative position was not significantly associated with self-rated health, but lack of trust of neighbors was significantly and positively associated with below average self-rated health. The effect of relative position did not vary across neighborhood income inequality for either outcome. Implications for theories of income inequality and health are discussed.     

Whose health is affected by income inequality? A multilevel interaction analysis of contemporaneous and lagged effects of state income inequality on individual self-rated health in the United States

The empirical relationship between income inequality and health has been much debated and discussed. Recent reviews suggest that the current evidence is mixed, with the relationship between state income inequality and health in the United States (US) being perhaps the most robust. In this paper, we examine the multilevel interactions between state income inequality, individual poor self-rated health, and a range of individual demographic and socioeconomic markers in the US. We use the pooled data from the 1995 and 1997 Current Population Surveys, and the data on state income inequality (represented using Gini coefficient) from the 1990, 1980, and 1970 US Censuses. Utilizing a cross-sectional multilevel design of 201,221 adults nested within 50 US states we calibrated two-level binomial hierarchical mixed models (with states specified as a random effect). Our analyses suggest that for a 0.05 change in the state income inequality, the odds ratio (OR) of reporting poor health was 1.30 (95% CI: 1.17-1.45) in a conditional model that included individual age, sex, race, marital status, education, income, and health insurance coverage as well as state median income. With few exceptions, we did not find strong statistical support for differential effects of state income inequality across different population groups. For instance, the relationship between state income inequality and poor health was steeper for whites compared to blacks (OR=1.34; 95% CI: 1.20-1.48) and for individuals with incomes greater than $75,000 compared to less affluent individuals (OR=1.65; 95% CI: 1.26-2.15). Our findings, however, primarily suggests an overall (as opposed to differential) contextual effect of state income inequality on individual self-rated poor health. To the extent that contemporaneous state income inequality differentially affects population sub-groups, our analyses suggest that the adverse impact of inequality is somewhat stronger for the relatively advantaged socioeconomic groups. This pattern was found to be consistent regardless of whether we consider contemporaneous or lagged effects of state income inequality on health. At the same time, the contemporaneous main effect of state income inequality remained statistically significant even when conditioned for past levels of income inequality and median income of states.     

Linking social capital and self-rated health: a multilevel analysis of 11,175 men and women in Sweden

This multilevel study included 11,175 participants interviewed 2000-2002 in Sweden. The association between neighbourhood linking social capital (voting in national elections) and self-rated health was analysed. Individuals living in neighbourhoods with the lowest levels of linking social capital exhibited a significantly higher risk of poor health than individuals living in neighbourhoods with the highest levels of linking social capital, after adjustment for individual characteristics, including individual voting. The neighbourhood variance indicated significant differences in self-rated health between neighbourhoods. Both individuals and neighbourhoods need to be targeted in order to enhance people's health in neighbourhoods with low linking social capital.     

Contextual effect of different components of social capital on health in a suburban city of the greater Tokyo area: A multilevel analysis

Social capital (SC) can be broken down into a number of aspects and dimensions, but few studies have differentiated between the effects of different components of SC on health. This study examined the relationship between contextual SC and health (self-rated health, and co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors such as smoking, drinking, overweight/underweight and physical inactivity) among the general population in a Japanese suburban area. The specific research question was to explore which components of contextual SC had what effects on health. In 2009, we randomly selected 4123 residents, aged 20 years and over, from 72 districts in the city of Kashiwa, Chiba prefecture (a typical suburban city of Tokyo) to participate in a cross-sectional survey using mailed questionnaires. We used four indicators of SC: cognitive/horizontal (trust in neighbors), cognitive/vertical (institutional trust in the national social security system), structural/horizontal (participation in groups with egalitarian relationships) and structural/vertical (participation in groups with hierarchical relationships). District-level SC was calculated by aggregating the individual responses of each SC indicator within each district. The response rate was 42.1% (1716 questionnaires), 43.7% of the respondents were male, and the mean age was 54.8 ± 16.4 (ranging from 20 to 97). A multilevel analysis showed that higher district-level institutional mistrust was associated with self-rated poor health, but higher district-level mistrust in neighbors was inversely associated with it, after adjusting for individual-level covariates. There was no contextual effect of any SC components on co-occurrence of risk factors. Our findings showed that institutional trust has a beneficial effect on self-rated health, but trust among neighbors might negatively affect the health of the residents in a Japanese suburban city. These unique findings could suggest the advantage of breaking down SC to examine more specific relationships between SC and health, and the importance of accumulating the evidence in specific cohorts to develop customized health promotion strategies.     

Social capital: an individual or collective resource for health?

Although it is now widely acknowledged that the social environment plays an important role in people's health and well-being, there is considerable disagreement about whether social capital is a collective attribute of communities or societies, or whether its beneficial properties are associated with individuals and their social relationships. Using data from the European Social Survey (22 countries, N = 42,358), this study suggests that, rather than having a contextual influence on health, the beneficial properties of social capital can be found at the individual level. Individual levels of social trust and civic participation were strongly associated with self-rated health. At the same time, the aggregate social trust and civic participation variables at the national level were not related to people's subjective health after controlling for compositional differences in socio-demographics. Despite the absence of a main contextual effect, the current study found a more complex cross-level interaction for social capital. Trusting and socially active individuals more often report good or very good health in countries with high levels of social capital than individuals with lower levels of trust and civic participation, but are less likely to do so in countries with low levels of social capital. This suggests that social capital does not uniformly benefit individuals living in the same community or society.     

Income inequality and health: multilevel analysis of Chilean communities

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The evidence supporting the effect of income inequality on health has been largely observed in societies far more egalitarian than the US. This study examines the cross sectional multilevel associations between income inequality and self rated poor health in Chile; a society more unequal than the US. DESIGN: A multilevel statistical framework of 98 344 people nested within 61 978 households nested within 285 communities nested within 13 regions. SETTING: The 2000 National Socioeconomic Characterization Survey (CASEN) data from Chile. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 18 and above. The outcome was a dichotomised self rated health (0 if very good, good or average; 1 if poor, or very poor). Individual level exposures included age, sex, ethnicity, marital status, education, employment status, type of health insurance, and household level exposures include income and residential setting (urban/rural). Community level exposures included the Gini coefficient and median income. Main results: Controlling for individual/household predictors, a significant gradient was observed between income and poor self rated health, with very poor most likely to report poor health (OR: 2.94) followed by poor (OR: 2.77), low (OR: 2.06), middle (OR: 1.73), high (OR: 1.38) as compared with the very high income earners. Controlling for household and community effects of income, a significant effect of community income inequality was observed (OR:1.22). CONCLUSIONS: Household income does not explain any of the between community differences; neither does it account for the effect of community income inequality on self rated health, with more unequal communities associated with a greater probability of reporting poor health.     

The importance of gender and conceptualization for understanding the association between collective social capital and health: a multilevel analysis from northern Sweden

Growing research on social capital and health has fuelled the debate on whether there is a place effect on health. A central question is whether health inequality between places is due to differences in the composition of people living in these places (compositional effect) or differences in the local social and physical environments (contextual effects). Despite extensive use of multilevel approaches that allows controlling for whether the effects of collective social capital are confounded by access to social capital at the individual level, the picture remains unclear. Recent studies indicate that contextual effects on health may vary for different population subgroups and measuring "average" contextual effects on health for a whole population might therefore be inappropriate. In this study from northern Sweden, we investigated the associations between collective social capital and self-rated health for men and women separately, to understand if health effects of collective social capital are gendered. Two measures of collective social capital were used: one conventional measure (aggregated measures of trust, participation and voting) and one specific place-related (neighbourhood) measure. The results show a positive association between collective social capital and self-rated health for women but not for men. Regardless of the measure used, women who live in very high social capital neighbourhoods are more likely to rate their health as good-fair, compared to women who live in very low social capital neighbourhoods. The health effects of collective social capital might thus be gendered in favour for women. However, a more equal involvement of men and women in the domestic sphere would potentially benefit men in this matter. When controlling for socioeconomic, sociodemographic and social capital attributes at the individual level, the relationship between women's health and collective social capital remained statistically significant when using the neighbourhood-related measure but not when using the conventional measure. Our results support the view that a neighbourhood-related measure provides a clearer picture of the health effects of collective social capital, at least for women.