Health and healthcare utilization among single mothers and single fathers in Sweden

AIMS: To analyse self-rated health and healthcare utilization with regard to whether the respondents were single or couple parents, mothers or fathers. METHODS: A postal questionnaire was distributed nationwide to 4,000 randomly chosen individuals 20-64 years of age, with a response rate of 66%. A total of 1,041 respondents had legal custody of a child (150 were single parents and 891 were couple parents), and thus met the definition of a parent used for this study. Analyses of self-rated health and health care utilization were performed according to sex, age, sociodemographic, and socioeconomic characteristics. Three different statistical methods were applied: Spearman correlation analyses, chi-square analyses and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Both single fathers and single mothers reported worse health than their couple counterparts. However, single fathers had contact with a physician more frequently (OR 1.84) than couple fathers, whereas single mothers did not. Furthermore, single mothers refrained from seeing a physician despite a medical need much more often (OR 2.07) than couple mothers. CONCLUSIONS: An uneven distribution of sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics might help us to understand why single parents, both mothers and fathers, have worse health than parents who live together. Previously recognized gender differences with regard to healthcare utilization were present in our study as well, and it is possible that these differences are related to the unequal distribution of sociodemographic and socioeconomic assets between single fathers and single mothers found here.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Social capital and self-rated health in Colombia: the good, the bad and the ugly

Although there is increasing evidence supporting the associations between social capital and health, less is known of potential effects in Latin American countries. Our objective was to examine associations of different components of social capital with self-rated health in Colombia. The study had a cross-sectional design, using data of a survey applied to a nationally representative sample of 3025 respondents, conducted in 2004-2005. Stratified random sampling was performed, based on town size, urban/rural origin, age, and sex. Examined indicators of social capital were interpersonal trust, reciprocity, associational membership, non-electoral political participation, civic activities and volunteering. Principal components analysis including different indicators of social capital distinguished three components: structural-formal (associational membership and non-electoral political participation), structural-informal (civic activities and volunteering) and cognitive (interpersonal trust and reciprocity). Multilevel analyses showed no significant variations of self-rated health at the regional level. After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, interpersonal trust was statistically significantly associated with lower odds of poor/fair health, as well as the cognitive social capital component. Members of farmers/agricultural or gender-related groups had higher odds of poor/fair health, respectively. Excluding these groups, however, associational membership was associated with lower odds of poor/fair health. Likewise, in Colombians with educational attainment higher than high school, reciprocity was associated with lower odds of fair/poor health. Nevertheless, among rural respondents non-electoral political participation was associated with worse health. In conclusion, cognitive social capital and associational membership were related to better health, and could represent important notions for health promotion. Human rights violations related to political violence and gender based discrimination may explain adverse associations with health.     

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.     

Social participation, trust and self-rated health: a study among ageing people in urban, semi-urban and rural settings

This study examined associations between self-rated health and combinations of social participation and trust among ageing people in three living areas of Finland (N=2815, 66% response rate). Social participation and trust combinations were: low social capital (low participation/low trust), traditionalism (low/high), "the miniaturisation of community" (high/low) and high social capital (high/high). The highest rate of good self-rated health was found among the high social capital group, but after adjusting for background variables, statistical significance remained only in the urban area. High social capital measured at an individual level may thus promote health among ageing people.     

Social capital and health among the aged: comparisons between the United States and Germany

Through a cross-national investigation of the United States and Germany, this study examines how individual level social capital relates to the health of the elderly. Data from two national telephone surveys conducted in Germany (N=682) and the United States (N=608) with probability samples of non-institutionalized persons aged 60 and older was used. Indicators of social capital including both norms (reciprocity and civic trust) and behaviors (participation) were tested with three self-reported health indicators-overall health, depression (CES-D) and functional limitations. Housing variables and social support were controlled for in the study. Lack of reciprocity was associated with poorer self-rated health in both countries. Civic mistrust was associated with poorer self-rated health in both countries as well as with depression and functional limitations in America. Lack of participation was, in Germany, associated with poorer self-rated health and depression. The cross-national results indicate that individual-level analysis of social capital along with marco-level determinants are important for understanding the health of the elderly.     

The impact of changes in different aspects of social capital and material conditions on self-rated health over time: A longitudinal cohort study

Individual aspects of social capital have been shown to have significant associations with health outcomes. However, research has seldom tested different elements of social capital simultaneously, whilst also adjusting for other well-known health determinants over time. This longitudinal individual-level study investigates how temporal changes in social capital, together with changes in material conditions and other health determinants affect associations with self-rated health over a six year period. We use data from the British Household Panel Survey, a randomly selected cohort which is considered representative of the United Kingdom's population, with the same individuals (N = 9303) providing responses to identical questions in 1999 and 2005. Four measures of social capital were used: interpersonal trust, social participation, civic participation and informal social networks. Material conditions were measured by total income (both individual and weighted household income), net of taxation. Other health determinants included age, gender, smoking, marital status and social class. After the baseline sample was stratified by health status, associations were examined between changes in health status and changes in all other considered variables. Simultaneous adjustment revealed that inability to trust demonstrated a significant association with deteriorating self-rated health, whereas increased levels of social participation were significantly associated with improved health status over time. Low levels of household and individual income also demonstrated significant associations with deteriorating self-rated health. In conclusion, it seems that interpersonal trust and social participation, considered valid indicators of social capital, appear to be independent predictors of self-rated health, even after adjusting for other well-known health determinants. Understandably, how trust and social participation influence health outcomes may help resolve the debate surrounding the role of social capital within the field of public health.     

The association between network social capital and self-rated health: Pouring old wine in new bottles?

This study examines whether there is an association between network social capital and self-rated health after controlling for social support. Moreover, we distinguish between network social capital that emerges from strong ties and weak ties. We used a cross-sectional representative sample of 815 adults from the Belgian population. Social capital is measured with the position generator and perceived social support with the MOS Social Support-scale. Results suggest that network social capital is associated with self-rated health after adjustment for social support. Because different social classes have access to different sets of resources, resources of friends and family from the intermediate and higher service classes are beneficial for self-rated health, whereas resources of friends and family from the working class appear to be rather detrimental for self-rated health. From a health-promoting perspective, these findings indicate that policy makers should deal with the root causes of socioeconomic disadvantages in society.     

Social capital in working life and the health of employees

It is commonly assumed that social capital influences health, but only few studies have examined this hypothesis in the context of the workplace. The present prospective cohort study of 6028 public sector employees in Finland investigated social capital as a workplace characteristic which potentially affects employee health. The two indicators of social capital were trust in the labour market, measured by security of the employment contract, and trust in co-worker support. Self-rated health status and psychological distress were used as indicators of health. The combination of subsidised job contract and low co-worker support (i.e. the lowest category of social capital) was associated with poorer health prospects than the combination of permanent employment and high support (the highest social capital category) in an age-adjusted model, but this association disappeared in logistic regression analysis adjusted by sociodemographic background factors and baseline health. Fixed-term employment predicted better self-rated health and less psychological distress when compared with permanent employment. Co-worker support was most common in permanent and least common in subsidised employees and it was associated with better self-rated health in women. Our findings suggest only partial support for the hypothesis of work-related social capital as a health resource.     

Social determinants of health – A question of social or economic capital? Interaction effects of socioeconomic factors on health outcomes

Social structures and socioeconomic patterns are the major determinants of population health. However, very few previous studies have simultaneously analysed the "social" and the "economic" indicators when addressing social determinants of health. We focus on the relevance of economic and social capital as health determinants by analysing various indicators. The aim of this paper was to analyse independent associations, and interactions, of lack of economic capital (economic hardships) and social capital (social participation, interpersonal and political/institutional trust) on various health outcomes. Data was derived from the 2009 Swedish National Survey of Public Health, based on a randomly selected representative sample of 23,153 men and 28,261 women aged 16-84 year, with a participation rate of 53.8%. Economic hardships were measured by a combined economic hardships measure including low household income, inability to meet expenses and lacking cash reserves. Social capital was measured by social participation, interpersonal (horizontal) trust and political (vertical/institutional trust) trust in parliament. Health outcomes included; (i) self-rated health, (i) psychological distress (GHQ-12) and (iii) musculoskeletal disorders. Results from multivariate logistic regression show that both measures of economic capital and low social capital were significantly associated with poor health status, with only a few exceptions. Significant interactive effects measured as synergy index were observed between economic hardships and all various types of social capital. The synergy indices ranged from 1.4 to 2.3. The present study adds to the evidence that both economic hardships and social capital contribute to a range of different health outcomes. Furthermore, when combined they potentiate the risk of poor health.     

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.     

Social capital and its relationship with measures of health status: evidence from the Health Survey for England 2003

Social capital is a concept that attempts to describe the quantity and quality of social interactions in a community. This study explores the relationship between individual measures of social capital and alternative measures of health status within the context of a large national survey of population health. Using data for 13 753 adult participants in the 2003 Health Survey for England, linear regression with weighted least-squares estimation and Tobit regression with upper censoring were used to model the relationship between individual measures of social capital and EQ-5D utility scores. In addition, logistic regression was used to model the relationship between individual measures of social capital and a dichotomous self-reported health status variable. The study demonstrated that low stocks of social capital across the domains of trust and reciprocity, perceived social support and civic participation are significantly associated with poor measures of health status. The implications for health economists and, potentially, for policymakers are discussed.     

A Multilevel Analysis of Key Forms of Community- and Individual-Level Social Capital as Predictors of Self-Rated Health in the United States

Communities may be rich or poor in a variety of stocks of social capital. Studies that have investigated relations among these forms and their simultaneous and combined health effects are sparse. Using data on a sample of 24,835 adults (more than half of whom resided in core urban areas) nested within 40 U.S. communities from the Social Capital Benchmark Survey, correlational and factor analyses were applied to determine appropriate groupings among eight key social capital indicators (social trust, informal social interactions, formal group involvement, religious group involvement, giving and volunteering, diversity of friendship networks, electoral political participation, and non-electoral political participation) at each of the community and individual levels. Multilevel logistic regression models were estimated to analyze the associations between the grouped social capital forms and individual self-rated health. Adjusting the three identified community-level social capital groupings/scales for one another and community- and individual-level sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics, each of the odds ratios of fair/poor health associated with living in a community one standard deviation higher in the respective social capital form was modestly below one. Being high on all three (vs. none of the) scales was significantly associated with 18% lower odds of fair/poor health (odds ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.69–0.98). Adding individual-level social capital variables to the model attenuated two of the three community-level social capital associations, with a few of the former characteristics appearing to be moderately significantly protective of health. We further observed several significant interactions between community-level social capital and one's proximity to core urban areas, individual-level race/ethnicity, gender, and social capital. Overall, our results suggest primarily beneficial yet modest health effects of key summary forms of community social capital, and heterogeneity in some of these effects by urban context and population subgroup.     

Social trust and self-rated health in US communities: a multilevel analysis

This study assessed the contextual and individual effects of social trust on health. Methods consisted of a multilevel regression analysis of self-rated poor health among 21,456 individuals nested within 40 US communities included in the 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey. Controlling for demographic covariates, a strong income and education gradient was observed for self-rated health. Higher levels of cominunity social trust were associated with a lover probability of reporting poor health. Individual demographic and socioeconomic preditors did not explain the association of community social trust with self-rated health. Controlling for individual trust perception, however, rendered the main effect of community social trust statistically insignificant, but a complex interaction effect was observed, such that the health-promoting effect of community social trust was significantly greater for high-trust individuals. For low-trust individuals, the effect of community social trust on self-rated health was the opposite. Using the latest data available on community social trust, we conclude that the role of community social trust in explaining average population health achievements and health inequalities is complex and is contingent on individual perceptions of social trust. Future multilevel investigations of social capital and population health should routinely consider the cross-level nature of community or neighborbood effects.     

Individual-level relationships between social capital and self-rated health in a bilingual community

BACKGROUND. Previous register studies have shown that mortality rates and disability pension statistics favor Swedish-speakers when compared to their Finnish-speaking neighbors in the same bilingual region in Finland. The purpose of the present questionnaire survey was to determine whether the Swedish-speaking community has more social capital and if the social capital is associated with health at the individual level. METHODS. The study population consisted of randomly selected samples of Finnish-speakers (N 1,000, response rate 66%) and Swedish-speakers (N 1,000, response rate 63%) representing all adults living in bilingual Ostrobothnian municipalities (75,000 Finnish-speakers and 78,000 Swedish-speakers). To inquire into social capital and health indicators, a bilingual questionnaire was composed to cover variables and indicators of sociodemography, health status, health behavior, and social capital (interpersonal trust and civic engagement). Data were analyzed with multiple logistic regression for two binary outcome variables: language group (Finnish vs Swedish) and self-rated health (good vs almost good/fair/poor/bad). RESULTS. When health-related variables (urban residence, migration, age, BMI, household income, smoking, singing in a choir, membership in any voluntary association, participation in community events, and long-term diseases) were controlled for, the Finnish-speakers were more often migrated (P = 0.0001) and mistrusting (P = 0.0001) and less active in community events (P = 0.0016) and in singing in a choir (P = 0.02) than the Swedish-speakers. After controlling for language and the above-mentioned health-related variables, the number of auxiliary (willing to help) friends (P = 0.001), mistrust (P = 0.037), and membership in any religious association (P = 0.0096) were significantly and independently associated with good self-rated health in the whole sample. CONCLUSIONS. The Swedish-speaking community seems to hold a fair quantity of social capital, which is associated with good health. Since the ecological and socioeconomic circumstances are equal for both language communities, a great deal of health inequality can be explained by differences in social capital.     

Individual social capital, neighbourhood deprivation, and self-rated health in England

Individual social capital is increasingly considered to be an important determinant of an individual's health. This study examines the extent to which individual social capital is associated with self-rated health and the extent to which individual social capital mediates t.he relationship between neighbourhood deprivation and self-rated health in an English sample. Individual social capital was conceptualized and operationalized in both the social cohesion- and network resource tradition, using measures of generalized trust, social participation and social network resources. Network resources were measured with the position generator. Multilevel analyses were applied to wave 2 and 3 of the Taking Part Surveys of England, which consist of face-to-face interviews among the adult population in England (N(i) = 25,366 respondents, N(j) = 12,388 neighbourhoods). The results indicate that generalized trust, participation with friends and relatives and having network members from the salariat class are positively associated with self-rated health. Having network members from the working class is, however, negatively related to self-rated health. Moreover, these social capital elements are partly mediating the negative relationship between neighbourhood deprivation and self-rated 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.