The European Journal of Public Health Advance Access originally published online on March 8, 2005
The European Journal of Public Health 2005 15(3):262-269; doi:10.1093/eurpub/cki115
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Smoking |
Socioeconomic status and smoking
Analysing inequalities with multiple indicators
Mikko Laaksonen1, Ossi Rahkonen2, Sakari Karvonen3 and Eero Lahelma1
1 Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
2 Department of Social Policy, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
3 STAKES (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health), Helsinki, Finland
Correspondence: Mikko Laaksonen, PhD, Department of Public Health, PO Box 41, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, tel. +358 9 191 27569, fax +358 9 191 27570, Email: mikko.t.laaksonen{at}helsinki.fi
Background and aims: Socioeconomic differences in smoking have been well established. While previous studies have mostly relied on one socioeconomic indicator at a time, this study examined socioeconomic differences in smoking by using several indicators that reflect different dimensions of socioeconomic position. Data and methods: Data derive from Helsinki Health Study baseline surveys conducted among the employees of the City of Helsinki in 2000 and 2001. The data include 6243 respondents aged 40–60 years (response rate 68%). Six socioeconomic indicators were used: education, occupational status, household income per consumption unit, housing tenure, economic difficulties and economic satisfaction. Their associations with current smoking were examined by fitting sequential logistic regression models. Results: All socioeconomic indicators were strongly associated with smoking among both men and women. When the indicators were examined simultaneously their associations with smoking attenuated, especially when education and occupational status were considered together, and when income and housing tenure were introduced into the models already containing education and occupational status. After mutual adjustment for all socioeconomic indicators, housing tenure and economic satisfaction remained associated with smoking in men. In women, all indicators except income and economic difficulties were inversely associated with smoking after adjustments. Conclusions: Smoking was associated with structural, material as well as perceived dimensions of socioeconomic disadvantage. Attempts to reduce smoking among the socioeconomically disadvantaged need to target several dimensions of socioeconomic position.
Keywords: education, income, occupational status, smoking, socioeconomic differences
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Blackman Can smoking cessation services be better targeted to tackle health inequalities? Evidence from a cross-sectional study Health Education Journal, June 1, 2008; 67(2): 91 - 101. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Richter and A. Leppin Trends in socio-economic differences in tobacco smoking among German schoolchildren, 1994 2002 Eur J Public Health, December 1, 2007; 17(6): 565 - 571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Flacking, K. H. Nyqvist, and U. Ewald Effects of socioeconomic status on breastfeeding duration in mothers of preterm and term infants Eur J Public Health, December 1, 2007; 17(6): 579 - 584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Leinsalu, M. Tekkel, and A. E. Kunst Social determinants of ever initiating smoking differ from those of quitting: a cross-sectional study in Estonia Eur J Public Health, December 1, 2007; 17(6): 572 - 578. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Kestila, S. Koskinen, T. Martelin, O. Rahkonen, T. Pensola, S. Pirkola, K. Patja, and A. Aromaa Influence of parental education, childhood adversities, and current living conditions on daily smoking in early adulthood Eur J Public Health, December 1, 2006; 16(6): 617 - 626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Geyer, O. Hemstrom, R. Peter, and D. Vagero Education, income, and occupational class cannot be used interchangeably in social epidemiology. Empirical evidence against a common practice. J. Epidemiol. Community Health, September 1, 2006; 60(9): 804 - 810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|