Cross-sectional study of ethnic differences in the utility of area deprivation measures to target socioeconomically deprived individuals
Jessica Baker,
Richard Mitchell and
Jill Pell
Social Science & Medicine, 2013, vol. 85, issue C, 27-31
Abstract:
Area deprivation measures provide a pragmatic tool for targeting public health interventions at socioeconomically deprived individuals. Ethnic minority groups in the UK experience higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation and certain associated diseases than the White population. The aim of this study was to explore ethnic differences in the utility of area deprivation measures as a tool for targeting socioeconomically deprived individuals. We carried out a cross-sectional study using the Health Survey for England 2004. 7208 participants aged 16–64 years from the four largest ethnic groups in England (White, Indian, Pakistani and Black Caribbean) were included. The main outcome measures were percentage agreement, sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of area deprivation, measured using Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004, in relation to individual socioeconomic position (measured by education, occupation, income, housing tenure and car access). We found that levels of both area and individual deprivation were higher in the Pakistani and Black Caribbean groups compared to the White group. Across all measures, agreement was lower in the Pakistani (50.9–63.4%) and Black Caribbean (61.0–70.1%) groups than the White (67.2–82.4%) group. However, sensitivity was higher in the Pakistani (0.56–0.64) and Black Caribbean (0.59–0.66) groups compared to the White group (0.24–0.38) and PPV was at least as high. The results for the Indian group were intermediate. We conclude that, in spite of lower agreement, area deprivation is better at identifying individual deprivation in ethnic minority groups. There was no evidence that area based targeting of public health interventions will disadvantage ethnic minority groups.
Keywords: UK; Ethnicity; Deprivation; Area; Public health; Socioeconomic status (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795361300107X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:85:y:2013:i:c:p:27-31
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.02.025
Access Statistics for this article
Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian
More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().