The purpose of this study was to measure state trends in educational inequalities in smoking, binge alcohol use, physical inactivity, obesity, and seatbelt use.
Methods.
The authors calculated the Relative Concentration Index of educational inequality for five health behaviors on adults from all 50 states and the District of Columbia using data from 1990 to 2004 in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (n=2,118,562). Linear regression was used to measure changes and trends in the Relative Concentration Index of health inequality across education groups in each state.
Results.
Except for binge alcohol use, poorer health behaviors were concentrated among the less educated. The largest educational inequalities were for physical inactivity. From 1990 to 2004, significant increases in relative educational inequalities occurred in 40 states for smoking and 31 states for physical inactivity. For binge alcohol use, 27 states showed significant declining inequality trends, but educational inequalities reversed direction and binge alcohol use is now more prevalent among the less educated in 19 states. Significant decreases in educational inequalities occurred in 36 states for obesity and 24 states for seat belt use. Changes in educational inequalities across the different health behaviors were not associated, except for a modest correlation between changes in inequality in smoking and binge alcohol use (r=0.40; p=0.004). Similarly, there was little association between changes in the population prevalence of health behaviors and changes in educational inequality in health behaviors, with substantial heterogeneity among states.
Conclusions.
State trends in relative educational inequality among health behaviors were mixed, increasing for smoking and physical inactivity and decreasing for obesity and seat belt use. The factors influencing relative inequality trends may differ from those affecting overall prevalence trends.
References
1.
Department of Health and Human Services (US). Healthy people 2010: Understanding and improving health. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2000.
2.
Arizona Department of Health Services. Healthy Arizona 2010: Collaborating for a healthier future. Phoenix: Arizona Department of Health Services; 2001.
3.
Iowa Department of Public Health. Healthy Iowans 2010: Advancing the boundaries of healthy living and the quality of life in the new decade [cited 2003 Nov 7]. Available from: URL: http://www.idph.state.ia.us/bhpl/healthy_iowans_2010.asp
4.
Lincoln-Lancaster Health Department. Healthy people 2010: Health objectives for the year 2010 for Lincoln and Lancaster County Nebraska. Lincoln (NE): Lincoln-Lancaster Health Department; 2000.
5.
BrookmeyerRStroupDF, editors. Monitoring the health of populations: Statistical principles and methods for public health surveillance. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.
6.
NelsonDEBlandSPowell-GrinerEKleinRWellsHEHogelinGMarksJ. State trends in health risk factors and receipt of clinical preventive services among US adults during the 1990s. JAMA2002;287:2659–67.
7.
LynchJKaplanG. Socioeconomic position. In: BerkmanLFKawachiI, editors. Social epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000. p. 13–35.
8.
PamukEMakucDHeckKReubenCLochnerK. Health, United States, 1998 with socioeconomic status and health chartbook. Hyattsville (MD): National Center for Health Statistics; 1998.
9.
DeatonA. Policy implications of the gradient of health and wealth. Health Aff (Millwood)2002;21:13–30.
10.
PamukERWagenerDKMollaMT. Achieving national health objectives: The impact on life expectancy and on healthy life expectancy. Am J Public Health2004;94:378–83.
11.
HarperSLynchJ. Methods for measuring cancer disparities: A review using data relevant to Healthy People 2010 cancer-related objectives. Washington: National Cancer Institute; 2006.
12.
GentryEMKalsbeekWDHogelinGCJonesJTGainesKLFormanMR. The behavioral risk factor surveys: II. Design, methods, and estimates from combined state data. Am J Prev Med1985;1:9–14.
13.
MarksJSHogelinGCGentryEMJonesJTGainesKLFormanMRTrowbridgeFL. The behavioral risk factor surveys: I. State-specific prevalence estimates of behavioral risk factors. Am J Prev Med1985;1:1–8.
14.
RemingtonPLSmithMYWilliamsonDFAndaRFGentryEMHogelinGC. Design, characteristics, and usefulness of state-based behavioral risk factor surveillance: 1981–87. Public Health Rep1988;103:366–75.
15.
NelsonDEHoltzmanDBolenJStanwyckCAMackKA. Reliability and validity of measures from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Soz Praventivmed2001;46Suppl 1:S3–42.
16.
NelsonDEPowell-GrinerETownMKovarMG. A comparison of national estimates from the National Health Interview Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Am J Public Health2003;93:1335–41.
17.
WagstaffAPaciPvan DoorslaerE. On the measurement of inequalities in health. Soc Sci Med1991;33:545–57.
18.
HarperSLynchJ. Measuring health inequalities. In: OakesJMKaufmanJS, editors. Methods in social epidemiology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2006.
19.
KakwaniNWagstaffAvan DoorslaerE. Socioeconomic inequalities in health: Measurement, computation, and statistical inference. J Econom1997;77:87–103.
20.
ChotikapanichDCreedyJHopkinsS. Income and health concentration in Australia. Economic Record2003;79(246):297–305.
21.
van DoorslaerEWagstaffABleichrodtHCalongeSGerthamUGGerfinM. Income-related inequalities in health: Some international comparisons. J Health Econ1997;16:93–112.
22.
WagstaffA. Child health on a dollar a day: Some tentative crosscountry comparisons. Soc Sci Med2003;57:1529–38.
23.
ClarkePSmithLJenkinsonC. Comparing health inequalities among men aged 18–65 years in Australia and England using the SF-36. Aust N Z J Public Health2002;26:136–43.
24.
ZhangQWangY. Socioeconomic inequality of obesity in the United States: Do gender, age, and ethnicity matter?Soc Sci Med2004;58:1171–80.
25.
ZhangQWangY. Secular trends in socioeconomic inequality of obesity in the United States. In: BishopJAAmielY, editors. Research on economic inequality2004;12:481–99.
26.
WagstaffA. The bounds of the concentration index when the variable of interest is binary, with an application to immunization inequality. Health Econ2005;14:429–32.
27.
ClevelandWSDevlinSJ. Locally weighted regression: An approach to regression analysis by local fitting. J Am Stat Assoc1988;83:596–610.
28.
MinujinADelamonicaE. Mind the gap! Widening child mortality disparities. J Hum Dev2003;4:397–418.
29.
MokdadAHMarksJSStroupDFGerberdingJL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000 [published erratum appears in JAMA 2005;293:293–4]. JAMA2004;291:1238–45.
30.
PierceJPFioreMCNovotnyTEHatziandreuEJDavisRM. Trends in cigarette smoking in the United States. Educational differences are increasing. JAMA1989;261:56–60.
31.
National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2005 with chartbook on trends in the health of Americans. Hyattsville (MD): National Center for Health Statistics; 2005.
32.
MeierKJLicariMJ. The effect of cigarette taxes on cigarette consumption, 1955 through 1994. Am J Public Health1997;87:1126–30.
33.
LicariMJMeierKJ. Regulatory policy when behavior is addictive: Smoking, cigarette taxes and bootlegging. Polit Res Q1997;50:5–24.
34.
McMullenKMBrownsonRCLukeDChriquiJ. Strength of clean indoor air laws and smoking related outcomes in the USA. Tob Control2005;14:43–8.
35.
TaurasJAChaloupkaFJFarrellyMCGiovinoGAWakefieldMJohnstonLD. State tobacco control spending and youth smoking. Am J Public Health2005;95:338–44.
36.
Cessation and cessation measures among adult daily smokers: National and state-specific data. In: ShoplandDRBurnsDM, editors. Smoking and tobacco control monograph 12: Population based smoking cessation. Bethesda (MD): U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute; 2000. p. 25–97.
37.
StillmanFAHartmanAMGraubardBIGilpinEAMurrayDMGibsonJT. Evaluation of the American Stop Smoking Intervention Study (ASSIST): A report of outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst2003;95:1681–91.
38.
FichtenbergCMGlantzSA. Association of the California tobacco control program with declines in cigarette consumption and mortality from heart disease. N Engl J Med2000;343:1772–7.
39.
GilpinEALeeLPierceJPTangHLloydJ. Support for protection from secondhand smoke: California 2002. Tob Control2004;13:96.
40.
BienerLHarrisJEHamiltonW. Impact of the Massachusetts tobacco control programme: Population based trend analysis. BMJ2000;321:351–4.
41.
NaimiTSBrewerRDMokdadADennyCSerdulaMKMarksJS. Binge drinking among US adults. JAMA2003;289:70–5.
42.
NelsonDENaimiTSBrewerRDBolenJWellsHE. Metropolitan-area estimates of binge drinking in the United States. Am J Public Health2004;94:663–71.
43.
WechslerHDavenportADowdallGMoeykensBCastilloS. Health and behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college. A national survey of students at 140 campuses. JAMA1994;272:1672–7.
44.
RoomRBaborTRehmJ. Alcohol and public health. Lancet2005;365:519–30.
45.
FlemingMFBarryKLManwellLBJohnsonKLondonR. Brief physician advice for problem alcohol drinkers. A randomized controlled trial in community-based primary care practices. JAMA1997;277:1039–45.
46.
WhitlockEPPolenMRGreenCAOrleansTKleinJ. Behavioral counseling interventions in primary care to reduce risky/harmful alcohol use by adults: A summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med2004;140:557–68.
47.
Alcohol Epidemiology Program. Alcohol policies in the United States: Highlights from the 50 states. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota; 2000.
48.
ChaloupkaFJWechslerH. Binge drinking in college: The impact of price, availability, and alcohol control policies. Contemp Econ Policy1996;14(4):112–24.
49.
CookPJMooreMJ. Environment and persistence in youthful drinking patterns. In: GruberJ, editor. Risky behavior among youths: An economic analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2001. p. 375–437.
50.
NelsonTFNaimiTSBrewerRDWechslerH. The state sets the rate: The relationship among state-specific college binge drinking, state binge drinking rates, and selected state alcohol control policies. Am J Public Health2005;95:441–6.
51.
CookPJMooreMJ. Drinking and schooling. J Health Econ1993;12:411–29.
52.
JefferisBJMHPowerCManorO. Adolescent drinking level and adult binge drinking in a national birth cohort. Addiction2005;100:543–9.
53.
SchoenbornCAAdamsPFBarnesPMVickerieJLSchillerJS. Health behaviors of adults: United States 1999–2001. Washington: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics; 2004.
54.
FlegalKMCarrollMDOgdenCLJohnsonCL. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2000. JAMA2002;288:1723–7.
55.
MokdadAHSerdulaMKDietzWHBowmanBAMarksJSKoplanJP. The spread of the obesity epidemic in the United States, 1991–1998. JAMA1999;282:1519–22.
56.
ZhangQWangY. Trends in the association between obesity and socioeconomic status in US adults: 1971 to 2000. Obes Res2004; 12:1622–32.
57.
NelsonDEBolenJKresnowM. Trends in safety belt use by demographics and by type of state safety belt law, 1987 through 1993. Am J Public Health1998;88:245–9.
58.
CohenAEinavL. The effects of mandatory seat belt laws on driving behavior and traffic fatalities. Rev Econ Stat2003;85:828–43.
