Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study

By Katrina M. Giskes, Gavin Turrell, Frank J. Van Lenthe, Johannes Brug and Johan P. Mackenbach

Abstract

Objective To examine the influence of individual- and area-level socio-economic characteristics on food choice behaviour and dietary intake. Setting The city of Eindhoven in the south-east Netherlands. Design A total of 1339 men and women aged 25–79 years were sampled from 85 areas (mean number of participants per area = 18.4, range 2–49). Information on socio-economic position (SEP) and diet was collected by structured face-to-face interviews (response rate 80.9%). Individual-level SEP was measured by education and household income, and area-level deprivation was measured using a composite index that included residents' education, occupation and employment status. Diet was measured on the basis of (1) a grocery food index that captured compliance with dietary guidelines, (2) breakfast consumption and (3) intakes of fruit, total fat and saturated fat. Multilevel analyses were performed to examine the independent effects of individual- and area-level socio-economic characteristics on the dietary outcome variables. Results After adjusting for individual-level SEP, few trends or significant effects of area deprivation were found for the dietary outcomes. Significant associations were found between individual-level SEP and food choice, breakfast consumption and fruit intake, with participants from disadvantaged backgrounds being less likely to report food behaviours or nutrient intakes consistent with dietary recommendations. Conclusions The findings suggest that an individual's socio-economic characteristics play a more important role in shaping diet than the socio-economic characteristics of the area in which they live. In this Dutch study, no independent influence of area-level socio-economic characteristics on diet was detected, which contrasts with findings from the USA, the UK and Finland

Topics: 111700 PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH SERVICES, Food choice, Socio, economic position, Education, Income, Area deprivation
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Year: 2006
DOI identifier: 10.1079/PHN2005758
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.qut.edu.au:12066

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2004). A multilevel analysis of socioeconomic (small area) differences in household food purchasing behaviour.
  2. (1994). A prospective cohort study investigating the explanation of socioeconomic inequalities
  3. (2002). An ecological study of the relationship between social and environmental determinants of obesity.
  4. (2003). Association between eating patterns and obesity in a freeliving US adult population.
  5. (2001). Childhood socioeconomic position and cognitive function in adulthood.
  6. (2004). City Population [online],
  7. (1995). Collecting food-related data from low socioeconomic groups: how adequate are our current research designs?
  8. (1990). Cost and availability of healthy food choices in a London health district.
  9. (1994). De ENVET-lijst: Ontwikkeling en validering van een korte voedelsfrequentievragenlijst naar energie en vet- tweede fase. Geldrop-Valkenswaard: GGD regio Geldrop-Valkenswaard,
  10. (1992). Demographic and economic factors associated with dietary quality for adults in the 1987–1988 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey.
  11. (1991). Diet and other life-style factors in high and low socioeconomic groups (Dutch Nutrition Surveillance System).
  12. (2001). Diet and socioeconomic position: does the use of different indicators matter?
  13. (1997). Dietary assessment in Whitehall II: the influence of reporting bias on apparent socioeconomic variation in nutrient intakes.
  14. (1994). Diets for disease? Intraurban variation in reported food consumption in Glasgow. Appetite
  15. (1993). Do communities differ in health behaviour?
  16. (1999). Do the poor pay more for food? An analysis of grocery store availability and food price disparities.
  17. (2004). Estimating neighbourhood health effects: the challenges of causal inference in a complex world.
  18. (2002). Food deserts’ in British cities: policy context and research priorities. Urban Studies
  19. (1997). Health behaviours and socio-economic status in Ontario, Canada.
  20. (1998). Individual social class, area-based deprivation, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and mortality: the Renfrew and Paisley Study.
  21. (2003). Low-income consumer’s attitudes and behaviours towards access, availability and motivation to eat fruit and vegetables. Public Health Nutrition
  22. (2001). MLwiN version 1.10.0007. London: Multilevel Models Project,
  23. (1996). Modern and healthy?: socioeconomic differences in the quality of diet.
  24. Nederlands Stichting Voedingsstoffenbestand.
  25. (1999). Neighbourhood differences in diet: the Atherosclerosis Risk
  26. (2005). Neighbourhood inequalities in physical activity: the role of neighbourhood attractiveness, proximity to local facilities and safety in the Netherlands.
  27. Nutrient intakes of different social-class groups: results from the Scottish Heart Health Study.
  28. (1997). Retail stores in poor urban neighbourhoods.
  29. Small area variations in health related behaviours; do these depend on the behaviour itself, its measurement, or on personal characteristics? Health
  30. (2001). Social mix and the neighbourhood effect. Policy ambitions and empirical evidence. Housing Studies
  31. (1997). Socio-economic differentials in health: the role of nutrition.
  32. (1996). Socio-regional context as a determinant of adolescents’ health behaviour in Finland.
  33. (1997). Socioeconomic determinants of health. The contribution of nutrition to inequalities in health.
  34. (2002). Socioeconomic differences in fruit and vegetable consumption among Australian adolescents and adults. Public Health Nutrition
  35. (2003). Socioeconomic disparities in cancer-risk behaviours in adolescence:
  36. (1993). Socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular disease: a review of the literature. Circulation
  37. (2000). Socioeconomic inequalities in cardiovascular disease mortality; an international study.
  38. (1992). Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income and occupation contribute to risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
  39. (2002). The contextual effect of the local food environment on resident’s diets: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study.
  40. (2003). The effect of breakfast type on total daily energy intake and body mass index: results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III).
  41. (2001). Underreporting of energy intake in repeated 24-hour recalls related to gender, age, weight status, day of interview, educational level, reported food intake, smoking habits and area of living. Public Health Nutrition
  42. Urban small area variation in adolescents’ health behaviour.
  43. (1987). Ziest: Nederlands Voedingsstoffenbestand,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.