Using point-of-sale data to examine tobacco pricing across neighbourhoods in Scotland

Objectives: To assess the geographical variation in tobacco price (cigarettes and roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco) in convenience stores across Scotland and how this relates to neighbourhood income deprivation, tobacco retail outlet density and urban/rural status. Methods: Tobacco price data from 124 566 shopping baskets purchased in 274 convenience stores during 1 week in April 2018 were obtained through an electronic point-of-sale system. These data were combined with neighbourhood-level measures of income deprivation, tobacco retail outlet density and urban/rural status. We examined brand price for 12 of the most popular cigarette brands and 3 RYO brands and variations in purchases by price segment; multivariable regression analysis assessed associations between area variables and tobacco price. Results: Most stores sold tobacco in all price segments. The lowest priced subvalue brands were the most popular in all neighbourhoods but were most dominant in shops in more deprived neighbourhoods. When total sales were assessed, overall purchase price varied significantly by neighbourhood income deprivation; packets of 20 cigarettes were 50 pence (5.6%) lower and RYO 34 pence (2.7%) lower among shops in the two highest income deprivation quintiles relative to the lowest. Analysis of individual brands showed that for 3 of the 12 cigarette brands considered, average prices were 12-17 pence lower in more deprived neighbourhoods with the most popular RYO brand 15 pence lower. There was limited evidence of a relationship with tobacco retail outlet density. Conclusion: Across Scottish convenience stores, the purchase price of cigarettes and RYO was lower in more income-deprived neighbourhoods. The lower prices primarily reflect greater sales of cheap brands in these areas, rather than retailers reducing the prices of individual brands

The general and mental health of movers to more- and less-disadvantaged socio-economic and physical environments within the UK

Residential mobility may play an important role in influencing both individual health, by determining individual exposures to environments, and area health, by shaping area population composition. This study is the first analysis of migration within the UK to compare general and mental health among adults by age group and consider moves between neighbourhoods with different levels of both socio-economic and physical environment disadvantage. The analysis assesses 122,570 cases from the annual British Household Panel Survey, 1996–2006, based upon pooled data describing moves between consecutive waves of the survey. It assesses the rates and binary logistic regression model odds of self-reported general health and mental health problems of movers and stayers by age group. It also compares movers between Census Area Statistics wards in the UK with different levels of Carstairs and Multiple Environmental Deprivation Index (MEDIx) scores. At all ages, movers had similar or higher odds of poor general and mental health relative to non-movers. Risk of mental health problems were particularly elevated among movers and remained significant after adjustment for socio-demographic variables in most age groups. In adjusted analysis of all adults odds of poor general and mental health were most elevated among movers to more socio-economically deprived areas, with the highest odds for mental health (1.54 95% CI 1.27–1.86). In contrast, risk of poor mental health among total adults was greatest among movers to better physical environments (1.40 95% CI 1.16–1.70). This study therefore finds little evidence of ‘healthy migrant effects’ among recent movers within the UK and suggests movers have particularly elevated risk of mental health problems. It also indicates that selective migration may not contribute to poor health found in UK neighbourhoods with multiple physical environment deprivation. Further analysis should explore why people with mental health problems are more likely to move to socio-economically deprived neighbourhoods

Particulate air pollution and health inequalities: a Europe-wide ecological analysis

<p>Background: Environmental disparities may underlie the unequal distribution of health across socioeconomic groups. However, this assertion has not been tested across a range of countries: an important knowledge gap for a transboundary health issue such as air pollution. We consider whether populations of low-income European regions were a) exposed to disproportionately high levels of particulate air pollution (PM10) and/or b) disproportionately susceptible to pollution-related mortality effects.</p> <p>Methods: Europe-wide gridded PM10 and population distribution data were used to calculate population-weighted average PM10 concentrations for 268 sub-national regions (NUTS level 2 regions) for the period 2004–2008. The data were mapped, and patterning by mean household income was assessed statistically. Ordinary least squares regression was used to model the association between PM10 and cause-specific mortality, after adjusting for regional-level household income and smoking rates.</p> <p>Results: Air quality improved for most regions between 2004 and 2008, although large differences between Eastern and Western regions persisted. Across Europe, PM10 was correlated with low household income but this association primarily reflected East–West inequalities and was not found when Eastern or Western Europe regions were considered separately. Notably, some of the most polluted regions in Western Europe were also among the richest. PM10 was more strongly associated with plausibly-related mortality outcomes in Eastern than Western Europe, presumably because of higher ambient concentrations. Populations of lower-income regions appeared more susceptible to the effects of PM10, but only for circulatory disease mortality in Eastern Europe and male respiratory mortality in Western Europe. </p> <p>Conclusions: Income-related inequalities in exposure to ambient PM10 may contribute to Europe-wide mortality inequalities, and to those in Eastern but not Western European regions. We found some evidence that lower-income regions were more susceptible to the health effects of PM10.</p&gt

Does administrative data reflect individual experience? Comparing an index of poverty with individually collected data on financial well-being in a multi-ethnic community

The Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) uses administrative data to count children living in households in receipt of both in-work and out-of-work means-tested benefits and provides small area ranking as an indicator of child poverty in neighbourhoods. Benefit take-up rates within an area will affect its reliability. We aimed to examine benefit take-up rates and compare area ranking by the IDACI with ranking using individually reported data across areas of varying ethnic composition. Mothers living in areas with high minority ethnic density were less likely to report claiming a benefit than those in majority White or mixed areas, despite reporting lower incomes. The correlation between self-reported material difficulties and worsening IDACI rank was much lower in areas characterised by minority ethnic populations. Further investigation into the performance of area-based deprivation measures in areas with high minority ethnic density is needed

What are the living conditions and health status of those who don't report their migration status? a population-based study in Chile

BACKGROUND: Undocumented immigrants are likely to be missing from population databases, making it impossible to identify an accurate sampling frame in migration research. No population-based data has been collected in Chile regarding the living conditions and health status of undocumented immigrants. However, the CASEN survey (Caracterizacion Socio- Economica Nacional) asked about migration status in Chile for the first time in 2006 and provides an opportunity to set the base for future analysis of available migration data. We explored the living conditions and health of self-reported immigrants and respondents who preferred not to report their migration status in this survey. METHODS: Cross-sectional secondary analysis of CASEN survey in Chile in 2006. Outcomes: any disability, illness/accident, hospitalization/surgery, cancer/chronic condition (all binary variables); and the number of medical/emergency attentions received (count variables). Covariates: Demographics (age, sex, marital status, urban/rural, ethnicity), socioeconomic status (education level, employment status and household income), and material standard of living (overcrowding, sanitation, housing quality). Weighted regression models were estimated for each health outcome, crude and adjusted by sets of covariates, in STATA 10.0. RESULTS: About 1% of the total sample reported being immigrants and 0.7% preferred not to report their migration status (Migration Status - Missing Values; MS-MV). The MS-MV lived in more deprived conditions and reported a higher rate of health problems than immigrants. Some gender differences were observed by health status among immigrants and the MS-MV but they were not statistically significant. Regressions indicated that age, sex, SES and material factors consistently affected MS-MVs’ chance of presenting poor health and these patterns were different to those found among immigrants. Great heterogeneity in both the MS-MV and the immigrants, as indicated by wide confidence intervals, prevented the identification of other significantly associated covariates. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to look at the living conditions and health of those that preferred not to respond their migration status in Chile. Respondents that do not report their migration status are vulnerable to poor health and may represent undocumented immigrants. Surveys that fail to identify these people are likely to misrepresent the experiences of immigrants and further quantitative and qualitative research is urgently required

Difficult Life Events, Selective Migration and Spatial Inequalities in Mental Health in the UK

Objective: Research has indicated that people moving towards neighbourhoods with disadvantaged socio-economic status have poor health, in particular mental health, but the reasons for this are unclear. This study aims to assess why people moving towards more socio-economically deprived areas have poor mental health. It focuses upon the role of difficult life events that may both trigger moves and damage mental health. This study investigates how mental health and socio-spatial patterns of mobility vary between people moving following difficult life events and for other reasons.<p></p> Methods: Longitudinal analysis of British Household Panel Survey data describing adults’ moves between annual survey waves, pooled over ten years, 1996-2006 (N=122,892 observations). Respondents were defined as ‘difficult life event movers’ if they had experienced relationship breakdown, housing eviction/repossession, or job loss between waves. Respondents were categorised as moving to more or less deprived quintiles using their Census Area Statistic residential ward Carstairs score. Mental health was indicated by self-reported mental health problems. Binary logistic regression models of weighted data were adjusted for age, sex, education and social class.<p></p> Results: The migration rate over one year was 8.5%; 14.1% of movers had experienced a difficult life event during this time period. Adjusted regression model odds of mental health problems among difficult life event movers were 1.67 (95% CI 1.35-2.07) relative to other movers. Odds of difficult life events movers, compared to other movers, moving to a less deprived area, relative to an area with a similar level of deprivation, were 0.70 (95% CI 0.58-0.84). Odds of mental health problems among difficult life event movers relocating to more deprived areas were highly elevated at 2.40 (95% CI 1.63-3.53), relative to stayers.<p></p> Conclusion: Difficult life events may influence health selective patterns of migration and socio-spatial trajectories, reducing moves to less deprived neighbourhoods among people with mental illness

The relationship between wealth and loneliness among older people across Europe: Is social participation protective?

Objective: 1. Examine the relationship between household wealth, social participation and loneliness among older people across Europe. 2. Investigate whether relationships vary by type of social participation (charity/volunteer work, sports/social clubs, educational/training course, and political/community organisations) and gender. 3. Examine whether social participation moderates the association between wealth and loneliness. Methods: Data (N = 29,795) were taken from the fifth wave of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), which was collected during 2013 from 14 European countries. Loneliness was measured using the short version of the Revised-University of California, Los Angeles (R-UCLA) Loneliness Scale. We used multilevel logistic models stratified by gender to examine the relationships between variables, with individuals nested within countries. Results: The risk of loneliness was highest in the least wealthy groups and lowest in the wealthiest groups. Frequent social participation was associated with a lower risk of loneliness and moderated the association between household wealth and loneliness, particularly among men. Compared to the wealthiest men who often took part in formal social activities, the least wealthy men who did not participate had greater risk of loneliness (OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.44 to 2.51). This increased risk was not observed among the least wealthy men who reported frequent participation in formal social activities (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.67). Conclusion: Participation in external social activities may help to reduce loneliness among older adults and potentially acts as a buffer against the adverse effects of socioeconomic disadvantage

Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose