Table 1 Results from recent studies
From: Hip fractures and area level socioeconomic conditions: a population-based study
Study | Socioeconomic (SE) variable | Association between SE variables and hip fracture risk |
|---|---|---|
Individual-level studies | ||
Vestergard 2006, Denmark | - Social, co-morbidity variables; | Significant association |
| Â | - income | No association found |
Peel 2007, Australia | - Psychosocial determinants of healthy ageing | Risk decrease |
Area-level studies | ||
West 2004, UK | Townsend Score: social deprivation | No association found |
Jones 2004, UK | Townsend Score: social deprivation | Risk increase |
Kaastad 1998, Oslo (Norway) | - Urban vs. rural | Risk increase |
| Â | - poor socioeconomic conditions, high mortality | Risk increase |
Sanders 2002, Australia | Urban vs. rural | Risk increase |
Bacon 2000, USA | Lower income | Risk increase |
Individual- and area-level studies | ||
Reimers 2007, Sweden | Individual-level: | Â |
| Â | -marital status: unmarried | Risk increase |
| Â | -county of birth: outside Sweden | Risk decrease |
| Â | Area-level: | Â |
| Â | - low economic status (high proportion of social welfare, unemployment, low-wage earners, single parent families) | Risk increase |
| Â | - low social status (high proportion of low educated subjects, high population density, low car ownership) | Risk decrease |