Evidence mapPaperPMID 35197348Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Theoretical explanations for socioeconomic inequalities in multimorbidity: a scoping review.

Ludmila Fleitas Alfonzo, Tania King, Emily You, Diana Contreras-Suarez, Syafiqah Zulkelfi, Ankur Singh

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Ludmila Fleitas AlfonzoCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia ludmila.fleitasalfonzo@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-6988-5036
Tania KingCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Emily YouAcademic Unit for Psychiatry of Old Age, Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Diana Contreras-SuarezMelbourne Institute: Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Syafiqah ZulkelfiCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ankur SinghCentre of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1336-6493
The University of Melbourne · AUEconomic and Social Research Institute · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo document socioepidemiological theories used to explain the relationship between socioeconomic disadvantage and multimorbidity.

designScoping review.

methodsA search strategy was developed and then applied to multiple electronic databases including Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Web of Science, Scielo, Applied Social Sciences, ERIC, Humanities Index and Sociological Abstracts. After the selection of studies, data were extracted using a data charting plan. The last search was performed on the 28 September 2021. Extracted data included: study design, country, population subgroups, measures of socioeconomic inequality, assessment of multimorbidity and conclusion on the association between socioeconomic variables and multimorbidity. Included studies were further assessed on their use of theory, type of theories used and context of application. Finally, we conducted a meta-narrative synthesis to summarise the results.

resultsA total of 64 studies were included in the review. Of these, 33 papers included theories as explanations for the association between socioeconomic position and multimorbidity. Within this group, 16 explicitly stated those theories and five tested at least one theory. Behavioural theories (health behaviours) were the most frequently used, followed by materialist (access to health resources) and psychosocial (stress pathways) theories. Most studies used theories as post hoc explanations for their findings or for study rationale. Supportive evidence was found for the role of material, behavioural and life course theories in explaining the relationship between social inequalities and multimorbidity.

conclusionGiven the widely reported social inequalities in multimorbidity and its increasing public health burden, there is a critical gap in evidence on pathways from socioeconomic disadvantage to multimorbidity. Generating evidence of these pathways will guide the development of intervention and public policies to prevent multimorbidity among people living in social disadvantage. Material, behavioural and life course pathways can be targeted to reduce the negative effect of low socioeconomic position on multimorbidity.

Indexed as

MultimorbidityResearch DesignHumansSocioeconomic Factorsepidemiologypublic healthsocial medicine

Identifiers

PMID35197348
PMCPMC8882654
OpenAlexW4213437955

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.