Key result
Socioeconomic status mobility was associated with inflammation markers in white adults but not in black adults, indicating diminished returns for affluent black participants.
Why the study?
It was unknown whether multidimensional indicators of objective and subjective socioeconomic status across the life course form latent classes of mobility and associate with inflammation markers across racial groups.
Is socioeconomic status mobility associated with inflammation markers in white and black adults?
Observational (n=750)
Is socioeconomic status mobility associated with inflammation markers in white and black adults?
Socioeconomic status mobility is associated with inflammation markers in white adults but not in black adults, indicating diminished health returns for affluent black individuals.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May indicate race-specific inflammation effects of socioeconomic mobility; leaves open causality and needs longitudinal confirmation.
OBJECTIVE: This article examines whether multidimensional indicators of objective and subjective socioeconomic status (SES) across the life course can be categorized into latent classes of SES mobility and tests the associations of these categories with inflammation markers among white and black adults. METHODS: Data are from 592 non-Hispanic white and 158 non-Hispanic black participants who completed both the baseline survey and biomarkers assessment of the Midlife in the United States Refresher study. Groups of different SES mobility were examined using latent class analysis. RESULTS: White and black participants showed different patterns of SES mobility. Among blacks, the latent classes were as follows: 1) objectively always high (24.71%; high objective SES across the life course), 2) subjectively always high (6.48%; high subjective and low objective SES across the life course), 3) downwardly mobile (35.84%; high childhood SES, low adult SES), and 4) always low (32.97%; low childhood SES, education, and adult SES). Among whites, the latent classes were as follows: 1) always high (52.17%; high childhood SES, high education, high adult SES), 2) upwardly mobile (18.14%; low childhood SES, high education, high adult SES), 3) subjectively downward (27.74%; high childhood SES, high education, high objective adult SES, low subjective adult SES), and 4) always low (1.95%; low childhood SES, education, and adult SES). SES mobility was associated with inflammation in white (Wald χ values (3) = 12.89-17.44, p values < .050), but not in black adults (Wald χ values (3) = 2.79-7.22, p values > .050). CONCLUSION: The lack of SES mobility differentiation on inflammation is an indication of diminished return for the most affluent class among black participants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Surachman et al. (2019) reported an observational. Socioeconomic status (SES) mobility vs. Different latent classes of SES mobility was evaluated on Inflammation markers (p=< .050 (whites); > .050 (blacks)). Socioeconomic status mobility was associated with inflammation markers in white adults but not in black adults, indicating diminished returns for affluent black participants.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: