Key result
Higher Gini index is linked to ~56% greater risk of adverse cardiovascular tract classification.
Why the study?
Areas that promote cardiovascular disease resilience rather than risk among black populations are understudied despite growing interest in place as a determinant of health.
What neighborhood socioeconomic factors are associated with at-risk versus resilient census tracts for cardiovascular disease among black adults?
Observational
No
What neighborhood socioeconomic factors are associated with at-risk versus resilient census tracts for cardiovascular disease among black adults?
Odds Ratio: 1.56 (95% CI 1.19–2.07)
Despite similar median incomes, at-risk neighborhoods for CVD among black populations have a higher prevalence of socioeconomic inequality indicators compared to resilient neighborhoods.
Neighborhood inequality may flag high-risk CVD areas for black adults; extends observational data but should not yet alter practice.
INTRODUCTION: Despite the growing interest in place as a determinant of health, areas that promote rather than reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) in blacks are understudied. We performed an ecologic analysis to identify areas with high levels of CVD resilience and risk among blacks from a large southern, US metropolitan area. METHODS: We obtained census tract-level rates of cardiovascular deaths, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations for black adults aged 35 to 64 from 2010 through 2014 for the Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan area. Census tracts with substantially lower rates of cardiovascular events on the basis of neighborhood socioeconomic status were identified as resilient and those with higher rates were identified as at risk. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of being classified as an at-risk versus resilient tract for differences in census-derived measures. RESULTS: We identified 106 resilient and 121 at-risk census tracts, which differed in the rates per 5,000 person years of cardiovascular outcomes (mortality, 8.13 vs 13.81; ED visits, 32.25 vs 146.3; hospitalizations, 26.69 vs 130.0), despite similarities in their median black income ($46,123 vs $45,306). Tracts with a higher percentage of residents aged 65 or older (odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.41-3.85 per 5% increment) and those with incomes less than 200% of the federal poverty level (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.39 per 5% increment) and greater Gini index (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.19- 2.07 per 0.05 increment) were more likely to be classified as at risk than resilient neighborhoods. DISCUSSION: Despite matching on median income level, at-risk neighborhoods for CVD among black populations were associated with a higher prevalence of socioeconomic indicators of inequality than resilient neighborhoods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease. Greater Gini index (per 0.05 increment) vs. Lower Gini index was evaluated on Classification as an at-risk versus resilient census tract for cardiovascular events (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.19-2.07). Census tracts with a greater Gini index were more likely to be classified as at-risk for cardiovascular disease among black residents (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.19-2.07 per 0.05 increment).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: