Combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and least advantaged socioeconomic status were associated with the highest all-cause mortality, suggesting an additive effect, though the literature remains limited and heterogeneous.
Systematic Review
Does socioeconomic status modify the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and adverse health outcomes in adults?
The influence of socioeconomic status on the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and adverse health outcomes could be additive, with the highest mortality observed in those with the unhealthiest lifestyles and least advantaged SES.
Background: Combinations of lifestyle factors (LFs) and socioeconomic status (SES) are independently associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and mortality. Less advantaged SES groups may be disproportionately vulnerable to unhealthy LFs but interactions between LFs and SES remain poorly understood. This review aimed to synthesise the available evidence for whether and how SES modifies associations between combinations of LFs and adverse health outcomes. Methods: Systematic review of studies that examine associations between combinations of >3 LFs (eg.smoking/physical activity/diet) and health outcomes and report data on SES (eg.income/education/poverty-index) influences on associations. Databases (PubMed/EMBASE/CINAHL), references, forward citations, and grey-literature were searched from inception to December 2021. Eligibility criteria were analyses of prospective adult cohorts that examined all-cause mortality or CVD/cancer mortality/incidence. Results: Six studies (n=42,467-399,537; 46.5-56.8 years old; 54.6-59.3% women) of five cohorts were included. All examined all-cause mortality; three assessed CVD/cancer outcomes. Four studies observed multiplicative interactions between LFs and SES, but in opposing directions. Two studies tested for additive interactions; interactions were observed in one cohort (UK Biobank) and not in another (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)). All-cause mortality HRs (95% confidence intervals) for unhealthy LFs (versus healthy LFs) from the most advantaged SES groups ranged from 0.68 (0.32-1.45) to 4.17 (2.27-7.69). Equivalent estimates from the least advantaged ranged from 1.30 (1.13-1.50) to 4.00 (2.22-7.14). In 19 analyses (including sensitivity analyses) of joint associations between LFs, SES, and all-cause mortality, highest all-cause mortality was observed in the unhealthiest LF-least advantaged suggesting an additive effect. Conclusions: Limited and heterogenous literature suggests that the influence of SES on associations between combinations of unhealthy LFs and adverse health could be additive but remains unclear. Additional prospective analyses would help clarify whether SES modifies associations between combinations of unhealthy LFs and health outcomes. Registration: Protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020172588;25 June 2020).
Foster et al. (Fri,) conducted a systematic review in Adverse health outcomes (all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, cancer). Combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and least advantaged socioeconomic status vs. Healthy lifestyle factors and most advantaged socioeconomic status was evaluated on All-cause mortality. Combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and least advantaged socioeconomic status were associated with the highest all-cause mortality, suggesting an additive effect, though the literature remains limited and heterogeneous.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: