Article
Agreement between area- and individual-level income measures in a population-based cohort: Implications for population health research

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100553Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
open access

Highlights

  • Area- and individual-level income measures may not capture the same groups.

  • Area-level socioeconomic status is not a valid proxy for individual-level data.

  • Area- and individual-level income are independently meaningful for health outcomes.

  • Measures can be used together to fully contextualize socioeconomic status.

Abstract

Socioeconomic status is an important determinant of health, the measurement of which is of great significance to population health research. However, individual-level socioeconomic factors are absent from much health administrative data, resulting in widespread use of area-level measures in their place. This study aims to clarify the role of individual- and area-level socioeconomic status in Ontario, Canada, through comparison of income measures.

Using data from four cycles (2005–2012) of the Canadian Community Health Survey, we assessed concordance between individual- and area-level income quintiles using percent agreement and Kappa statistics. Individual-level characteristics were compared at baseline. Cumulative adult premature mortality was calculated for 5-years following interview. Rates were calculated separately for area-level and individual-level income, and jointly for each combination of income groups. Multivariable negative binomial models were fit to estimate associations between area- and individual-level income quintile and premature mortality after adjustment for basic demographics (age, sex, interview cycle) and key risk factors (alcohol, smoking, physical activity, and body mass index).

Agreement between individual- and area-level income measures was low. Kappa statistics for same and similar (i.e. ±1 quintile) measures were 0.11 and 0.48, indicating low and moderate agreement, respectively. Socioeconomic disparities in premature mortality were greater for individual-level income than area-level income. When rates were stratified by both area- and individual-level income quintiles simultaneously, individual-level income gradients persisted within each area-level income group. The association between income and premature mortality was significant for both measures, including after full adjustment.

Area-level socioeconomic status is an inappropriate proxy for missing individual-level data. The low agreement between area- and individual-level income measures and differences in demographic profile indicate that the two socioeconomic status measures do not capture the same population groups. However, our findings demonstrate that both individual- and area-level income measures are associated with premature mortality, and describe unique socioeconomic inequities.

Keywords

Area-level measures
Individual-level measures
Premature mortality
Socioeconomic status

Cited by (0)