Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study

  • Katrina Giskes (a1), Gavin Turrell (a2), Frank J van Lenthe (a3), Johannes Brug (a3) and Johan P Mackenbach (a3)...

Abstract

Objective

To examine the influence of individual- and area-level socio-economic characteristics on food choice behaviour and dietary intake.

Setting

The city of Eindhoven in the south-east Netherlands.

Design

A total of 1339 men and women aged 25–79 years were sampled from 85 areas (mean number of participants per area = 18.4, range 2–49). Information on socio-economic position (SEP) and diet was collected by structured face-to-face interviews (response rate 80.9%). Individual-level SEP was measured by education and household income, and area-level deprivation was measured using a composite index that included residents' education, occupation and employment status. Diet was measured on the basis of (1) a grocery food index that captured compliance with dietary guidelines, (2) breakfast consumption and (3) intakes of fruit, total fat and saturated fat. Multilevel analyses were performed to examine the independent effects of individual- and area-level socio-economic characteristics on the dietary outcome variables.

Results

After adjusting for individual-level SEP, few trends or significant effects of area deprivation were found for the dietary outcomes. Significant associations were found between individual-level SEP and food choice, breakfast consumption and fruit intake, with participants from disadvantaged backgrounds being less likely to report food behaviours or nutrient intakes consistent with dietary recommendations.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that an individual's socio-economic characteristics play a more important role in shaping diet than the socio-economic characteristics of the area in which they live. In this Dutch study, no independent influence of area-level socio-economic characteristics on diet was detected, which contrasts with findings from the USA, the UK and Finland.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email k.giskes@erasmusmc.nl
Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands

References

Hide All
1Dalstra, JA, Kunst, AE, Geurts, JJ, Frenken, FJ, Mackenbach, JP. Trends in socioeconomic health inequalities in the Netherlands, 1981 – 1999. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2002; 56: 927–34.
2Kaplan, G, Keil, J. Socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular disease: a review of the literature. Circulation 1993; 88: 1973–98.
3Davey Smith, G, Hart, C, Watt, G, Hole, D, Hawthorne, V. Individual social class, area-based deprivation, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and mortality: the Renfrew and Paisley Study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1998; 52: 399405.
4Davey Smith, G, Brunner, E. Socio-economic differentials in health: the role of nutrition. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 1997; 56: 7590.
5James, WP, Nelson, M, Ralph, A, Leather, S. Socioeconomic determinants of health. The contribution of nutrition to inequalities in health. British Medical Journal 1997; 314: 1545–9.
6Mackenbach, J, Cavelaars, A, Kunst, A, Groenhof, F. Socioeconomic inequalities in cardiovascular disease mortality; an international study. European Heart Journal 2000; 21: 1141–51.
7Diez-Roux, A, Nieto, F, Caulfield, L, Tyroler, H, Watson, R, Szklo, M. Neighbourhood differences in diet: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1999; 53: 5563.
8Galobardes, B, Morabia, A, Bernstein, MS. Diet and socioeconomic position: does the use of different indicators matter? International Journal of Epidemiology 2001; 30: 334–40.
9Giskes, K, Turrell, G, Patterson, C, Newman, B. Socio-economic differences in fruit and vegetable consumption among Australian adolescents and adults. Public Health Nutrition 2002; 5: 663–9.
10Roos, E, Prattala, R, Lahelma, E, Kleemola, P, Pietinen, P. Modern and healthy?: socioeconomic differences in the quality of diet. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1996; 50: 753–60.
11Turrell, G, Blakely, T, Patterson, C, Oldenburg, B. A multilevel analysis of socioeconomic (small area) differences in household food purchasing behaviour. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2004; 58: 208–15.
12Forsyth, A, Macintyre, S, Anderson, A. Diets for disease? Intraurban variation in reported food consumption in Glasgow. Appetite 1994; 22: 259–74.
13Shohaimi, S, Welch, A, Bingham, S, Luben, R, Day, N, Wareham, N, et al. Residential area deprivation predicts fruit and vegetable consumption independently of individual educational level and occupational social class: a cross sectional population study in the Norfolk cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC-Norfolk). Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2004; 58: 686–91.
14Wardle, J, Jarvis, M, Steggles, N, Sutton, S, Williamson, S, Farimond, H, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in cancer-risk behaviours in adolescence: baseline results from the Health and Behaviour in Teenagers Study (HABITS). Preventive Medicine 2003; 36: 721–30.
15Karvonen, S, Rimpela, A. Socio-regional context as a determinant of adolescents' health behaviour in Finland. Social Science & Medicine 1996; 43: 1467–74.
16Karvonen, S, Rimpela, A. Urban small area variation in adolescents' health behaviour. Social Science & Medicine 1997; 45: 1089–98.
17Ecob, R, Macintyre, S. Small area variations in health related behaviours; do these depend on the behaviour itself, its measurement, or on personal characteristics? Health & Place 2000; 6: 261–74.
18Mackenbach, J, van de Mheen, H, Stronks, K. A prospective cohort study investigating the explanation of socio-economic inequalities in health in the Netherlands. Social Science & Medicine 1994; 38: 299308.
19Camps, M, Abden, D. De ENVET-lijst: Ontwikkeling en validering van een korte voedelsfrequentievragenlijst naar energie en vet- tweede fase. Geldrop-Valkenswaard: GGD regio Geldrop-Valkenswaard, 1994.
20van Lenthe, FJ, Mackenbach, JP. Neighbourhood deprivation and overweight: the GLOBE study. International Journal Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 2002; 26: 234–40.
21Hulshof, K, Lowik, M, Kok, F, Wedel, M, Brants, H, Hermus, R, et al. Diet and other life-style factors in high and low socioeconomic groups (Dutch Nutrition Surveillance System). European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1991; 45: 441–50.
22Nederlands Stichting Voedingsstoffenbestand. NEVO-tabel 1986/1987. Ziest: Nederlands Voedingsstoffenbestand, 1987.
23Rasbash, J, Browne, W, Healy, M, Cameron, B, Charlton, C. MLwiN version 1.10.0007. London: Multilevel Models Project, 2001.
24Diehr, P, Koepsell, T, Cheadle, A, Psaty, B, Wagner, E, Curry, S. Do communities differ in health behaviour? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1993; 46: 1141–9.
25Alwitt, L, Donley, T. Retail stores in poor urban neighbourhoods. Journal of Consumer Affairs 1997; 31: 139–64.
26Morland, K, Wing, S, Diez-Roux, A. The contextual effect of the local food environment on resident's diets: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. American Journal of Public Health 2002; 92: 1761–7.
27Reidpath, D, Burns, C, Garrad, J, Mahoney, M, Townsend, M. An ecological study of the relationship between social and environmental determinants of obesity. Health & Place 2002; 8: 141–5.
28Chung, C, Myers, S. Do the poor pay more for food? An analysis of grocery store availability and food price disparities. Journal of Consumer Affairs 1999; 33: 276–96.
29Dibsdall, L, Lambert, N, Bobbin, R, Frewer, L. Low-income consumer's attitudes and behaviours towards access, availability and motivation to eat fruit and vegetables. Public Health Nutrition 2003; 6: 159–68.
30Mooney, C. Cost and availability of healthy food choices in a London health district. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 1990; 3: 111–20.
31Brinkhoff, T. City Population [online], 2004. Available at http://www.citypopulation.de. Accessed November 2004.
32Wrigley, N. ‘Food deserts’ in British cities: policy context and research priorities. Urban Studies 2002; 39: 2029–40.
33Ostendorf, W, Musterd, S, de Vos, S. Social mix and the neighbourhood effect. Policy ambitions and empirical evidence. Housing Studies 2001; 16: 371–80.
34Bolton-Smith, C, Smith, W, Woodward, M, Tunstall-Pedoe, H. Nutrient intakes of different social-class groups: results from the Scottish Heart Health Study. British Journal of Nutrition 1991; 65: 321–35.
35Pomerleau, J, Pederson, L, Ostbye, T, Speechley, M, Speechley, K. Health behaviours and socio-economic status in Ontario, Canada. European Journal of Epidemiology 1997; 13: 613–22.
36Murphy, S, Rose, D, Hudes, M, Viteri, F. Demographic and economic factors associated with dietary quality for adults in the 1987 – 1988 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1992; 92: 1352–7.
37Stallone, D, Brunner, E, Bingham, S, Marmot, M. Dietary assessment in Whitehall II: the influence of reporting bias on apparent socioeconomic variation in nutrient intakes. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1997; 51: 815–25.
38Cho, S, Dietrich, M, Brown, C, Clark, C, Block, G. The effect of breakfast type on total daily energy intake and body mass index: results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III). Journal of the American College of Nutrition 2003; 22: 296302.
39Ma, Y, Bertone, E, Stanek, E, Reed, G, Hebert, J, Cohen, N, et al. Association between eating patterns and obesity in a free-living US adult population. American Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 158: 8592.
40van Lenthe, FJ, Brug, J, Mackenbach, JP. Neighbourhood inequalities in physical activity: the role of neighbourhood attractiveness, proximity to local facilities and safety in the Netherlands. Social Science & Medicine 2005; 60: 763–75.
41Diez-Roux, A. Estimating neighbourhood health effects: the challenges of causal inference in a complex world. Social Science & Medicine 2004; 58: 1953–60.
42Winkleby, M, Jatulis, D, Frank, E, Fortmann, S. Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income and occupation contribute to risk factors for cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Public Health 1992; 82: 816–20.
43Johansson, G, Wikman, A, Ahren, A, Hallmans, G, Johansson, I. Underreporting of energy intake in repeated 24-hour recalls related to gender, age, weight status, day of interview, educational level, reported food intake, smoking habits and area of living. Public Health Nutrition 2001; 4: 919–27.
44Kaplan, G, Turrell, G, Lynch, J, Everson, S, Helkala, E, Salonen, J. Childhood socioeconomic position and cognitive function in adulthood. International Journal of Epidemiology 2001; 30: 256–63.
45Turrell, G, Najman, J. Collecting food-related data from low socioeconomic groups: how adequate are our current research designs? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 1995; 19: 410–6.

Keywords

A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study

  • Katrina Giskes (a1), Gavin Turrell (a2), Frank J van Lenthe (a3), Johannes Brug (a3) and Johan P Mackenbach (a3)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed