Causal mechanisms proposed for the alcohol harm paradox-a systematic review

被引:87
作者
Boyd, Jennifer [1 ]
Sexton, Olivia [1 ]
Angus, Colin [1 ]
Meier, Petra [2 ]
Purshouse, Robin C. [3 ]
Holmes, John [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sch Hlth & Related Res, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Glasgow, MRC CSO Social & Publ Hlth Sci Unit, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[3] Univ Sheffield, Dept Automat Control & Syst Engn, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
基金
美国国家卫生研究院; 英国惠康基金;
关键词
Alcohol consumption; alcohol-related harm; causal mechanisms; disadvantage; health inequalities; morbidity; mortality; socio-economic position; ALL-CAUSE MORTALITY; PUBLIC-HEALTH RESEARCH; SOCIOECONOMIC-STATUS; GENDER-DIFFERENCES; SOCIAL-CLASS; ATTRIBUTABLE MORTALITY; HOSPITAL ADMISSIONS; ACUTE-PANCREATITIS; FOLLOW-UP; CONSUMPTION;
D O I
10.1111/add.15567
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Aims The alcohol harm paradox (AHP) posits that disadvantaged groups suffer from higher rates of alcohol-related harm compared with advantaged groups, despite reporting similar or lower levels of consumption on average. The causes of this relationship remain unclear. This study aimed to identify explanations proposed for the AHP. Secondary aims were to review the existing evidence for those explanations and investigate whether authors linked explanations to one another. Methods This was a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE (1946-January 2021), EMBASE (1974-January 2021) and PsycINFO (1967-January 2021), supplemented with manual searching of grey literature. Included papers either explored the causes of the AHP or investigated the relationship between alcohol consumption, alcohol-related harm and socio-economic position. Papers were set in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development high-income countries. Explanations extracted for analysis could be evidenced in the empirical results or suggested by researchers in their narrative. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to group explanations. Results Seventy-nine papers met the inclusion criteria and initial coding revealed that these papers contained 41 distinct explanations for the AHP. Following inductive thematic analysis, these explanations were grouped into 16 themes within six broad domains: individual, life-style, contextual, disadvantage, upstream and artefactual. Explanations related to risk behaviours, which fitted within the life-style domain, were the most frequently proposed (n = 51) and analysed (n = 21). Conclusions While there are many potential explanations for the alcohol harm paradox, most research focuses on risk behaviours while other explanations lack empirical testing.
引用
收藏
页码:33 / 56
页数:24
相关论文
共 103 条
[1]   Assessing the contribution of alcohol-specific causes to socio-economic inequalities in mortality in England and Wales 2001-16 [J].
Angus, Colin ;
Pryce, Rob ;
Holmes, John ;
de Vocht, Frank ;
Hickman, Matthew ;
Meier, Petra ;
Brennan, Alan ;
Gillespie, Duncan .
ADDICTION, 2020, 115 (12) :2268-2279
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2014, ALCOHOL HLTH WALES 2
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2014, ALC IN
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2019, Doing Business, V16th
[5]   Unemployment Is a Risk Factor for Hospitalization Due to Alcohol Problems: A Longitudinal Study Based on the Stockholm Public Health Cohort (SPHC) [J].
Backhans, Mona Christina ;
Balliu, Natalja ;
Lundin, Andreas ;
Hemmingsson, Tomas .
JOURNAL OF STUDIES ON ALCOHOL AND DRUGS, 2016, 77 (06) :936-942
[6]   Deconstructing the Alcohol Harm Paradox: A Population Based Survey of Adults in England [J].
Beard, Emma ;
Brown, Jamie ;
West, Robert ;
Angus, Colin ;
Brennan, Alan ;
Holmes, John ;
Kaner, Eileen ;
Meier, Petra ;
Michie, Susan .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (09)
[7]  
Beeston C., 2016, MONITORING EVALUATIN
[8]  
Bellis M.A., 2009, STRATEGIC REV HLTH I
[9]   The alcohol harm paradox: using a national survey to explore how alcohol may disproportionately impact health in deprived individuals [J].
Bellis, Mark A. ;
Hughes, Karen ;
Nicholls, James ;
Sheron, Nick ;
Gilmore, Ian ;
Jones, Lisa .
BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2016, 16
[10]  
Bloomfield K, 2020, LANCET PUBLIC HEALTH, V5, pE300, DOI 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30119-5