澳大利亚农村和地区成年人的社会经济地位与饮食质量之间的关系。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
British Journal of Nutrition Pub Date : 2025-06-28 Epub Date: 2025-06-30 DOI:10.1017/S0007114525103486
Rebekah Pullen, Matthew J Sharman, Ami Seivwright, Denis Visentin, Sebastian Kocar, Tracy Schumacher, Clare E Collins, Elizabeth Lester, Katherine Kent
{"title":"澳大利亚农村和地区成年人的社会经济地位与饮食质量之间的关系。","authors":"Rebekah Pullen, Matthew J Sharman, Ami Seivwright, Denis Visentin, Sebastian Kocar, Tracy Schumacher, Clare E Collins, Elizabeth Lester, Katherine Kent","doi":"10.1017/S0007114525103486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Diet quality has been linked to socio-economic status. However, evidence within rural and regional populations is lacking. This cross-sectional study examined the relationship between diet quality and socio-economic position in adults living in rural and regional areas of Australia. The Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS; range 0-73) measured diet quality (total and subscale scores). Area-level socio-economic position was determined by postcode-linked socio-economic index for areas (SEIFA), Index of Relative Social Advantage and Disadvantage scores, stratified into quintiles. The mean total ARFS (34·7; sd = 9·1; <i>n</i> 836) was classified as 'getting there'. Findings showed significantly lower mean total ARFS between SEIFA quintile 1 (1 = lowest; mean total ARFS = 30·4; sd = 10·2; categorised as 'needs work') compared with all other SEIFA quintiles (F (44 831) = 8·44, <i>P ≤</i> 0·001). Linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, income, education, employment status and household composition demonstrated significantly lower overall diet quality for SEIFA quintile 1 compared with SEIFA quintile 3 (B = -3·9; 95 % CI (-6·2, -1·5); <i>P</i> < 0·001) and lower subscale scores for vegetables (B = -1·6; 95 % CI (-2·7, -0·6); <i>P</i> = 0·003), fruit (B = -0·9; 95 % CI (-1·6, -0·1); <i>P</i> = 0·018) and grains (B = -0·6; 95 % CI (-1·3, -0·0); <i>P</i> = 0·050). After adjusting for individual confounders of diet quality, results indicate that lower area-level socio-economic position remained associated with poorer diet quality in this sample of rural and regional Australian adults. This suggests that broader social and environmental factors unique to these areas may impact diet quality and amplify individual barriers to achieving a healthy diet.</p>","PeriodicalId":9257,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":"1532-1542"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335914/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The association between socio-economic position and diet quality in rural and regional Australian adults.\",\"authors\":\"Rebekah Pullen, Matthew J Sharman, Ami Seivwright, Denis Visentin, Sebastian Kocar, Tracy Schumacher, Clare E Collins, Elizabeth Lester, Katherine Kent\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0007114525103486\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Diet quality has been linked to socio-economic status. However, evidence within rural and regional populations is lacking. This cross-sectional study examined the relationship between diet quality and socio-economic position in adults living in rural and regional areas of Australia. The Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS; range 0-73) measured diet quality (total and subscale scores). Area-level socio-economic position was determined by postcode-linked socio-economic index for areas (SEIFA), Index of Relative Social Advantage and Disadvantage scores, stratified into quintiles. The mean total ARFS (34·7; sd = 9·1; <i>n</i> 836) was classified as 'getting there'. Findings showed significantly lower mean total ARFS between SEIFA quintile 1 (1 = lowest; mean total ARFS = 30·4; sd = 10·2; categorised as 'needs work') compared with all other SEIFA quintiles (F (44 831) = 8·44, <i>P ≤</i> 0·001). Linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, income, education, employment status and household composition demonstrated significantly lower overall diet quality for SEIFA quintile 1 compared with SEIFA quintile 3 (B = -3·9; 95 % CI (-6·2, -1·5); <i>P</i> < 0·001) and lower subscale scores for vegetables (B = -1·6; 95 % CI (-2·7, -0·6); <i>P</i> = 0·003), fruit (B = -0·9; 95 % CI (-1·6, -0·1); <i>P</i> = 0·018) and grains (B = -0·6; 95 % CI (-1·3, -0·0); <i>P</i> = 0·050). After adjusting for individual confounders of diet quality, results indicate that lower area-level socio-economic position remained associated with poorer diet quality in this sample of rural and regional Australian adults. This suggests that broader social and environmental factors unique to these areas may impact diet quality and amplify individual barriers to achieving a healthy diet.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9257,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1532-1542\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335914/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114525103486\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114525103486","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

饮食质量与社会经济地位有关。然而,在农村和区域人口中缺乏证据。这项横断面研究调查了生活在澳大利亚农村和偏远地区的成年人的饮食质量和社会经济地位之间的关系。澳大利亚推荐食物评分(ARFS);范围0-73)测量饮食质量(总分和分量表得分)。区域层面的社会经济地位由邮政编码相关的地区社会经济指数(SEIFA)和相对社会优势和劣势指数(IRSAD)得分确定,并按五分位数分层。平均总ARFS (34.7;SD = 9.1;N =836)被归类为“到达那里”。研究结果显示,SEIFA五分位数1之间的平均总ARFS显著降低(1=最低;平均总ARFS = 30.4;SD = 10.2;归类为“需要工作”),与所有其他SEIFA五分位数相比(F (44,831) = 8.44, p = < 0.001)。经年龄、性别、收入、教育程度、就业状况和家庭组成调整后的线性回归显示,SEIFA五分位数1的总体饮食质量显著低于SEIFA五分位数3 (B=-3.9;95%ci [-6.2, -1.5];p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The association between socio-economic position and diet quality in rural and regional Australian adults.

Diet quality has been linked to socio-economic status. However, evidence within rural and regional populations is lacking. This cross-sectional study examined the relationship between diet quality and socio-economic position in adults living in rural and regional areas of Australia. The Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS; range 0-73) measured diet quality (total and subscale scores). Area-level socio-economic position was determined by postcode-linked socio-economic index for areas (SEIFA), Index of Relative Social Advantage and Disadvantage scores, stratified into quintiles. The mean total ARFS (34·7; sd = 9·1; n 836) was classified as 'getting there'. Findings showed significantly lower mean total ARFS between SEIFA quintile 1 (1 = lowest; mean total ARFS = 30·4; sd = 10·2; categorised as 'needs work') compared with all other SEIFA quintiles (F (44 831) = 8·44, P ≤ 0·001). Linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, income, education, employment status and household composition demonstrated significantly lower overall diet quality for SEIFA quintile 1 compared with SEIFA quintile 3 (B = -3·9; 95 % CI (-6·2, -1·5); P < 0·001) and lower subscale scores for vegetables (B = -1·6; 95 % CI (-2·7, -0·6); P = 0·003), fruit (B = -0·9; 95 % CI (-1·6, -0·1); P = 0·018) and grains (B = -0·6; 95 % CI (-1·3, -0·0); P = 0·050). After adjusting for individual confounders of diet quality, results indicate that lower area-level socio-economic position remained associated with poorer diet quality in this sample of rural and regional Australian adults. This suggests that broader social and environmental factors unique to these areas may impact diet quality and amplify individual barriers to achieving a healthy diet.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Nutrition
British Journal of Nutrition 医学-营养学
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
740
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: British Journal of Nutrition is a leading international peer-reviewed journal covering research on human and clinical nutrition, animal nutrition and basic science as applied to nutrition. The Journal recognises the multidisciplinary nature of nutritional science and includes material from all of the specialities involved in nutrition research, including molecular and cell biology and nutritional genomics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信