| Bernardi et al. 1919. Bernardi JR, Goldani MZ, Pinheiro TV, Guimarães LSP, Bettiol H, da Silva AAM, et al. Gender and social mobility modify the effect of birth weight on total and central obesity. Nutr J 2017; 16:38. (Brazil/2017) |
2,063 individuals, followed from birth to 23-25 years old. Age at outcome assessment: between 23 and 25 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood. In childhood, maternal level of education; in adulthood, participant’s level of education |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [mean BMI (SD)]: Males: 26.1 (6.8) vs. 25.4 (6.7); Females: 25.1 (7.3) vs. 22.5 (6.7) |
Among women born with normal weight, the BMI was higher in the group with always low socioeconomic status, as compared to the group with always high socioeconomic status. Among those born with low weight, BMI was higher in the group with always low socioeconomic status, as compared to the group with upward mobility. There was no association for men |
8 |
| Savitsky et al. 2727. Savitsky B, Manor O, Friedlander Y, Burger A, Lawrence G, Calderon-Margalit R, et al. Associations of socioeconomic position in childhood and young adulthood with cardiometabolic risk factors: the Jerusalem Perinatal Family Follow-Up Study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2017; 71:43-51. (Israel/2017) |
1,132 individuals, followed from birth to 32 years old. Age at outcome assessment: 32 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood. In childhood, parental occupation was used; in adulthood, participant’s level of education and occupation |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status: β (p-value): 1.019 (0.289) |
Individuals with upward mobility had, on average, a higher BMI, as compared to individuals with always high socioeconomic status. Analyses of downward social mobility and always low socioeconomic status were not significant |
6 |
| Albrecht & Gordon-Larsen 2020. Albrecht SS, Gordon-Larsen P. Socioeconomic gradients in body mass index (BMI) in US immigrants during the transition to adulthood: examining the roles of parental education and intergenerational educational mobility. J Epidemiol Community Health 2014; 68:842-8. (United States/2014) |
13,701 individuals, followed from 11/20 to 24/33 years old. Age at outcome assessment: between 24 and 33 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood. In childhood, parental level of education was used; in adulthood, the participant’s level of education was used. The mobility was assessed in three generations of immigrants |
BMI: overweight (25.0-29.9kg/m2) and obesity (≥ 30kg/m2) |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status by immigrant generation [mean BMI (SE)]: First: 26.1 (1.84) vs. 24.7 (1.57); Second: 28.3 (1.25) vs. 26.0 (1.03); Third: 29.3 (0.50) vs. 27.7 (0.50) |
In the first generation of immigrants, individuals with upward mobility had a lower BMI mean as compared to those who remained in the low socioeconomic status group. No association was observed with the other generations and with downward and stable high or medium mobility |
6 |
| Boylan et al. 2121. Boylan SM, Gill TP, Hare-Bruun H, Andersen LB, Heitmann BL. Associations between adolescent and adult socioeconomic status and risk of obesity and overweight in Danish adults. Obes Res Clin Pract 2014; 8:e163-71. (Denmark/2014) |
623 adolescents. Followed for 20-22 years (from 17 to 38 years old). Age at outcome assessment: 38 years |
Socioeconomic status accumulation and social mobility from adolescence to adulthood. For socioeconomic status in adolescence, paternal level of education and occupation was used; in adulthood, the participant’s level of education and occupation |
BMI: overweight (25-30kg/m2) and obesity (> 30kg/m2) |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [OR (CI)]: Males: 1.0 (0.3; 2.9); Females: 2.8 (0.9; 8.3) |
Women with downward socioeconomic status were more likely to be overweight/obese as compared to those who remained in the high socioeconomic status group. The OR of overweight/obesity among women who accumulated low socioeconomic status from 17 to 38 years of age was 3.6 times higher than those who accumulated high socioeconomic status. There was no association for men |
5 |
| Padyab & Norberg 2626. Padyab M, Norberg M. Socioeconomic inequalities and body mass index in Vasterbotten County, Sweden: a longitudinal study of life course influences over two decades. Int J Equity Health 2014; 13:35. (Sweden/2014) |
3,340 individuals, followed from birth to 60 years old. Age at outcome assessment: 60 years |
Socioeconomic status accumulation, social mobility and critical period. The three models were assessed with socioeconomic status at 40, 50 and 60 years old. It was assessed by the participant’s occupation |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [mean BMI (SD)]: Males: 26.1 (3.5) vs. 26.4 (3.5); Females: 26.6 (4.4) vs. 25.3 (3.6) |
Women who kept a low socioeconomic status had a higher BMI average than those who kept high socioeconomic status. Women with no accumulation of socioeconomic status disadvantage had a lower BMI mean than those with accumulation of socioeconomic status disadvantage. At each increase of one unit in the accumulation score, the BMI increased by an average of 0.44kg/m2. The critical period model was not significant |
6 |
| Aitsi-Selmi et al. 77. Aitsi-Selmi A, Batty GD, Barbieri MA, Silva AA, Cardoso VC, Goldani MZ, et al. Childhood socioeconomic position, adult socioeconomic position and social mobility in relation to markers of adiposity in early adulthood: evidence of differential effects by gender in the 1978/79 Ribeirao Preto cohort study. Int J Obes (Lond) 2013; 37:439-47. (Brazil/2013) |
2,063 individuals, followed from birth to 23/25 years old. Age at outcome assessment: between 23 and 25 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood assessed by family income |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [mean BMI (SD)]: Males: 24.8 (4.6) vs. 25.4 (4.7); Females: 24.6 (5.8) vs. 22.6 (4.1) |
Women with upward mobility and who kept a high socioeconomic status had, on average, lower BMI as compared to those who kept a low socioeconomic status. There was no association for men |
8 |
| Gustafsson et al. 2222. Gustafsson PE, Persson M, Hammarstrom A. Socio-economic disadvantage and body mass over the life course in women and men: results from the Northern Swedish Cohort. Eur J Public Health 2012; 22:322-7. (Sweden/2012) |
863 individuals, followed from 16 to 43 years old. Age at outcome assessment: 43 years |
Critical period assessed from 16 to 43 years old and socioeconomic status accumulation assessed by number of times with low socioeconomic status (occupation) in all the follow-ups |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Accumulation (R2): Males: 1.0% (age 30 years); Females: 1.0% (age 16 years) and 4.6% (age 43 years). Critical period (low socioeconomic status 16 years): β (CI): Females: mean BMI 30 years: 1.11 (0.43; 1.78); mean BMI 43 years: 2.14 (1.23; 3.06) |
Among women, the accumulation of socioeconomic status disadvantage was associated with the increase in BMI average in all ages studied. For men, only at 30 years, with positive association. Among women, adolescence was considered a critical period for a higher BMI average at 30 and 43 years of age. For men, no critical period was observed |
6 |
| Krzyzanowska & Mascie-Taylor 2323. Krzyzanowska M, Mascie-Taylor CG. Intra- and intergenerational social mobility in relation to height, weight and body mass index in a British national cohort. J Biosoc Sci 2011; 43:611-8. (England, Scotland and Wales/2011) |
2,090 individuals, followed from birth to 33-40 years. Age at outcome assessment: between 33 and 40 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood assessed by paternal occupation and participant’s occupation |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Mean BMI difference (kg/m2) from non-mobile reference group. Downwardly mobile: 0.68; Upward mean: -0.07 |
Individuals with downward mobility had, on average, a higher BMI as compared to those without social mobility, and individuals with upward social mobility had, on average, a lower BMI as compared to individuals without social mobility |
6 |
| Murray et al. 2525. Murray ET, Mishra GD, Kuh D, Guralnik J, Black S, Hardy R. Life course models of socioeconomic position and cardiovascular risk factors: 1946 birth cohort. Ann Epidemiol 2011; 21:589-97. (United Kingdom/2011) |
3,035 individuals, followed from birth to 53 years old. Age at outcome assessment: 53 years |
Socioeconomic status accumulation, social mobility and critical period. In childhood, parental occupation was used; in early adulthood and late adulthood, the participant’s occupation |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [mean BMI (SD)]: Males: 27.9 (4.2) vs. 26.7 (3.8); Females: 28.6 (6.3) vs. 26.0 (4.4) |
Among women, the best model was accumulation of socioeconomic status disadvantage, where at each increase of one unit in the score of accumulation of socioeconomic status disadvantage, BMI increased by an average of 0.91kg/m2 at 53 years. For men, the best model was the critical period (low socioeconomic status in childhood), where individuals with low socioeconomic status in childhood had a higher BMI average |
6 |
| Scharoun-Lee et al. 2828. Scharoun-Lee M, Kaufman JS, Popkin BM, Gordon-Larsen P. Obesity, race/ethnicity and life course socioeconomic status across the transition from adolescence to adulthood. J Epidemiol Community Health 2009; 63:133-9. (United States/2009) |
12,940 adolescents followed into young adulthood (mean age = 21.7 years). Age at outcome assessment: mean age = 21.7 years |
Social mobility from adolescence to adulthood assessed by parental material endowments, skills, knowledge, material, human, and social capital + own of above |
BMI: obesity (> 30kg/m2). |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [RR (CI)]: Males: 1.18 (0.82; 1.7); Females: 3.01 (1.95; 4.66) |
Women were 3 times more likely to be obese if they were in the persistent low life course socioeconomic status compared to high life course socioeconomic status. There was no association for men |
6 |
| Langenberg et al. 2424. Langenberg C, Hardy R, Kuh D, Brunner E, Wadsworth M. Central and total obesity in middle aged men and women in relation to lifetime socioeconomic status: evidence from a national birth cohort. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003; 57:816-22. (England, Scotland and Wales/2003) |
1,299 individuals, followed from birth to 53 years old. Age at outcome assessment: 53 years |
Social mobility from childhood to adulthood. In childhood, parental occupation was used; in adulthood, participant’s occupation |
BMI: assessed continuously |
Low vs. high socioeconomic status [mean BMI (SD)]: Males: 27.7 (4.0) vs. 26.8 (3.9); Females: 28.8 (5.4) vs. 26.1 (5.6) |
For both men and women, those who maintained a low socioeconomic status or had upward mobility had a higher BMI average as compared to those who kept a high socioeconomic status |
7 |
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
