Search

The Delta-Omicron wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (Wave 4) in the United States occurred in Fall of 2021 through Spring of 2022. Although vaccinations were widely available, this was the deadliest period to date in the U.S., and the toll was especially high in rural areas, exacerbating an existing rural mortality penalty. This paper uses county-level multilevel regression models and publicly available data for 47 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. We describe differences in COVID-19 case and mortality rates across the rural-urban continuum during Wave 4 of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a progressive modeling approach, we evaluate the relative contribution of a range of explanatory factors for the rural disadvantage we observe, including: pre-pandemic population health composition, vaccination rates, political partisanship, socioeconomic composition, access to broadband internet rate, and primary care physicians per capita. Results show that rural counties had higher observed burdens of cases and deaths in Wave 4 compared to more urban counties. The most remote rural counties had Wave 4 COVID-19 mortality rates 52% higher than the most urban counties. Older age composition, worse pre-pandemic population health, lower vaccination rates, higher share of votes cast for Donald Trump in the 2020 Presidential election, and lower socioeconomic composition completely explained the rural disadvantage in reported COVID-19 case rates in Wave 4, and accounting for these factors reversed the observed rural disadvantage in COVID-19 mortality. In models of mortality rate, Trump vote share had the largest effect size, followed by the percentage of the population age 50 or older, the poverty rate, the pre-pandemic mortality rate, the share of residents with a 4-year college degree, and the vaccination rate. These findings add to a growing literature describing the disproportionate toll of the COVID-19 pandemic on rural America, highlighting the combined effect of multiple sources of rural disadvantage. • Rural counties had higher case and death rates in the Delta-Omicron wave. • Rural counties had up to 51% more deaths per capita than the most urban counties. • Age, health, and SES composition partially explained the rural disadvantage. • Vaccination and Trump vote share were separate factors in the rural disadvantage. • Multiple sources of disadvantage combined in rural areas to produce poor outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study is to report on research production and publications on health inequalities through a bibliometric analysis covering publications from 1966 to 2014 and a content analysis of the 25 most-cited papers. A database of 49,294 references was compiled from the search engine Web of Science. The first article appears in 1966 and deals with equality and civil rights in the United States and the elimination of racial discrimination in access to medical care. By 2003, the term disparity has gained in prominence relative to the term inequality which was initially elected by the researchers. Marmot's 1991 article is one of the five papers with the largest number of citations and contributes to the central perspective of social determinants of health and the British influence on the international status of research on social inequalities of health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Socioeconomic inequalities in childhood Body Mass Index (BMI) are becoming increasingly more pronounced across the world. Although countries differ in the direction and strength of these inequalities, cross-national comparative research on this topic is rare. This paper draws on harmonized longitudinal cohort data from four wealthy countries—Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US)—to 1) map cross-country differences in the magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities in childhood BMI, and 2) to examine cross-country differences in the role of three energy-balance-related behaviors—physical activity, screen time, and breakfast consumption—in explaining these inequalities. Children were aged 5–7 at our first timepoint and were followed up at age 8–11. We used data from the German National Educational Panel Study, the Dutch Generation R study, the UK Millennium Cohort Study and the US Early Childhood Longitudinal-Kindergarten Study. All countries revealed significant inequalities in childhood BMI. The US stood out in having the largest inequalities. Overall, inequalities between children with low versus medium educated parents were smaller than those between children with high versus medium educated parents. The role of energy-balance-related behaviors in explaining inequalities in BMI was surprisingly consistent. Across countries, physical activity did not, while screen time and breakfast consumption did play a role. The only exception was that breakfast consumption did not play a role in the US. Cross-country differences emerged in the relative contribution of each behavior in explaining inequalities in BMI: Breakfast consumption was most important in the UK, screen time explained most in Germany and the US, and breakfast consumption and screen time were equally important in the Netherlands. Our findings suggest that what constitutes the most effective policy intervention differs across countries and that these should target both children from medium as well as low educated families. • All countries showed substantial socioeconomic inequalities in childhood BMI. • In all countries, inequalities in BMI steepen over course of primary school. • Protective factors among the most advantaged seem to mainly drive inequalities. • Across most countries, underlying mechanisms for inequalities in BMI are similar. • The relative contribution of each mechanism to BMI inequalities differs per country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses increasing differentiation of U.S. dietary components by socioeconomic strata and its health implications. While upper-income groups have had increasing access to higher-quality foods, lower-to-middle-income class diets are heavily focused on “energy-dense” fares. This neoliberal diet is clearly associated with the proliferation of obesity that disproportionately affects the poor. We provide a critical review of the debate about obesity from within the critical camp in food studies, between individual-focused and structural perspectives. Using official data, we show how the US diet has evolved since the 1960s to a much greater emphasis on refined carbohydrates and vegetable oils. Inequality is demonstrated by dividing the population into households-income quintiles and how they spend on food. We then introduce our Neoliberal Diet Risk Index (NDR), comprised of measures of food-import dependency, the Gini coefficient, rates of urbanization, female labor-force participation, and economic globalization. Our index serves to measure the risk of exposure to the neoliberal diet comparatively, across time and between nations. We conclude that only a societal actor like the state can redirect the food-production system by modifying its agricultural subsidy policies. Inequality-reducing policies will make the healthier food involved in such change widely available for all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]