Search

Background: Many studies around the world have been carried out to establish the association between deprivation and health outcomes. Both separate deprivation indicators (income, education) and indices that include several ones are used. Deprivation indices have been actively used in public health since the mid-80s of the last century. Nowadays, there is no clear classification of deprivation indices. Methods: In order to create a taxonomy of deprivation indices, scientific publications related to the development and application of indices have been combined, analyzed, and systematized. The search was carried out in two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Google Sholar). After conducting a full-text review and searching and adding relevant papers from the bibliography, and adding papers that were already known to the authors, 61 documents were included in the study. These documents referred to 61 original deprivation indices. Original index is defined as ‘‘an index that includes a combination of deprivation indicators that is unique and not repeated in other indices’’. Results: Four key characteristics of the indices included in the classification were determined: type of deprivation, spatial scale, data source and weighting method. To create the taxonomy, an integrative approach was used that allows you to add new classes and subclasses when new information appears. In accordance with the type of deprivation 72% (44 \ 61) socio-economic, 7% (4 \ 61) material deprivation, 5% (3 \ 61) environmental deprivation and 16% (10 \ 61) multidimensional indices were identified. Conclusions: The terms and definitions introduced during the review are aimed at ensuring uniformity in the taxonomy and finding a common language among researchers and specialists who develop and use indices. We also hope that the data from the study will stimulate the use of a competent approach and will help in resolving conflicts or inconsistencies that arise during the construction and use of indices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The area of residence and its characteristics affect cardiovascular disease indicators at different spatial scales. Our study evaluated the impact of a wide range of characteristics of large administrative regions (socio-economic, etc.) on individual probability of the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension among the Russian adult population. Methods: We used data from the cross-sectional phase of the epidemiological study ‘‘Epidemiology of Cardiovascular Diseases in the Regions of the Russian Federation’’ (ESSERF) conducted in 2013-2014. A total of 19,791 individuals aged 25-64 years were examined. To calculate regional indices, 64 indicators were obtained from the official website of the Federal State Statistics Service of Russia. Results: There were no associations between the territorial characteristics and the prevalence of hypertension in the general population. However, the Socio-Geographical Index has a direct impact on men (OR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.05-1.32), people with low education (OR = 1.14; 95% CI: 1.02-1.27) and older people (OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.02-1.32). Hypertension awareness is directly associated with the Demographic (OR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.02-1.25) and Industrial Territory Index (OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.01-1.33). The deterioration of the social situation (Socio-Geographic Index) related to poor adherence to treatment (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.64-0.90) and poor control of hypertension (OR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69-0.90). The influence of territorial characteristics on the awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension is less pronounced than the individual characteristics of the population and differs when stratified by gender, age and educational level. Conclusions: The analysis made it possible to assess the influence of the characteristics of the population living in large areas on the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension. These patterns reflect an empirical approach to the territorial characteristics. Key messages: The first attempt to understand why there are such significant differences in the prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in the Russian regions. New knowledge about the impact of living conditions on the health status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]