Search

Objective: This study aimed to examine social gradients in ADHD during late childhood (age 9–11 years) using absolute and relative relationships with socioeconomic status exposure (household income, maternal education) during early childhood (<5 years) in seven cohorts from six industrialised countries (UK, Australia, Canada, The Netherlands, USA, Sweden). Methods: Secondary analyses were conducted for each birth cohort. Risk ratios, pooled risk estimates, and absolute inequality, measured by the Slope Index of Inequality (SII), were estimated to quantify social gradients in ADHD during late childhood by household income and maternal education measured during early childhood. Estimates were adjusted for child sex, mother age at birth, mother ethnicity, and multiple births. Findings: All cohorts demonstrated social gradients by household income and maternal education in early childhood, except for maternal education in Quebec. Pooled risk estimates, relating to 44,925 children, yielded expected gradients (income: low 1.83(CI 1.38,2.41), middle 1.42(1.13,1.79), high (reference); maternal education: low 2.13(1.39,3.25), middle 1.42(1.13,1.79)). Estimates of absolute inequality using SII showed that the largest differences in ADHD prevalence between the highest and lowest levels of maternal education were observed in Australia (4% lower) and Sweden (3% lower); for household income, the largest differences were observed in Quebec (6% lower) and Canada (all provinces: 5% lower). Conclusion: Findings indicate that children in families with high household income or maternal education are less likely to have ADHD at age 9–11. Absolute inequality, in combination with relative inequality, provides a more complete account of the socioeconomic status and ADHD relationship in different high-income countries. While the study design precludes causal inference, the linear relation between early childhood social circumstances and later ADHD suggests a potential role for policies that promote high levels of education, especially among women, and adequate levels of household income over children's early years in reducing risk of later ADHD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In sub-Saharan Africa, women must overcome numerous barriers when they need modern healthcare. Respect of gender norms within the household and the community may still influence women's ability to obtain care. A lack of gender-sensitive instruments for measuring women's ability to overcome barriers compromises attempts to adequately quantify the burden and risk of exclusion they face when seeking modern healthcare. The aim of this study was to create and validate a synthetic measure of women's access to healthcare from a publicly available and possibly internationally comparable population-based survey. Method Seven questionnaire items from the Burkina Faso 2003 DHS were combined to create the index. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to test the reliability of the index. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were applied to evaluate the factorial structure and construct validity of the index while taking into account the hierarchical structure of the data. Results The index has a Cronbach's alpha of 0.75, suggesting adequate reliability. In EFA, three correlated factors fitted the data best. In CFA, the construct of perceived ability to overcome barriers to healthcare seeking emerged as a second-order latent variable with three domains: socioeconomic barriers, geographical barriers and psychosocial barriers. Model fit indices support the index's global validity for women of reproductive age in Burkina Faso. Evidence for construct validity comes from the finding that women's index scores increase with household living standard. Conclusion The DHS items can be combined into a reliable and valid, gender-sensitive index quantifying reproductive-age women's perceived ability to overcome barriers to healthcare seeking in Burkina Faso. The index complies conceptually with the sector-cross-cutting capability approach and enables measuring directly the perceived access to healthcare. Therefore it can help to improve the design and evaluation of interventions that aim to facilitate healthcare seeking in this country. Further analyses may examine how far the index applies to similar contexts.

Abstract Background User fees were generalized in Burkina Faso in the 1990 s. At the time of their implementation, it was envisioned that measures would be instituted to exempt the poor from paying these fees. However, in practice, the identification of indigents is ineffective, and so they do not have access to care. Thus, a community-based process for selecting indigents for user fees exemption was tested in a district. In each of the 124 villages in the catchment areas of ten health centres, village committees proposed lists of indigents that were then validated by the health centres' management committees. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of this community-based selection. Methods An indigent-selection process is judged effective if it minimizes inclusion biases and exclusion biases. The study compares the levels of poverty and of vulnerability of indigents selected by the management committees (n = 184) with: 1) indigents selected in the villages but not retained by these committees (n = 48); ii) indigents selected by the health centre nurses (n = 82); and iii) a sample of the rural population (n = 5,900). Results The households in which the three groups of indigents lived appeared to be more vulnerable and poorer than the reference rural households. Indigents selected by the management committees and the nurses were very comparable in terms of levels of vulnerability, but the former were more vulnerable socially. The majority of indigents proposed by the village committees who lived in extremely poor households were retained by the management committees. Only 0.36% of the population living below the poverty threshold and less than 1% of the extremely poor population were selected. Conclusions The community-based process minimized inclusion biases, as the people selected were poorer and more vulnerable than the rest of the population. However, there were significant exclusion biases; the selection was very restrictive because the exemption had to be endogenously funded.