Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 94, Issue 6, pp 442–447 | Cite as

Association of Socio-economic Factors with Health Risk Behaviours Among High School Students in Rural Nova Scotia

  • Donald B. LangilleEmail author
  • Lori Curtis
  • Jean Hughes
  • Gail Tomblin Murphy
Article

Abstract

Objective

To determine the association of socio-economic (SES) factors with risk behaviours among adolescents.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was carried out on students in four high schools in northern Nova Scotia, Canada. Associations between SES variables and substance use behaviours, having early intercourse and suicide attempt in the past year were examined using multivariate analysis (logit regression). Negative binomial regression was performed for associations of SES with a total risk score summing risk behaviours.

Results

Participants included 2,198 students (48% males; 52% females) ranging in age from 14 to 20 years. Almost 25% of youth smoked regularly, 19% of males smoked marijuana >-10 times monthly, more than 40% of males regularly drank excessively, and 10% of students > 14 years old had had intercourse before age 15. Smoking was the behaviour most often associated with lower SES in both genders. Mother’s not being employed was protective against all substance use variables except driving after drinking. Living both with lone mother and in any family arrangement other than with both parents was associated with smoking, using marijuana, and early sex. Higher risk score was associated with living with a lone mother or other family arrangement. Lower risk score was associated with father having more than high school education and mother not working.

Interpretation

Lower socio-economic status is associated with adolescent risk behaviours. These findings point to the importance of these factors to risk-taking in youth, their relevance to social policy, and also their importance as factors to consider in targeted interventions.

Résumé

Objectif

Déterminer les liens entre les facteurs socio-économiques et les comportements à risque chez les adolescents.

Méthode

Nous avons mené une enquête transversale auprès des élèves de quatre écoles secondaires du nord de la Nouvelle-Écosse. Les liens entre les variables socio-économiques et la consommation de drogues, les relations sexuelles précoces et les tentatives de suicide au cours de l’année précédente ont été examinés à l’aide d’une analyse multivariable (régression logistique). Nous avons procédé par régression binomiale négative pour déterminer les liens entre les facteurs socio-économiques et le score total du risque (l’addition des comportements à risque).

Résultats

L’enquête a porté sur 2 198 élèves (48 % de garçons et 52 % de filles) de 14 à 20 ans. Près du quart des jeunes fumaient régulièrement, 19 % des garçons fumaient de la marijuana 10 fois par mois ou plus, plus de 40 % des garçons avaient régulièrement des épisodes de consommation excessive d’alcool, et 10 % des élèves de plus de 14 ans avaient eu des relations sexuelles avant l’âge de 15 ans. Le tabagisme était le comportement le plus souvent associé aux statuts socio-économiques inférieurs pour les deux sexes. Le fait que la mère ne travaille pas protégeait contre toutes les variables liées à la consommation de drogues, sauf l’alcool au volant. Le fait de vivre seulement avec sa mère ou dans toute configuration familiale autre qu’avec ses deux parents était associé au tabagisme, à la consommation de marijuana et aux relations sexuelles précoces. Les scores de risque élevés étaient associés au fait de vivre seulement avec sa mère ou dans une autre configuration familiale atypique. Les faibles scores de risque étaient associés au fait d’avoir un père ayant poussé ses études après l’école secondaire et une mère ne travaillant pas.

Interprétation

Un statut socio-économique inférieur est associé aux comportements à risque chez les adolescents. Les constatations de l’étude montrent l’importance des facteurs recensés dans la propension à prendre des risques chez les jeunes, leur pertinence pour la politique sociale, ainsi que l’importance d’en tenir compte dans les mesures d’intervention ciblées.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lerner RM, Galambos NL. Adolescent development: Challenges and opportunities for research, programs and policies. Annu Rev Psychol 1998;49:413–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Walker ZAK, Townsend J. The role of general practice in promoting teenage health: A review of the literature. Family Practice 1999;16:164–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dryburgh H. Teenage pregnancy. Heath Reports 2000;12:9–19.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Health Canada. 1998/1999 Canadian sexually transmitted disease surveillance report. Laboratory Centre for Disease Control. CCDR 2000;26S6:1–46.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wellings K, Nanchalal K, Macdowell W, McManus S, Erens B, Mercer CH, et al. Sexual behaviour in Britain: Early heterosexual experience. Lancet 2001;358:1843–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mardh PA, Creatsas G, Guaschino S, Hellberg D, Henry-Suchet J, European Chlamydia Epidemiology Group. Correlation between early sexual debut, and reproductive health and behavioral factors: A multinational European study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000;5:177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elders MJ, Perry CL, Eriksen MP, Giovino GA. The report of the surgeon general: Preventing tobacco use among young people. Am J Public Health 1994;84:543–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnston LD, Bachman JG, O’Malley PM. Drug survey. University of Michigan News and Information Services. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, December, 1996;11–12.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tapert SF, Aarons GA, Sedlar GR, Brown SA. Adolescent substance use and sexual risk-taking behavior. J Adolesc Health 2001;28:181–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Friedman AS, Bransfield S, Kreisher C. Early teenage substance use as a predictor of educational-vocational failure. Am J Addiction 1994;3:325–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    King KA. Developing a comprehensive school suicide prevention program. J School Health 2001;71:132–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McClure GM. Suicide in children and adolescents in England and Wales 1970–1998. Br J Psych 2001;178:469–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Montgomery LE, Kiely JL, Pappas G. The effects of poverty, race and family structure on US children’s health: Data from the NHIS, 1978 through 1980 and 1989 through 1991. Am J Public Health 1996;86:1401–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Petridou E, Zaitsanos X, Dessypris N, Frangakis C, Mandyla M, Doxiadis S, et al. Adolescents in high-risk trajectory: Clustering of risky behavior and the origins of socioeconomic health differentials. Prev Med 1997;26:215–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hertzman C. The case for an early child development strategy. ISUMA 2001;1:11–18.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cadman D, Boyle MH, Offord DR, Szatmari P, Rae-Grant NI, Crawford J, et al. Chronic illness and functional limitation in Ontario children: Findings of the Ontario Child Health Study. CMAJ 1986;135:761–67.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dooley MD, Curtis L, Lipman E, Feeny DH. Child behaviour problems, poor school performance and social problems: The roles of family structure and low income in cycle one of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. In: Corak M (Ed.), Labour Markets, Social Institutions and the Future of Canada’s Children. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1998;107–29.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Evans RG. Introduction. In: Evans RG, Barer ML, Marmor TR (Eds.), Why Are Some People Healthy and Others Not? The Determinants of Health in Populations. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1994;3–27.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Curtis LJ. Socio-economic status and the health and well-being of youths in Canada. Unpublished manuscript, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Offord DR, Boyle MH, Racine YA, Flemming JE, Cadman DT, Blum HM, et al. Outcome, prognosis and risk in a longitudinal follow-up study. J Am Adolesc Psychiatry 1992;31:916–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Human Resources Development Canada, Statistics Canada. Growing Up in Canada: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Statistics Canada. 2002 Community Profiles. Available on-line at: https://doi.org/www12.statcan.ca/english/Profil01/PlaceSearchForm1.cfm (Accessed July 29, 2002).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wardle J, Robb K, Johnson F. Assessing socio-economic status in adolescents: The validity of a home affluence scale. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:595–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Becker G. Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. J Political Econ 1962;70(S):9–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brener ND, Collins JL, Kann L, Warren CW, Williams BI. Reliability of the youth risk behavior questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 1995;141:575–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995;116–18.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    The McCreary Centre Society. Health Connections: Listening to BC Youth. Burnaby, BC: The Centre, 1999;4–36.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nova Scotia Department of Health & Dalhousie University. Nova Scotia Student Drug Use 1998: Technical Report. Halifax, NS: The Department, 1998;1–44.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kann L, Kinchen SA, Williams BI, Ross JG, Lowry R, Grunbaum JA, et al. Youth risk behaviour surveillance - United States, 1999. MMWR 2000;49(S-5):95.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Maticka-Tyndale E, Barrett M, McKay A. Adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Canada: A view of national data sources and their limitations. Can J Human Sexual 2000;9:41–65.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Blum RW, Beuhring T, Shew ML, Bearinger LH, Sieving RE, Resnick MD. The effects of race/ethnicity, income and family structure on adolescent risk behaviors. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1879–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Galambos NL, Tilton-Weaver LC. Multiple risk behaviour in adolescents and young adults. Health Reports 1998;2:109–20.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Santelli JS, Lowry R, Brener N, Robin L. The association of sexual behaviours with socioeco-nomic status, family structure, and race/ethnicity among US adolescents. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1582–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hawton K, Fagg J, Simkin S, Mills J. The epidemiology of attempted suicide in the Oxford area, England. Crisis 1994;15:123–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goodman E. The role of socioeconomic status gradients in explaining differences in US adolescents’ health. Am J Public Health 1999;89:1522–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Richardson JL, Radziszewska B, Dent CW, Flay BR. Relationship between after-school care of adolescents and substance use, risk taking, depressed mood, and academic achievement. Pediatrics 1993;92:32–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yu J. Perceived parental/peer attitudes and alcohol-related behaviors: An analysis of the impact of the drinking age law. Subst Use Misuse 1998;33:2687–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ku L, Sonenstein FL, Pleck JH. Factors influencing first intercourse for teenage men. Public Health Rep 1993;108:680–94.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Morris P, Michalopoulos C. The self-sufficiency project at 36 months: Effects on children of a program that increased parental employment and income. Ottawa: Social Research and Demonstration Corporation, 2000;15.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lynch J, Kaplan G. Socioeconomic position. In: Berkman KF, Kawachi I (Eds.), Social Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000;13–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald B. Langille
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lori Curtis
    • 1
  • Jean Hughes
    • 2
  • Gail Tomblin Murphy
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Community Health and EpidemiologyDalhousie University, Centre for Clinical ResearchHalifaxCanada
  2. 2.School of Nursing, Faculty of Health SciencesDalhousie UniversityCanada

Personalised recommendations