Neighborhood Racial Diversity and Metabolic Syndrome: 2003–2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
- 183 Downloads
This study investigated the independent association between neighborhood racial/ethnic diversity and metabolic syndrome among US adults, and focused on how this association differed across individual and neighborhood characteristics (i.e., race/ethnicity, sex, age, urbanity, neighborhood poverty). Objectively-measured biomarker data from 2003 to 2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were linked to census-tract profiles from 2000 decennial census (N = 10,122). Multilevel random intercept logistic regression models were estimated to examine the contextual effects of tract-level racial/ethnic diversity on individual risks of metabolic syndrome. Overall, more than 20% of the study population were identified as having metabolic syndrome, although the prevalence also varied across demographic subgroups and specific biomarkers. Multilevel analyses showed that increased racial/ethnic diversity within a census tract was associated with decreased likelihood of having metabolic syndrome (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52–0.96), particularly among female (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.43–0.96), young adults (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39–0.93), and residents living in urban (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.48–0.93) or poverty neighborhoods (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.31–0.95). The findings point to the potential benefits of neighborhood racial/ethnic diversity on individual health risks.
KeywordsHealth disparities Neighborhoods Race Ethnicity Biomarkers Metabolic syndrome
This study was funded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA140319-01A1; PI: Wen). Li also acknowledged a faculty summer grant from the College of Natural and Behavioral Sciences supported by K. T. and E. L. Norris Foundation.
- 1.National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. What is metabolic syndrome? Retrieved August 21, 2017 from http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/ms.
- 6.Bellatorre A, Finch BK, Do DP, Bird CE, Beck AN. Contextual predictors of cumulative biological risk: segregation and allostatic load. Soc Sci Q. 2011;92:1338–62.Google Scholar
- 9.Liao FH, Farber S, Ewing R. Compact development and preference heterogeneity in residential location choice behaviour: a latent class analysis. Urban Stud. 2014;52:1–24.Google Scholar
- 24.Massey DS, Denton NA. American apartheid: segregation and the making of the underclass. Harvard: Harvard University Press; 1993.Google Scholar
- 28.Krieger N, Feldman JM, Waterman PD, Chen JT, Coull BA, Hemenway D. Local residential segregation matters: stronger association of census tract compared to conventional city-level measures with fatal and non-fatal assaults (total and firearm related), using the index of concentration at the extremes (ICE) for racial, economic, and racialized economic segregation, Massachusetts (US), 1995–2010. J Urban Health. 2017;94:244–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.U.S. Census Bureau. Statistical brief: poverty areas. Retrieved August 21, 2017 from https://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/statbriefs/povarea.html.
- 34.U.S. Department of Agriculture. Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (2013). Retrieved August 21, 2017 from http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-commuting-area-codes.aspx.
- 36.Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS. Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.Google Scholar