Search

Background: Both social and physical neighbourhood factors may affect residents' health, but few studies have considered the combination of several exposures in relation to individual health status., Aim: To assess a range of different potentially relevant physical and social environmental characteristics in a sample of small neighbourhoods in the Netherlands, to study their mutual correlations and to explore associations with morbidity of residents using routinely collected general practitioners' (GPs') data., Methods: For 135 neighbourhoods in 43 Dutch municipalities, we could assess area-level social cohesion and collective efficacy using external questionnaire data, urbanisation, amount of greenspace and water areas, land use diversity, air pollution (particulate matter (PM) with a diameter <10 μm (PM 10 ), PM <2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and noise (from road traffic and from railways). Health data of the year 2013 from GPs were available for 4450 residents living in these 135 neighbourhoods, that were representative for the entire country. Morbidity of 10 relevant physical or mental health groupings was considered. Individual-level socio-economic information was obtained from Statistics Netherlands. Associations between neighbourhood exposures and individual morbidity were quantified using multilevel mixed effects logistic regression analyses, adjusted for sex, age (continuous), household income and socio-economic status (individual level) and municipality and neighbourhood (group level)., Results: Most physical exposures were strongly correlated with degree of urbanisation. Social cohesion and collective efficacy tended to be higher in less urbanised municipalities. Degree of urbanisation was associated with higher morbidity of all disease groupings. A higher social cohesion at the municipal level coincided with a lower prevalence of depression, migraine/severe headache and Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS). An increase in both natural and agricultural greenspace in the neighbourhood was weakly associated with less morbidity for all conditions. A high land use diversity was consistently associated with lower morbidities, in particular among non-occupationally active individuals., Conclusion: A high diversity in land use of neighbourhoods may be beneficial for physical and mental health of the inhabitants. If confirmed, this may be incorporated into urban planning, in particular regarding the diversity of greenspace., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neighbourhood social capital might provide resources that can benefit chronic illness self-management. Improved self-management is a possible mechanism behind the relationship between neighbourhood social capital and health of people with chronic illness., Methods: To test this mechanism, we collected data on self-management and self-rated health among a sample of 2091 people with chronic illness in 2013. Data on neighbourhood social capital were collected among 69 336 people in 3425 neighbourhoods between May 2011 and September 2012. A social capital measure was estimated with ecometric measurements. We conducted mediation analyses to examine whether the relationship between neighbourhood social capital and self-rated health was mediated through chronic illness self-management., Results: We found that neighbourhood social capital is related to chronic illness self-management only for people with chronic illness and mild physical disabilities and that, for this group, self-management mediates the relationship between neighbourhood social capital and health., Conclusion: Improved self-management is a mechanism behind the relationship between neighbourhood social capital and health for people with chronic illness and mild physical disabilities. It is possible that the self-management support needs of people with chronic illness with moderate or severe physical disabilities cannot be met by the resources provided in neighbourhoods, but more tailored support is necessary. More research is needed to discover mechanisms behind the relationship between neighbourhood social capital and health and elucidate which resources in neighbourhoods can benefit specific groups of people with chronic illness., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.)

Differential provision of local services and amenities has been proposed as a mechanism behind the relationship between social capital and health. The aim of this study was to investigate whether social capital and collective efficacy are related to the provision of social support services and amenities in Dutch municipalities, against a background of decentralisation of long-term care to municipalities. We used data on neighbourhood social capital, collective efficacy (the extent to which people are willing to work for the common good), and the provision of services and amenities in 2012. We included the services municipalities provide to support informal caregivers (e.g. respite care), individual services and support (e.g. domiciliary help), and general and collective services and amenities (e.g. lending point for wheelchairs). Data for social capital were collected between May 2011 and September 2012. Social capital was measured by focusing on contacts between neighbours. A social capital measure was estimated for 414 municipalities with ecometric measurements. A measure of collective efficacy was constructed based on information about the experienced responsibility for the liveability of the neighbourhood by residents in 2012, average charity collection returns in municipalities in 2012, voter turnout at the municipal elections in 2010 and the percentage of blood donors in 2012. We conducted Poisson regression and negative binomial regression to test our hypotheses. We found no relationship between social capital and the provision of services and amenities in municipalities. We found an interaction effect (coefficient = 3.11, 95% CI = 0.72-5.51, P = 0.011) of social capital and collective efficacy on the provision of support services for informal caregivers in rural municipalities. To gain more insight in the relationship between social capital and health, it will be important to study the relationship between social capital and differential provision of services and amenities more extensively and in different contexts., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The neighbourhood may provide resources for health. It is to date unknown whether people who live in neighbourhoods with more social capital have more access to practical and emotional support by neighbours, or whether this is a resource only available to those who are personally connected to people in their neighbourhood. We investigated whether support by neighbours of people with chronic illness was related to neighbourhood social capital and to individual neighbourhood connections. Furthermore, we investigated whether support received from neighbours by people with chronic illness differed according to demographic and disease characteristics. We collected data on support by neighbours and individual connections to neighbours among 2272 people with chronic illness in 2015. Data on neighbourhood social capital were collected among 69,336 people in 3425 neighbourhoods between May 2011 and September 2012. Neighbourhood social capital was estimated with ecometric measurements. We conducted multilevel regression analyses. People with chronic illness were more likely to receive practical and emotional support from neighbours if they had more individual connections to people in their neighbourhood. People with chronic illness were not more likely to receive practical and emotional support from neighbours if they lived in a neighbourhood with more social capital. People with chronic illness with moderate physical disabilities or with comorbidity, and people with chronic illness who lived together with their partner or children, were more likely to receive support from neighbours. To gain more insight into the benefits of neighbourhood social capital, it is necessary to differentiate between the resources only accessible through individual connections to people in the neighbourhood and resources provided through social capital on the neighbourhood level., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Health literacy skills are important for health and self-management for people with chronic illness. Neighborhood social capital can provide resources, such as access to information and informal social control over unhealthy behavior. The benefit of these resources, and the access people have to these resources, might depend on levels of health literacy. We investigated whether neighborhood social capital is differentially related to the health of people with chronic illness according to health literacy skills. This study focused on health literacy skills in 4 domains related to the ability to access and understand health information and to the ability to perform self-management. We found a significant positive interaction between social capital and health literacy skills for accessing and understanding health information. This suggests that health literacy enhances people's ability to gain access to and use neighborhood resources to benefit health. There was no interaction effect between social capital and health literacy skills in the other 2 domains. More research is needed to investigate how people with chronic illness can benefit from knowledge, support, and other social resources for health and self-management also whether they have limited health literacy skills.

Background: Social capital has been related to various aspects of health. While literature suggests that men and women differently access and mobilize social capital, gender has received little attention within social capital research. This study examines whether the association between individual social capital and psychological distress is different for men and women., Methods: We made use of data from a representative sample of 1025 adults within 50 neighbourhoods of Ghent (Belgium), collected in the context of the cross-sectional Social capital and Well-being In Neighbourhoods in Ghent (SWING) Survey 2011. Six components of social capital were discerned: generalized trust, social support, social influence, social engagement and attachment, the volume of social capital and the mean occupational prestige in one's network. Multilevel linear regression models were fitted to explore interactions between gender and these components of social capital., Results: In accordance with previous research, men report lower levels of psychological distress than women (t = 4.40, p < 0.001). Regarding the gender gap in social capital, the findings are mixed. Only for half of the social capital variables (social support, social influence and volume of social capital), a significant gender difference is found, favouring men (t = 4.03, p < 0.001; t = 1.99, p < 0.001 and t = 4.50, p < 0.001 respectively). None of the analysed interaction terms between gender and social capital is significantly related to psychological distress., Conclusion: The analyses indicate that the association between individual social capital and psychological distress is similar for men and women. The relatively low level of gender stratification in Belgium might have influenced this finding. Furthermore, it is possible that social capital is not of greater importance for women in general, but mainly for women who are in an especially vulnerable social situation that deprives their access to alternative resources (e.g. unemployed women, single mothers). Future studies should seek to identify subgroups for whom social capital might be particularly influential, by transcending 'simple' dyads such as 'men versus women'.

Background: Social capital in the living environment, both on the individual and neighbourhood level, is positively associated with people's self-rated health; however, prospective and longitudinal studies are rare, making causal conclusions difficult. To shed more light on the direction of the relationship between social capital and self-rated health, we investigated main and interaction effects of individual and neighbourhood social capital at baseline on changes in self-rated health of people with a somatic chronic disease., Methods: Individual social capital, self-rated health and other individual level variables were assessed among a nationwide sample of 1048 non-institutionalized people with a somatic chronic disease residing in 259 neighbourhoods in the Netherlands. The assessment of neighbourhood social capital was based on data from a nationwide survey among the general Dutch population. The association of social capital with changes in self-rated health was assessed by multilevel regression analysis., Results: Both individual social capital and neighbourhood social capital at baseline were significantly associated with changes in self-rated health over the time period of 2005 to 2008 while controlling for several disease characteristics, other individual level and neighbourhood level characteristics. No significant interactions were found between social capital on the individual and on the neighbourhood level., Conclusions: Higher levels of individual and neighbourhood social capital independently and positively affect changes in self-rated health of people with chronic illness. Although most of the variation in health is explained at the individual level, one's social environment should be considered as a possible relevant influence on the health of the chronically ill.

Background: Perinatal morbidity rates are relatively high in the Netherlands, and significant inequalities in perinatal morbidity and mortality can be found across neighborhoods. In socioeconomically deprived areas, 'Western' women are particularly at risk for adverse birth outcomes. Almost all studies to date have explained the disparities in terms of individual determinants of birth outcomes. This study examines the influence of neighborhood contextual characteristics on birth weight (adjusted for gestational age) and preterm birth. We focused on the influence of neighborhood social capital--measured as informal socializing and social connections between neighbors--as well as ethnic (minority) density., Methods: Data on birth weight and prematurity were obtained from the Perinatal Registration Netherlands 2000-2008 dataset, containing 97% of all pregnancies. Neighborhood-level measurements were obtained from three different sources, comprising both survey and registration data. We included 3.422 neighborhoods and 1.527.565 pregnancies for the birth weight analysis and 1.549.285 pregnancies for the premature birth analysis. Linear and logistic multilevel regression was performed to assess the associations of individual and neighborhood level variables with birth weight and preterm birth., Results: We found modest but significant neighborhood effects on birth weight and preterm births. The effect of ethnic (minority) density was stronger than that of neighborhood social capital. Moreover, ethnic (minority) density was associated with higher birth weight for infants of non-Western ethnic minority women compared to Western women (15 grams; 95% CI: 12,4/17,5) as well as reduced risk for prematurity (OR 0.97; CI 0,95/0,99)., Conclusions: Our results indicate that neighborhood contexts are associated with birth weight and preterm birth in the Netherlands. Moreover, ethnic (minority) density seems to be a protective factor for non-Western ethnic minority women, but not for Western women. This helps explain the increased risk of Western women in deprived neighborhoods for adverse birth outcomes found in previous studies.

Background: Several studies have shown the positive effect of neighbourhood social capital on health. Existing research, however, has hitherto not studied whether the duration and intensity of exposure to neighbourhood social capital conditions and its effect on health. The aim of this study was to examine whether neighbourhood social capital affects individual’s health immediately and equally. Methods: We used two waves of the Dutch cross-sectional ‘Housing and Living Survey’. One (from 2009) as individual data (n = 65 990), and the other (from 2006) to estimate with ecometric measurements a social capital measure for 3001 Dutch neighbourhoods. We assessed by means of multilevel regression models the combined effect of exposure and amount of neighbourhood social capital on self-rated health. Results: Duration of exposure, measured by the length of stay in the same neighbourhood is not linearly associated with individual health. Health of people who live up to 6 years or >22 years in the same neighbourhood is not affected by neighbourhood social capital. People with young children in the household or elderly were assumed to be more intensively exposed. However, exposure intensity was only found to have an effect for households with young children. Conclusions: Duration and intensity of exposure to neighbourhood social capital, a social aspect of the environment, matters for people’s health. Interventions focusing on the health of people with young children may want to stimulate the creation of neighbourhood social capital. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: Neighborhood social capital is increasingly considered to be an important determinant of an individual’s health. Using data from the Netherlands we investigate the influence of neighborhood social capital on an individual’s self-reported health, while accounting for other conditions of health on both the level of the neighborhood and the individual. We use national representative data (‘The Housing and Living Survey’, 2006) on the Netherlands with 61,235 respondents in 3273 neighborhoods. The cross-sectional data were combined with information provided by Statistics Netherlands on neighborhoods, i.e., the percentage of residents in the highest income quintile per neighborhood and the municipality’s degree of urbanity. The association of neighborhood social capital with individual health was assessed by multilevel logistic regression analysis. Our results show that neighborhood social capital is positively associated with health. Interestingly, residents in urban neighborhoods benefit particularly from their neighborhood social capital. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]