Article Text

PDF
Evaluating the health inequalities impact of area-based initiatives across the socioeconomic spectrum: a controlled intervention study of the New Deal for Communities, 2002–2008
  1. Mai Stafford1,
  2. Hannah Badland2,
  3. James Nazroo3,
  4. Emma Halliday4,
  5. Pierre Walthery5,
  6. Sue Povall6,
  7. Christopher Dibben7,
  8. Margaret Whitehead8,
  9. Jennie Popay9
  1. 1Reader in Social Epidemiology, MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at UCL, London, UK
  2. 2Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  3. 3Cathie Marsh Centre for Census and Survey Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  4. 4Division of Health Research, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK
  5. 5Cathie Marsh Centre for Census and Survey Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  6. 6Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
  7. 7School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  8. 8Department of Public Health, Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
  9. 9Division of Health Research, Department of Sociology and Public Health, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mai Stafford, MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at UCL, 33 Bedford Place, London WC1B 5JU, UK; m.stafford{at}ucl.ac.uk

Abstract

Background Previous evaluations of area-based initiatives have not compared intervention areas with the full range of areas from top to bottom of the social spectrum to evaluate their health inequalities impact.

Setting Deprived areas subject to the New Deal for Communities (NDC) intervention, local deprivation-matched comparator areas, and areas drawn from across the socioeconomic spectrum (representing high, medium and low deprivation) in England between 2002 and 2008.

Data Secondary analysis of biannual repeat cross-sectional surveys collected for the NDC National Evaluation Team and the Health Survey for England (HSE).

Methods Following data harmonisation, baseline and time trends in six health and social determinants of health outcomes were compared. Individual-level data were modelled using regression to adjust for age, sex, ethnic and socioeconomic differences among respondents.

Results Compared with respondents in HSE low deprivation areas, those in NDC intervention areas experienced a significantly steeper improvement in education, a trend towards a steeper improvement in self-rated health, and a significantly less steep reduction in smoking between 2002 and 2008. In HSE high deprivation areas, significantly less steep improvements in five out of six outcomes were seen compared with HSE low deprivation areas.

Conclusions Although unable to consider prior trends and previous initiatives, our findings provide cautious optimism that well-resourced and constructed area-based initiatives can reduce, or at least prevent the widening of, social inequalities for selected outcomes between the most and least deprived groups of areas.

  • DEPRIVATION
  • INEQUALITIES
  • POLICY
  • SOCIO-ECONOMIC

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.