Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Co-occurrence of risk factors for cardiovascular disease by social class: 1958 British birth cohort
  1. C Power1,
  2. K Atherton1,
  3. O Manor2
  1. 1
    Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK
  2. 2
    School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
  1. Professor C Power, Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCL Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK; c.power{at}


Aim: To establish whether social differences in multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease are due to a greater strength of association (higher correlation) between risk factors in less advantaged groups.

Methods: Co-occurrence of five risk factors (smoking, hypertension, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, obesity, diabetes) in 3614 British 45-year-old men and 3560 women in the manual and non-manual social groups.

Results: 4.0% of women in manual groups had ⩾3 risk factors compared with 1.7% in non-manual groups: 6.2% and 3.4% respectively for men. There was a higher than expected percentage of the population, overall, with ⩾3 risk factors assuming independence between risk factors; correspondingly, there was a slightly lower than expected proportion with one factor. However, patterns of observed to expected ratios were consistent in manual and non-manual groups and did not differ by the number of risk factors.

Conclusions: Higher prevalence of multiple risk factors in manual groups was due to the higher prevalence of individual factors rather than a greater tendency of those with an individual risk factor to have additional risks. Strategies to reduce multiple risk factors in less advantaged groups would help to lessen their health burden.

Statistics from

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.


  • Funding: Medical Research Council Health of the Public initiative (grant G000934).

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Ethics approval: Ethical approval for the medical examination of the British 1958 Birth Cohort was obtained from South East Multi-Centre Research Ethics Committee.

Linked Articles

  • In this issue
    Mauricio L Barreto