Browsing by Author "Löffler M"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemSocial determinants and lifestyle factors for brain health: implications for risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia(Springer Nature Limited, 2022-07-28) Röhr S; Pabst A; Baber R; Engel C; Glaesmer H; Hinz A; Schroeter ML; Witte AV; Zeynalova S; Villringer A; Löffler M; Riedel-Heller SGSubstantial evidence indicates a huge potential for risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia based on modifiable health and lifestyle factors. To maximize the chances for risk reduction, it is useful to investigate associations of social determinants and lifestyle for brain health. We computed the “LIfestyle for BRAin health” (LIBRA) score for baseline participants of the Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases (LIFE) Adult Study, a population-based urban cohort in Germany. LIBRA predicts dementia in midlife and early late life populations, comprising 12 modifiable risk factors (heart disease, kidney disease, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, alcohol consumption, smoking, physical inactivity, diet, depression, cognitive inactivity). Associations of social determinants (living situation, marital status, social isolation, education, net equivalence income, occupational status, socioeconomic status/SES, employment) with LIBRA were inspected using age- and sex-adjusted multivariable linear regression analysis. Z-standardization and sampling weights were applied. Participants (n = 6203) were M = 57.4 (SD = 10.6, range 40–79) years old and without dementia, 53.0% were women. Except for marital status, all considered social determinants were significantly associated with LIBRA. Beta coefficients for the association with higher LIBRA scores were most pronounced for low SES (β = 0.80, 95% CI [0.72–0.88]; p < 0.001) and middle SES (β = 0.55, 95% CI [0.47–0.62]; p < 0.001). Social determinants, particularly socioeconomic factors, are associated with lifestyle for brain health, and should thus be addressed in risk reduction strategies for cognitive decline and dementia. A social-ecological public health perspective on risk reduction might be more effective and equitable than focusing on individual lifestyle behaviors alone.
- ItemSocial factors and the prevalence of social isolation in a population-based adult cohort(Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, 2022-10) Röhr S; Wittmann F; Engel C; Enzenbach C; Witte AV; Villringer A; Löffler M; Riedel-Heller SGPurpose Social isolation has negative effects on physical and brain health across the lifespan. However, the prevalence of social isolation, specifically with regard to sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors, is not well known. Methods Database was the Leipzig population-based study of adults (LIFE-Adult Study, n = 10,000). The short form of the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6) was used to assess social isolation (cutoff < 12 points). Sampling weights were applied to account for differences in sampling fractions. Results Data were available for 9392 study participants; 51.6% were women, the mean age was 45.2 years (SD = 17.3). The prevalence of social isolation was 12.3% (95% CI 11.6–13.0) across ages 18–79 years. Social isolation was more prevalent in men (13.8%, 95% CI 12.8–14.8) compared to women (10.9%, 95% CI 10.0–11.8; (1) = 18.83, p < .001), and it showed an increase with increasing age from 5.4% (95% CI 4.7–6.0) in the youngest age group (18–39 years) to 21.7% (95% CI 19.5–24.0) in the oldest age group (70–79 years; (4) = 389.51, p < .001). Prevalence differed largely with regard to socioeconomic status (SES); showing lower prevalence in high SES (7.2%, 95% CI 6.0–8.4) and higher prevalence in low SES (18.6%, 95% CI 16.9–20.3; (2) = 115.78; p < .001). Conclusion More than one in ten individuals in the adult population reported social isolation, and prevalence varied strongly with regard to sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors. Social isolation was particularly frequent in disadvantaged socioeconomic groups. From a public health perspective, effective prevention of and intervention against social isolation should be a desired target as social isolation leads to poor health. Countermeasures should especially take into account the socioeconomic determinants of social isolation, applying a life-course perspective.