Inequalities in living well with dementia-The impact of deprivation on well-being, quality of life and life satisfaction: Results from the improving the experience of dementia and enhancing active life study
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: Area level factors, such as deprivation and urban/rural settings, have been associated with variation in local resources and services and health inequality in later life. The aim of this study is to investigate the potential impact of deprivation and urban/rural areas on capability to live well with dementia and to examine whether availability of informal carers modified the associations. METHODS: The analysis was based on a large cohort study of 1547 community-dwelling people with dementia across Great Britain. Quality of life, life satisfaction, and well-being were measured as indices of "living well." Multivariate modelling was used to investigate differences in living well measures across deprivation quintiles and urban/rural areas adjusting for sociodemographic factors and number of comorbidities and stratifying by three groups: those living with a carer, those with a noncoresident carer and those without a carer. RESULTS: Negative dose-response relationships between deprivation and measures of quality of life (-2.12; 95% CI: -3.52, -0.73), life satisfaction (-1.27; 95% CI: -2.70, 0.16), and well-being (-5.24; 95% CI: -10.11, -0.36) were found in participants living with a carer. The associations were less clear in those with a noncoresident carer and those without a carer but these two groups generally reported lower scores on living well indicators than participants living with a carer. There was no urban/rural difference. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest inequalities in living well with dementia according to levels of deprivation. Additional resources are needed to improve postdiagnostic care in highly deprived areas and support those who have no informal carer.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
People from the most disadvantaged socio-economic groups are most likely to have unmet care needs and experience poorer health outcomes.
“People from the most disadvantaged socio-economic groups are most likely to have unmet care needs and experience poorer health outcomes [3].”
From The Impact of demographic, socio-economic and geographic factors on mortality risk among people living with dementia in England (2002–2016) (2021) · cites this paper as [3]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 50
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Public Health England. Chapter 5: inequality in health. Health profile for England. Public Health England, 2017.
- Bech P. Measuring the dimension of psychological general well-being by the WHO-5. Qual Life Newslett. 2004;32:15-16.
- Authors
- Wu, Y., Clare, L., Jones, I. R., Martyr, A., Nelis, S. M., Quinn, C., Victor, C. R., Lamont, R. A., Rippon, I., Matthews, F. E., & study, O. B. O. T. I. T. E. O. D. A. E. A. L. (.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (GB)
- Brunel University of London (GB)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Wu, Yu‐Tzu
- ORCID
- Venue
- International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-10-08
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1736-1742
- ISSN
- 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1166
- OpenAlex
- W2889788689
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- Bradford Scholars (University of Bradford) (acceptedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (acceptedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Repository@Hull (Worktribe) (University of Hull) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health Research (ES/L001853/2)
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/L001853/2)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
- Keywords
- dementia, health disparities, socioeconomic deprivation, living well, quality of life, life satisfaction, well-being, informal caregivers, community-dwelling people with dementia, urban-rural differences, old age
- MeSH terms
- Healthy Aging, Aged, Dementia, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personal Satisfaction, Poverty, Quality of Life, Rural Population, Socioeconomic Factors, Urban Population, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Health Status Disparities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review