A systematic review of psychosocial explanations for the relationship between socioeconomic status and body mass index
Open accessAbstract
A negative association between socioeconomic status (SES) and levels of overweight/obesity is consistently found in high- and middle-income countries. Yet, there is little conclusive evidence about the mechanisms driving this association. In this systematic review, we discuss and compare the results of 22 studies that examine the role of psychosocial mediators in the association between SES and BMI in diverse population samples. These include factors related to resources and constraints in one's external neighborhood, social resources, and psychological factors such as stress. The findings support theoretical models indicating that SES is related to BMI partially through environmental and psychological factors. Importantly, SES often remains a significant predictor of weight status, indicating the importance of also addressing structural antecedents in order to improve health among lower SES populations. We thoroughly discuss the quality and limitations of current study designs and mediation testing and provide recommendations for future research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Overall psychological resources (i.e., stress) had more consistent evidence of mediation than external neighborhood in the relationship between SES and BMI.
“A recent systematic review found that overall psychological resources (i.e., stress) had more consistent evidence of mediation than external neighborhood in the relationship between SES and BMI [91].”
From Food Addiction and Psychosocial Adversity: Biological Embedding, Contextual Factors, and Public Health Implications (2020) · cites this paper as [91]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 137 · Cited by 67
- Authors
- Claassen, M. A., Klein, O., Bratanova, B., Claes, N., & Corneille, O.
- Affiliations
- Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
- University of St Andrews (GB)
- UCLouvain (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Claassen, Maria Almudena
- Venue
- Appetite
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 132
- Pages
- 208-221
- ISSN
- 0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2890111862
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 137
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- dipot.ulb.ac.be
- Licence
- Locations
- Appetite (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
- St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Walloon Region (FOOD4GUT)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- socioeconomic status, body mass index, obesity, overweight, psychosocial mediators, neighborhood environment, social resources, psychological stress, mediation analysis, structural determinants of health, low-income populations
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Income, Obesity, Residence Characteristics, Social Class, Stress, Psychological, Body Mass Index, Overweight
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