CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 239

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differential vulnerability and susceptibility: how to make use of recent development in our understanding of mediation and interaction to tackle health inequalities

Diderichsen, Finn, Hallqvist, Johan, Whitehead, Margaret·2019·International Journal of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1093/ije/dyy167
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/dyy167

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Mackenbach, 2015, Inequalities in alcohol-related mortality in 17 European countries: a retrospective analysis of mortality register, PLoS Med, 12, e1001909., 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001909 · DOI
  2. Jones, 2015, Relationship between alcohol-attributable disease and socioeconomic status, and the role of alcohol consumption in this relationship: a systematic review and meta-analysis, BMC Public Health, 15, 400, 10.1186/s12889-015-1720-7 · DOI
  3. Christensen, 2017, Joint effect of alcohol consumption and educational level on alcohol-related medical events: a register-based cohort study in Denmark, Epidemiology, 28, 872, 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000718 · DOI
  4. Mäkelä, 2008, Do consequences of a given pattern of drinking vary by socioeconomic status? A mortality and hospitalization follow up for alcohol-related causes of the Finnish Drinking Habits Surveys, J Epidemiol Community Health, 62, 728, 10.1136/jech.2007.065672 · DOI
  5. Katikireddi, 2017, Socioeconomic status as an effect modifier of alcohol consumption and harm: analysis of linked cohort data, Lancet Public Health, 2, e267, 10.1016/S2468-2667(17)30078-6 · DOI
  6. Hallqvist, 1998, Is the effect of job strain on myocardial infarction risk due to interaction between high psychological demands and low decision latitude?, Soc Sci Med, 46, 1405, 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)10084-3 · DOI
  7. Grzywacz, 2004, Socioeconomic status and health: a micro-level analysis of exposure and vulnerability to daily stressors, J Health Soc Behav, 45, 1, 10.1177/002214650404500101 · DOI
  8. Nordahl, 2014, Education and cause-specific mortality. The mediating role of differential exposure and vulnerability, Epidemiology, 25, 389, 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000080 · DOI
  9. Nordahl, 2014, Combined effects of socioeconomic position, smoking, and hypertension on risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, Stroke, 45, 2582, 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.005252 · DOI
  10. Hoven, 2013, Work characteristics, socioeconomic position and health: a systematic review of mediation and moderation effects in prospective studies, Occup Environ Med, 70, 663, 10.1136/oemed-2012-101331 · DOI
  11. Veronesi, 2017, Combined effect of educational status and cardiovascular risk factors on the incidence of coronary heart disease and stroke in European cohorts: Implications for prevention, Eur J Prev Cardiol, 24, 437, 10.1177/2047487316679521 · DOI
  12. Hussein, 2018, Unequal exposure or unequal vulnerability? Contributions of neighborhood conditions and cardiovascular risk factors to socioeconomic inequality in incident cardiovascular disease in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis, Am J Epidemiol, 187, 1424, 10.1093/aje/kwx363 · DOI
  13. Hoffmann, 2013, The potential impact of a social redistribution of specific risk factors on socioeconomic inequalities in mortality: illustration of a method based on population, J Epidemiol Community Health, 67, 56, 10.1136/jech-2011-200886 · DOI
  14. Diderichsen, 2001, Challenging Inequities in Health
  15. Blas, 2010, Equity, Social Determinants and Public Health Programmes
  16. Hurst, 2008, Vulnerability in research and health care; Describing the elephant in the room?, Bioethics, 22, 191, 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00631.x · DOI
  17. Have, 2016, Vulnerability: Challenging Bioethics, 10.4324/9781315624068 · DOI
  18. Adger, 2006, Vulnerabilty, Glob Environ Change, 16, 268, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Turner, 2003, A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 100, 8074, 10.1073/pnas.1231335100 · DOI
  20. Birkmann, 2013, Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework, Nat Hazards, 67, 193, 10.1007/s11069-013-0558-5 · DOI
  21. Crimmins, 2016, U.S. Global Change Research Program
  22. Frohlich, 2008, The inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations, Am J Public Health, 98, 216, 10.2105/AJPH.2007.114777 · DOI
  23. Abel, 2012, Capitals and capabilities: Linking structure and agency to reduce health inequalities, Soc Sci Med, 74, 236, 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.10.028 · DOI
  24. Khoury, 1989, On the measurement of susceptibility in epidemiologic studies, Am J Epidemiol, 129, 183, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115107 · DOI
  25. VanderWeele, 2014, A unification of mediation and interaction – a 4-way decomposition, Epidemiology, 25, 749, 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000121 · DOI
  26. Vander Weele, 2015, Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction
  27. Giudice, 2017, The evolution of interaction shape in differential susceptibility, Child Dev, 88, 1897, 10.1111/cdev.12710 · DOI
  28. Lundberg, 1999, Exposure-dependent misclassification of exposure in interaction analyses, Epidemiology, 10, 545, 10.1097/00001648-199909000-00014 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Dohrenwend, 1973, Social status and stressful life events, J Pers Soc Psychol, 28, 225, 10.1037/h0035718 · DOI
  30. Syme, 1976, Social class, susceptibility and sickness, Am J Epidemiol, 104, 1, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112268 · DOI
  31. Kessler, 1979, A strategy for studying differential vulnerability to the psychological consequences of stress, J Health Soc Behav, 20, 100, 10.2307/2136432 · DOI
  32. McGlone, 2017, Genomics, health disparities, and missed opportunities for the nation’s research agenda, JAMA, 317, 1831, 10.1001/jama.2017.3096 · DOI
  33. Schmidt, 2014, Exploring genetic variants predisposing to diabetes mellitus and their association with indicators of socioeconomic status, BMC Public Health, 14, 609, 10.1186/1471-2458-14-609 · DOI
  34. Saban, 2014, Epigenetics and social context: implications for disparity in cardiovascular disease, Aging Dis, 5, 346
  35. Ladd-Acosta, 2016, The role of epigenetics in genetic and environmental epidemiology, Epigenomics, 8, 271, 10.2217/epi.15.102 · DOI
  36. Borghol, 2012, Associations with early-life socio-economic position in adult DNA methylation, Int J Epidemiol, 41, 62, 10.1093/ije/dyr147 · DOI
  37. Shields, 2017, Epigenetic signals of how social disadvantage “gets under the skin”: a challenge to the public health community, Epigenomics, 9, 223, 10.2217/epi-2017-0013 · DOI
  38. Levine, 2017, Contemporaneous social environment and the architecture of late-life gene expression profile, Am J Epidemiol, 186, 503, 10.1093/aje/kwx147 · DOI
  39. Denhardt, 2018, Effect of stress on human biology: epigenetics, adaptation, inheritance, and social significance, J Cell Physiol, 233, 1975, 10.1002/jcp.25837 · DOI
  40. Schwartz, 2011, Expanding the scope of environmental risk assessment to better include differential vulnerability and susceptibility, Am J Public Health, 101, S88, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300268 · DOI
  41. 2014, UNDP: Human Development Report
  42. Delmelle, 2016, A spatial model of socioeconomic and environmental determinants of dengue fever in Cali, Colombia, Acta Trop, 164, 169, 10.1016/j.actatropica.2016.08.028 · DOI
  43. Jaenisch, 2017, Risk of microcephaly after Zika virus infection in Brazil, 2015 to 2016, Bull World Health Organ, 95, 191, 10.2471/BLT.16.178608 · DOI
  44. Capewell, 2010, Will cardiovascular disease prevention widen health inequalities?, PLoS Med, 7, e1000320., 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000320 · DOI
  45. Ferrario, 2014, The contribution of educational class in improving the accuracy in cardiovascular risk prediction across European regions, Heart, 100, 1179, 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304664 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Diderichsen, F., Hallqvist, J., & Whitehead, M.
Affiliations
  • Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
  • Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2018-08-03
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
268-274
ISSN
  • 0300-5771
  • 1464-3685
DOI
10.1093/ije/dyy167
Cited by
239
References
5
Language
en
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor, 1 d)

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