Racial inequities and biopsychosocial indicators in older adults
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.5634.3514Keywords:
Aged; Health of the Elderly; Health Status Disparity; Ethnic Group Distribution; Race Factors; Geriatric Nursing.Abstract
Objective: to analyze the association of self-reported skin color/
race with biopsychosocial indicators in older adults. Method: crosssectional
study conducted with a total of 941 older adults from a health
micro-region in Brazil. Data were collected at home with instruments
validated for the country. Descriptive analysis and binary, multinomial
and linear logistic regression (p<0.05) were performed. Results:
Most older adults were self-declared white color/race (63.8%).
Black color/race was a protective factor for negative (OR=0.40) and
regular (OR=0.44) self-rated health perception and for the indicative
of depressive symptoms (OR=0.43); and it was associated with the
highest social support score (β=3.60) and the lowest number of
morbidities (β=-0.78). Conclusion: regardless of sociodemographic
and economic characteristics, older adults of black color/race had the
best outcomes of biopsychosocial indicators.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
