This study investigates whether class-level school performance affects students’ life satisfaction and if there are differential effects for high- and low-performing students. Data were derived from the National Educational Panel Study, including n = 5196 students (49.6% girls), nested in 478 classes and 250 secondary schools. School performance in class was measured by aggregating individual grade point average in Mathematics and German. The study could not reveal the “big-fish-little-pond”-effect regarding students’ life satisfaction but found differential effects for high- vs. low performing students. There was no significant association for low-performing students attending classes with higher class-level performance However, low-performing students revealed the lowest life satisfaction. High-performing students placed in classes with higher average performance reported lower life satisfaction compared to high-performing students in classes with lower average performance. This study provides evidence for the impact of the learning environment in class on school-aged children’s life satisfaction, by highlighting the differential sensitivity of high-performing students when placed in classes with higher or lower average performance.
Einleitung Zielsetzung des Beitrags ist es, zu untersuchen, inwiefern die sozioökonomische Komposition von Schulen mit dem Wohlbefinden von Schülerinnen und Schülern in Deutschland assoziiert ist. Konkret wurden die Assoziationen der Bildung, des Einkommens und des beruflichen Status der Eltern auf Individualebene und aggregiert auf Schulebene sowie die Interaktionen zwischen diesen Ebenen auf das subjektive Wohlbefinden von Schülern der Sekundarstufe I untersucht.
Methoden Es wurden Daten der Startkohorte „Klasse 5“ des Nationalen Bildungspanels (NEPS) herangezogen. Die Kohorte startete 2010 mit einer repräsentativen Stichprobe von Fünftklässlern in Deutschland, welche jährlich nachverfolgt wurden. Es wurden Erhebungswellen von der fünften bis zur neunten Klasse zusammengefasst. Damit konnten 14.265 Beobachtungen mit vollständigen Angaben von 3.977 Schülerinnen und Schülern in 218 Schulen in den Analysen berücksichtigt werden. Mit Mixed-Models wurde getestet, ob die sozioökonomische Position auf individueller und/oder schulischer Ebene und die ebenenübergreifende Interaktion dieser Indikatoren mit dem Wohlbefinden (adaptierter Personal Well-Being – School Children-Index) der Jugendlichen assoziiert ist. Es wurde für Alter, Geschlecht, Migrationshintergrund, Familienform, Schultyp und Notendurchschnitt kontrolliert.
Ergebnisse Auf individueller Ebene war das elterliche Einkommen mit höherem Wohlbefinden verbunden. Der berufliche Status der Eltern zeigte keine signifikanten Assoziationen. Auf Schulebene fanden wir einen geringen, positiven Zusammenhang zwischen dem durchschnittlichen elterlichen Einkommen und dem individuellen Wohlbefinden, aber auch einen mäßig negativen Einfluss eines hohen Anteils hoch gebildeter Eltern auf das Wohlbefinden. In Sensitivitätsanalysen blieben diese Zusammenhänge auch bei separater Betrachtung dieser Indikatoren bestehen. Die Zusammenhänge auf Individualebene wurden nicht durch die sozioökonomische Komposition von Schulen moderiert, es konnten keine signifikanten ebenenübergreifende Interaktionen festgestellt werden.
Schlussfolgerung Es wurde ein Zusammenhang der sozioökonomischen Zusammensetzung der Schule mit dem subjektiven Wohlbefinden der Jugendlichen gefunden. Internationale Befunde einer Moderation der Zusammenhänge auf individueller Ebene durch sozioökonomische Charakteristika auf Schulebene konnten jedoch nicht repliziert werden. Die Zusammenhänge zwischen individueller SEP und Wohlbefinden variieren somit nicht in Abhängigkeit von der SEP auf Schulebene. Es zeigen sich vielmehr in Teilen additive Effekte für die individuelle und schulische SEP.
Background: Many studies have identified health inequalities in childhood and adolescence. However, it is unclear how these have developed in recent years, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods: Analyses are based on the German data from the international Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study from 2009/10 (n = 5,005), 2013/14 (n = 5,961), 2017/18 (n = 4,347), and 2022 (n = 6,475). A total of 21,788 students aged approximately between 11 and 15 years were included. Socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed using the Family Affluence Scale (FAS). Several health indicators were analysed stratified by gender using bivariate and multivariate analysis methods.
Results: In 2022, there are clear socioeconomic inequalities in life satisfaction, self-rated health, fruit and vegetable consumption, and physical activity. These inequalities remained largely constant or increased between 2009/10 and 2022. Between 2017/18 and 2022, no significant changes in inequalities were found.
Conclusions: Health inequalities are persistent and reduce the chances of growing up healthy. There is no evidence that inequalities in the analysed outcomes have changed during the pandemic period (between 2017/18 and 2022). Rather, the changes in the health indicators seem to affect all adolescents in a similar way.
Background
The number of obese children is rising worldwide. Many studies have investigated single determinants of children’s body mass index (BMI), yet studies measuring determinants at different potential levels of influence are sparse. The aim of this study is to investigate the independent role of parental socioeconomic position (SEP), additional family factors at the micro level, as well as early childhood education and care (ECEC) centre characteristics at the meso level regarding BMI.
Methods
Analyses used the baseline data of the PReschool INtervention Study (PRINS) including up to 1,151 children from 53 ECEC centres. Multi-level models first estimated the associations of parental SEP indicators (parental school education, vocational training, and household income) with the children’s standard deviation scores for BMI (SDS BMI, standardised for age and gender). Second, structural (number of siblings), psychosocial (strained family relationships), and nutrition behavioural (soft-drink consumption, frequency of fast-food restaurant visits) family factors at the micro level were included. Third, characteristics of the ECEC centre at the meso level in terms of average group size, the ratio of overweight children in the group, ECEC centre type (all-day care), and the location of the ECEC centre (rural vs urban) were included. All analyses were stratified by gender and adjusted for age, migration background, and parental employment status.
Results
Estimates for boys and girls appeared to differ. In the full model, for boys the parental SEP indicators were not related to SDS BMI. Factors related to SDS BMI in boys were: two or more siblings; B = -.55; p = 0.045 [ref.: no sibling]), the characteristics of the ECEC centre in terms of average group size (20 – 25 children; B = -.54; p = 0.022 [ref.: < 20 children]), and the ratio of overweight children (more overweight children B = -1.39; p < 0.001 [ref.: few overweight children]). For girls the number of siblings (two and more siblings; B = .67; p = 0.027 [ref.: no sibling]) and average group size (> 25 children; B = -.52; p = 0.037 [ref.: < 20 children]) were related to SDS BMI.
Conclusions
The BMI of preschool children appears to be associated with determinants at the micro and meso level, however with some gender differences. The identified factors at the micro and meso level appear largely modifiable and can inform about possible interventions to reduce obesity in preschool children.
Socioeconomic position and self-rated health among adolescents: the mediating role of the family
(2022)
Background
Although health inequalities in adolescence are well documented, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Few studies have examined the role of the family in explaining adolescents’ health inequalities. The study aimed to explore whether the association between socioeconomic position and self-rated health (SRH) was mediated by familial determinants.
Methods
Using data from wave 2 of the KiGGS study (1,838 female and 1,718 male 11- to 17-year-olds), linear regression analyses were conducted to decompose the total effects of parents’ education, occupation, income, socioeconomic position index, and adolescents’ subjective social status on SRH into direct effects and indirect effects through familial determinants (family cohesion, parenting styles, parental well-being, stress, obesity, smoking and sporting activity).
Results
A significant total effect of all socioeconomic position indicators on SRH was found, except for income in male adolescents. In female adolescents, more than 70% of the total effects of each socioeconomic position indicator were explained by familial mediators, whereas no significant direct effects remained. The most important mediator was parental well-being, followed by family cohesion, parental smoking and sporting activity. In male adolescents, the associations of parental education, the socioeconomic position index and subjective social status with SRH were also mediated by familial determinants (family cohesion, parental smoking and obesity). However, a significant direct effect of subjective social status remained.
Conclusions
The family appears to play an important role in explaining health inequalities, particularly in female adolescents. Reducing health inequalities in adolescence requires policy interventions, community-based strategies, as well as programs to improve parenting and family functioning.
School-to-work/university transition is a sensitive period that can have a substantial impact on health and health behaviour over the life course. There is some indication that health and health behaviour is socially patterned in the age span of individuals in this transition (16–24 years) and that there are differences by socioeconomic position (SEP). However, evidence regarding this phenomenon has not been systematically mapped. In addition, little is known about the role of institutional characteristics (eg, of universities, workplaces) in the development of health and possible inequalities in health during this transition. Hence, the first objective of this scoping review is to systematically map the existing evidence regarding health and health behaviours (and possible health inequalities, for example, differences by SEP) in the age group of 16–24 years and during school-to-work transition noted in Germany and abroad. The second objective is to summarise the evidence on the potential effects of contextual and compositional characteristics of specific institutions entered during this life stage on health and health behaviours. Third, indicators and measures of these characteristics will be summarised.Methods and analysisWe will systematically map the evidence on health inequalities during school-to-work-transitions among young adults (aged 16–24 years), following the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley. The literature search is performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, International Labour Organization and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, using a predetermined search strategy. Articles published between January 2000 and February 2020 in English or German are considered for the review. The selection process follows a two-step approach: (1) screening of titles and abstracts, and (2) screening of full texts, both steps by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies in the selection process are resolved by a third researcher. Data extraction will be performed using a customised data extraction sheet. The results will be presented in tabular and narrative form.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this scoping review. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and presented at international conferences and project workshops.
Hintergrund: Viele Studien berichten von gesundheitlichen Ungleichheiten im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Unklar ist, wie sich diese in den letzten Jahren, insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund der COVID-19-Pandemie, entwickelt haben. Methode: Die Analysen basieren auf den deutschen Daten der internationalen HBSC-Studie (Health Behaviour in Schoolaged Children) von 2009/10 (n = 5.005), 2013/14 (n = 5.961), 2017/18 (n = 4.347) und 2022 (n = 6.475). Insgesamt wurden 21.788 Schülerinnen und Schüler im Alter von ca. 11 bis 15 Jahren berücksichtigt. Der sozioökonomische Status (SES) wurde mithilfe der Family Affluence Scale (FAS) erhoben. Verschiedene Gesundheitsindikatoren wurden mittels bi- und multivariaten Analysemethoden stratifiziert nach Geschlecht ausgewertet. Ergebnisse: 2022 zeigen sich deutliche sozioökonomische Ungleichheiten in der Lebenszufriedenheit, der subjektiven Gesundheit, im Obst- und Gemüsekonsum sowie im Bewegungsverhalten. Diese Ungleichheiten sind im Zeitverlauf von 2009/10 bis 2022 überwiegend konstant geblieben oder haben sich vergrößert. Zwischen 2017/18 und 2022 sind keine signifikanten Änderungen bezüglich der betrachteten Ungleichheiten zu erkennen. Schlussfolgerungen: Gesundheitliche Ungleichheiten zeigen sich kontinuierlich und reduzieren die Chancen auf ein gesundes Aufwachsen. Es gibt keine Hinweise darauf, dass sich die Ungleichheiten während des Pandemie-Zeitraums (zwischen 2017/18 und 2022) verändert haben. Die Veränderungen in den betrachteten Gesundheitsindikatoren betreffen vielmehr alle Heranwachsende in ähnlicher Weise.
Objective
Although health inequalities in adolescence are well documented, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Few studies have examined the role of the family in explaining the association between the family’s socioeconomic position and adolescents’ self-rated health. The current study aimed to explore whether the association between socioeconomic position and self-rated health was mediated by familial determinants.
Methods
Using data from wave 2 of the”German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents” (KiGGS) (1,838 female and 1,718 male 11- to 17-year-olds), linear regression analyses were conducted to decompose the total effects of income, education, occupational status, socioeconomic position index and adolescents’ subjective social status on self-rated health into direct effects and indirect effects through familial determinants (family cohesion, parental well-being, parental stress, parenting styles, parental obesity, smoking and sporting activity).
Results
A significant total effect of all socioeconomic position indicators on self-rated health was found, except for income in male adolescents. In female adolescents, more than 70% of the total effects of each socioeconomic position indicator were explained by familial mediators, whereas no significant direct effects remained. The most important mediator was parental well-being, followed by family cohesion, parental smoking and sporting activity. In male adolescents, the associations between income, parental education, the socioeconomic position index and subjective social status were also mediated by familial determinants (family cohesion, parental smoking, obesity and living in a single-mother family). However, a significant direct effect of subjective social status remained.
Conclusion
The analysis revealed how a family’s position of socioeconomic disadvantage can lead to poorer health in adolescents through different family practices. The family appears to play an important role in explaining health inequalities, particularly in female adolescents. Reducing health inequalities in adolescence requires policy interventions (macro-level), community-based strategies (meso-level) and programs to improve parenting and family functioning (micro-level).
Do families have moderating or mediating effects on early health inequalities? A scoping review
(2021)
Background
During early childhood, families have a crucial impact on children's health behaviour, health, and development (bhd). However, a family's socioeconomic position (SEP) determines both the parental behaviour, living conditions, and child health. To understand how family characteristics may influence the development of health inequalities, this scoping review synthesised research on their mediating and moderating effects.
Methods
The review followed the guidelines of the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. The search included German and English peer-reviewed articles published between January 1st, 2000 and December 19th, 2019. The search in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus used both free text terms in the title/abstract and index terms within linked keyword blocks: (1) family characteristics, (2) inequalities, (3) income, education, occupation, (4) bhd, (5) newborn, infant, toddler, preschooler. Two researchers independently examined eligibility for inclusion in two rounds (title/abstract; full-text).
Results
Of 7,089 articles identified, ten sources were included that studied family characteristics and health inequalities among 0-6 years olds. Parental rules, stress, and screentime, and TV in bedroom showed mediating effects on inequalities in behaviour problems or children's screentime. Families' negativity, single parenthood, and the number of children in the household moderated differences in impairment, health, behaviour problems, development or breastfeeding initiation.
Conclusions
The effect of family characteristics on early health inequalities has been sparsely investigated. The evidence supported models of family stress and investment. Further research is needed to comprehensively understand this association.
Key messages
Family characteristics contribute to health inequalities.
Taking families’ stress and investment into account could improve targeted prevention efforts aimed at reducing health inequalities.
Introduction
Childhood and adolescence are crucial life stages for health trajectories and the development of health inequalities in later life. The relevance of schools for health and well-being of children and adolescents has long been recognised, and there is some research regarding the association of contextual and compositional characteristics of schools and classes with health, health behaviour and well-being in this population. Little is known about the role of meso-level characteristics in relation to health inequalities. The aim of this scoping review is to retrieve and synthesise evidence about the mediating or moderating role of compositional or contextual characteristics of schools for the association between students’ socioeconomic position and health in primary and secondary education.
Methods and analysis
We will conduct a systematic search of electronic databases in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science and Education Resources Information Center. Studies must meet the following inclusion criteria: (1) The population must be students attending primary or secondary schools in developed economies. (2) The outcomes must include at least one indicator for individual health, health behaviour or well-being. (3) The study must include at least one contextual or compositional characteristic of the school context and one individual determinant of socioeconomic position. (4) The study must also examine the mediating or moderating role of the contextual or compositional characteristic of the school context for the associations between socioeconomic position and health, health behaviour or well-being. (5) The study must be published since 1 January 2000 in English or German language. We will provide a narrative synthesis of findings.
Ethics and dissemination
We will not collect primary data and only include secondary data derived from previously published studies. Therefore, ethical approval is not required. We intend to publish our findings in an international peer-reviewed journal and to present them at national and international conferences.