Sociodemographic Differences in Myocardial Infarction Risk Perceptions among People with Coronary Heart Disease
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, United Kingdom Journal of Health Psychology
(Impact Factor: 1.22).
04/2007; 12(2):316-29. DOI: 10.1177/1359105307074270
This study examines sociodemographic differences in myocardial infarction (MI) risk perceptions among people with coronary heart disease (CHD) (N = 3130). Two variables for comparative risk perceptions were computed: (1) own risk compared to that of an average person; and (2) own risk compared to that of an average person with CHD. Comparative optimism in MI risk perceptions was common, particularly among men and those with higher education. CHD severity and psychosocial resources mediated these sociodemographic differences. These results suggest challenges for secondary prevention in CHD, particularly regarding psychosocial interventions for communicating risk information and supporting lifestyle adjustments.
Available from: William MP Klein
- "Marxist theories of social class and alienated labor have focused on how the nature of work affects self-efficacy (Gecas, 1989), suggesting that prolonged lack of control is inherent to lower social status (Mirowsky & Ross, 1983). Education (Aalto et al., 2007; Cohen, Kaplan, & Salonen, 1999), income (Cohen et al., 1999; Lachman & Weaver, 1998), and occupation (Bosma, Schrijvers, & Mackenbach, 1999; Chandola, Kuper, Singh-Manoux, Bartley, & Marmot, 2004; Marmot, Bosma, Hemingway, Brunner, & Stansfield, 1997) are related to mastery and personal control as are measures combining socioeconomic indices (Bosma et al., 1999, 2005; Marmot et al., 1997). SES has generally shown positive relations with selfefficacy (Ribisl, Winkleby, Fortmann, & Flora, 1998; Winkleby, Flora, & Kraemer, 1994) and self-esteem (Twenge & Campbell, 2002). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to examine existing research on social cognitive factors that may, in part, mediate the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and coronary heart disease (CHD). We focus on how social status is 'carried' in the mental systems of individuals, and how these systems differentially affect CHD risk and associated behaviors. To this end, literatures documenting the association of various social cognitive factors (e.g., social comparison, perceived discrimination, and self-efficacy) with cardiovascular disease are reviewed as are literatures regarding the relationship of these factors to SES. Possible mechanisms through which social cognitions may affect health are addressed. In addition, directions for future research are discussed, and a model identifying the possible associations between social cognitive factors, SES, and coronary disease is provided.
Social and Personality Psychology Compass 09/2010; 4(9):704-727. DOI:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00295.x
Available from: David R Thomas
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This literature review covers research on public awareness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and stroke. It reviews the types of questions used in health surveys to gauge people’s awareness and knowledge about heart disease and stroke, including warning signs, what people should or would do in the event being present when someone was having a heart attack or stroke, and what people know about preventing or lowering their risk for CVD. The information gathered was intended to assist the development of a questionnaire suitable for use in New Zealand.
Four general categories of questions were commonly used in surveys. These were;
* general knowledge and awareness of risk factors for CHD and stroke which included knowledge about the risks of high blood cholesterol, hypertension, smoking, excess weight and lack of exercise,
* recognition of symptoms and warning signs,
*actions to take if someone were having a heart attack or stroke, and
* asking survey participants to assess their own risk of experiencing a heart attack or stroke.
Four main types of question formats were used; open-ended, semi-structured, and structured questions and structured responses to statements. Some surveys included questions with more than one format, for example using open-ended questions initially, followed by structured questions.
Differences in knowledge about the risk factors and warning signs for CVD and stroke were reported in many of the surveys. In terms of gender differences, women tended to have more knowledge of the risk factors and warning signs for CHD and stroke. With regard to age differences, people in the middle adult age groups (around 40-64 years) tend to be more knowledgeable than older (65+ years) and younger age groups (less than 35 years).
Educational interventions have been used with multiple population groups including general adult, specific groups selected by age or location and groups selected by health status. These interventions range from brief one-session events lasting less than an hour to extensive programmes over several weeks run in high schools. Four studies reporting programmes designed to modify risk factors used groups selected as high risk (e.g., older age groups) or people having a previously identified health risk factor such as having had a stroke. Two mass media programmes both used television and print media advertisements in selected cities or regions.
Affiliation: University of Auckland, School of Population Health.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To clarify the rationale behind Posttraumatic Growth (PTG), a model by Schaefer and Moos describes the relative contribution of environmental resources, individual resources, event related factors, cognitive processing and coping (CPC) on PTG. In the present study, this model was tested with the spouses of myocardial infarction patients with data from various hospitals in Turkey. A structural equation model revealed that neither individual nor environmental resources had indirect effects on PTG through the effect of event-related factors and CPC, while they showed direct effects on PTG. The findings were discussed in the context of the theoretical model.
Journal of Health Psychology 01/2010; 15(1):85-95. DOI:10.1177/1359105309342472 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.