There is substantial evidence that lower objective socioeconomic status (SES)—as measured by education, occupation, and income—is associated with a higher risk of depression. Less is known, however, about associations between perceptions of social status and the prevalence of depression. This study investigated associations of both objective SES and subjective social status (SSS) with depressive symptoms among adults in Germany. Data were obtained from the 2013 special wave of the German Health Update study, a national health survey of the adult population in Germany. Objective SES was determined using a composite index based on education, occupation, and income. The three single dimensions of the index were also used individually. SSS was measured using the MacArthur Scale, which asks respondents to place themselves on a 10-rung ‘social ladder’. Regression models were employed to examine associations of objective SES and SSS with current depressive symptoms, as assessed with the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-8 sum score ≥10). After mutual adjustment, lower objective SES and lower SSS were independently associated with current depressive symptoms. The associations were found in both sexes and persisted after further adjustment for sociodemographic factors, long-term chronic conditions, and functional limitations. Mediation analyses revealed a significant indirect relationship between objective SES and depressive symptoms through SSS. When the three individual dimensions of objective SES were mutually adjusted, occupation and income were independently associated with depressive symptoms. After additional adjustment for SSS, these associations attenuated but remained significant. The findings suggest that perceptions of low social status in adults may be involved in the pathogenesis of depression and play a mediating role in the relationship between objective SES and depressive symptoms. Prospective studies are needed to establish the direction of effects and to address questions of causality.

Klassischerweise wird der sozioökonomische Status (SES) in der Gesundheitsforschung mit objektiven Indikatoren (Bildung, Beruf, Einkommen) bestimmt. Ergänzend wird seit einigen Jahren zunehmend auch der subjektive soziale Status (SSS) erfasst, meist mithilfe der MacArthur Scale. In diesem Beitrag wird die Konstruktvalidität einer deutschsprachigen Version dieses Instruments untersucht. Zudem wird der Frage nachgegangen, ob der SSS über den objektiven SES hinaus mit der gesundheitlichen Lage zusammenhängt. Für die Analysen werden Daten einer bevölkerungsbasierten Pilotstudie herangezogen, die im Rahmen der Studie „Gesundheit in Deutschland aktuell“ (GEDA) vom Robert Koch-Institut durchgeführt wurde (n = 1571; Alter: 18−79 Jahre). Der SSS wurde mit der 10-stufigen MacArthur Scale erfasst. Dabei konnten sich die Befragten selbst auf der „sozialen Stufenleiter“ platzieren. Am stärksten korrelierte der SSS mit konstruktverwandten Indikatoren wie einem mehrdimensionalen SES-Index und den objektiven SES-Einzelindikatoren Einkommen, berufliche Stellung und Bildungsgrad (r = 0,32−0,60; p < 0,001). Schwächere Korrelationen waren zwischen dem SSS und den konstruktfremden Indikatoren soziale Unterstützung, seelisches Wohlbefinden, Depressivität und Body-Mass-Index festzustellen (r = − 0,29−0,30; p < 0,001). Faktorenanalysen ließen keine nennenswerten Fremdladungen des SSS auf die Faktoren Wohlbefinden und Depressivität erkennen. Nach Kontrolle für Alter, Bildung, Beruf und Einkommen blieb ein niedrigerer SSS signifikant mit einem schlechteren Gesundheitszustand assoziiert (p < 0,05). Die Ergebnisse sprechen für die konvergente und diskriminante Validität des Instruments und weisen darauf hin, dass der Selbstwahrnehmung von sozialer Benachteiligung eine eigenständige Bedeutung für die gesundheitliche Lage zukommt. In health research, socio-economic status (SES) is traditionally assessed using objective indicators (education, occupation, income). For a couple of years, there has been a growing body of studies that additionally assess the subjective social status (SSS) of respondents, mostly using the MacArthur Scale. The aim of this study was to examine the construct validity of a German-language version of this instrument and to investigate whether SSS is associated with health over and above objective SES. Analyses were based on data from a population-based pilot study carried out within the ‘German Health Update’ (GEDA) study conducted by the Robert Koch Institute (n = 1,571; age: 18−79 years). SSS was measured with the MacArthur scale asking respondents to place themselves on a 10-rung “social ladder”. The strongest correlations to SSS were found with measures of similar constructs such as a multidimensional index of objective SES, income level, occupational position and educational attainment (r = 0.32−0.60; p < 0.001). Weaker correlations were found between SSS and measures of dissimilar constructs such as social support, mental well-being, depressiveness, and body-mass-index (r = − 0.29−0.30; p < 0.001). Factor analysis did not show considerable loadings of SSS on factors of mental well-being and depressiveness. After adjusting for age, education, occupation, and income, lower SSS remained significantly associated with higher odds of adverse health (p < 0.05). The findings of this study provide support for the convergent and discriminant validity of the MacArthur Scale and indicate that self-perceptions of social disadvantage may have health implications beyond the impact of objective SES.

Since the early 2000s, evidence has been accumulating that subjective social status – a person’s sense of their own position on the social ladder – affects health above and beyond objective socioeconomic status. To date, however, little is known about how these distinct health effects of subjective social status can be explained. This article narratively reviews different explanatory approaches and key methodological challenges, backed up by empirical findings and supplemented by the authors’ own reflections. Both social–psychological and psychoneurobiological explanations can make a theoretically plausible contribution to explaining the subjective social status–health relationship. Experimental and panel designs appear promising for addressing important methodological challenges in this strand of research.

The health implications of environmental noise, especially cardiovascular effects, have been studied intensively. Research on associations between noise and mental health, however, has shown contradictory results. The present study examined associations between individual levels of noise annoyance due to noise from various sources in the living environment and mental health of adults in Germany. It evaluated whether these associations persisted after adjusting for potential covariates. Data were obtained from the cross-sectional “German Health Update” study 2012 (GEDA 2012), a national health interview survey among adults in Germany conducted by the Robert Koch Institute (n = 19,294). Noise annoyance questions referred to overall noise and that from road traffic, neighbours, and air traffic. Mental health was measured with the five-item Mental Health Inventory. Bivariate analysis showed associations between high levels of noise annoyance and impaired mental health for all noise sources except air traffic. After adjusting for covariates (sociodemographic factors, chronic disease, and social support), both men and women who reported high overall noise annoyance showed more than doubled odds of impaired mental health compared to those who were not annoyed. The odds of impaired mental health in the highest noise annoyance category from road traffic and neighbours were also significantly increased. These findings indicate that high noise annoyance is associated with impaired mental health and that this association can vary with the source of environmental noise. Further research on covariates of this association is necessary. Particularly, longitudinal data are required to establish the direction of associations and to address questions of causality.

In Germany, adult health checks are carried out in the primary care setting for early detection of chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and kidney disease. This study aims to examine the social, behavioural, and health-related determinants of health check attendance among eligible adults in Germany. Data were derived from the cross-sectional German Health Update (GEDA) study, a national health survey among adults in Germany carried out by the Robert Koch Institute. Analyses were restricted to respondents with statutory health insurance aged 35 years or older (n = 26,555). Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate associations between health check attendance and factors selected on the basis of Andersen’s Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. After mutual adjustment, higher health check attendance was associated with a higher age, higher socioeconomic status, being married, stronger social support, physical activity, non-smoking, greater fruit and vegetable consumption, and higher use of outpatient care in both sexes. In women, higher attendance was related to alcohol consumption and having company health insurance (BKK) after multiple adjustment. In men, higher attendance was associated with better self-rated health after adjusting for all other factors. The findings of this study suggest that people with an unfavourable risk factor profile, such as socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, smokers, physically inactive people, and persons with a low fruit and vegetable intake, are less likely to have health checks than those with a more favourable risk profile. Health checks carried out in the primary care setting should be evaluated for their effects on population health and health inequality.

Most chronic diseases follow a socioeconomic gradient with higher rates in lower socioeconomic groups. A growing body of research, however, reveals cancer to be a disease group with very diverse socioeconomic patterning, even demonstrating reverse socioeconomic gradients for certain cancers. To investigate this matter at the German national level for the first time, this study examined socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence in Germany, both for all cancers combined as well as for common site-specific cancers. Population-based data on primary cancers newly diagnosed in 2010–2013 was obtained from the German Centre for Cancer Registry Data. Socioeconomic position was assessed at the district level using the German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation, which is a composite index of area-based socioeconomic indicators. Absolute and relative socioeconomic inequalities in total and site-specific cancer incidence were analyzed using multilevel Poisson regression models with the logarithm of the number of residents as an offset. Among men, socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence with higher rates in more deprived districts were found for all cancers combined and various site-specific cancers, most pronounced for cancers of the lung, oral and upper respiratory tract, stomach, kidney, and bladder. Among women, higher rates in more deprived districts were evident for kidney, bladder, stomach, cervical, and liver cancer as well as for lymphoid/hematopoietic neoplasms, but no inequalities were evident for all cancers combined. Reverse gradients with higher rates in less deprived districts were found for malignant melanoma and thyroid cancer in both sexes, and in women additionally for female breast and ovarian cancer. Whereas in men the vast majority of all incident cancers occurred at cancer sites showing higher incidence rates in more deprived districts and cancers with a reverse socioeconomic gradient were in a clear minority, the situation was more balanced for women. This is the first national study from Germany examining socioeconomic inequalities in total and site-specific cancer incidence. The findings demonstrate that the socioeconomic patterning of cancer is diverse and follows different directions depending on the cancer site. The area-based cancer inequalities found suggest potentials for population-based cancer prevention and can help develop local strategies for cancer prevention and control.