Next Article in Journal
Relative Body Fat Distribution in Preadolescent Indian Children Exposed to a Natural Disaster during Early Development
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring the User Interaction Network in an Anxiety Disorder Online Community: An Exponential Random Graph Model with Topical and Emotional Effects
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Influence of Social Adversity on Perceived Health Status and Depressive Symptoms among Portuguese Older People

1
Laboratório para a Investigação Integrativa e Translacional em Saúde Populacional (ITR), Rua das Taipas 135, 4050-600 Porto, Portugal
2
EPIUnit, Instituto de Saúde Pública da Universidade do Porto, Rua das Taipas 135, 4050-600 Porto, Portugal
3
Departamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade do Porto, Alameda Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal
4
Instituto de Sociologia, Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto, Via Panorâmica, s/n, 4150-564 Porto, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(11), 6355; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph19116355
Submission received: 26 April 2022 / Revised: 21 May 2022 / Accepted: 21 May 2022 / Published: 24 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Aging)

Abstract

:
This study aims to investigate how exposure to poverty, food insecurity, and abuse at older ages relates to health outcomes. A questionnaire collecting data on sociodemographic and economic characteristics, health status, depressive symptoms, food insecurity, and abuse was administered to a sample of 677 older adults. Logistic regression was used to quantify the association of poverty, food insecurity, and abuse with perceived health status and depressive symptoms. If the older person only reported experiences of abuse, it was more likely to report the presence of depressive symptoms, even after adjustment for covariates. If it was only reported the experience of food insecurity, it was more likely to report a worse health status. Older people exposed to at least two factors of vulnerability were significantly more likely to report (very) poor perceived health status (OR: 7.11, 95% CI: 2.77–18.25) and the presence of relevant depressive symptoms (OR: 4.34; 95% CI: 2.04–9.22). Thus, the combined effect of vulnerabilities was significantly associated with worse health among older people. Public health policies to mitigate these adverse exposures should be developed to promote health and well-being in this population.

1. Introduction

Population aging and the increasing number of older people are a considerable challenge for societies [1]. A wide range of old-age vulnerabilities, such as lack of health-related knowledge and awareness, specific nutritional and physical needs, psychosocial concerns (depression or other neuropsychiatric pathologies) and mistreatment, as well as financial constraints, have a significant impact on the quality of life of older people [2].
Social adversity comprises unfavorable environmental conditions that are related to poor physical health. It includes not only material deprivation but also psychosocial factors, such as abuse experiences, that may accumulate over the life course. In addition, old age vulnerabilities can be exogenous/external events, related to the social and physical environments in which the older people live, or, more frequently, endogenous/internal events, considering older people’s health, employment, and social support issues [3,4,5]. The distribution of vulnerabilities in old age is very unequal because there are events and conditions individuals have no control over (e.g., the global spread of diseases, widowhood, physical and/or cognitive dependence, abuse, and violence). Furthermore, there are dimensions of vulnerability that are socially constructed and developed throughout life (e.g., long-term unemployment, precarious professional trajectories, retirement), greatly influencing the way individuals manage the specific challenges of old age [6].
In many countries, the social protection systems do not assure adequate income security until the end of individuals’ lives, when the expenses tend to increase, in part due to health needs, which makes older people particularly vulnerable to economic insecurity [7]. Individuals are forced to live on limited budgets that may contribute to worse health status (deteriorating physical and mental health and functional abilities) [8] and self-perception of wellbeing [9], as well as an increased risk of chronic diseases and other numerous deleterious health consequences [10].
Comorbidities and frailty, that arise with increasing age [11], are linked with rising risks of the onset of ill health and disability [5,8,12]. Studies showed that in general, older age, being women, lower education, lower economic status and not living with a partner are social adversity factors that were associated with worse health and quality of life [13,14,15,16,17,18].
From the economic instability, inadequate food intake may arise and lead to food insecurity [19], which disproportionately affects individuals living in poverty [20] and could worsen the adverse health consequences, being mental health one of the most affected dimensions [10]. Above all, proper nutrition among this age group is imperative because specific nutritional needs and diets are needed to manage older adults’ health conditions [21].
Some life experiences occurring among older people are also likely to be related to or a sign of an abuse experience, such as changes in the financial situations, changes in behavior or the regular social activity, as well as being left alone for long periods, not having proper clothing or food in the house and the presence of injuries [22]. Elder abuse is a destructive behavior directed at an older person that occurs in a context of trust and it may be psychological, physical, financial, or sexual abuse or neglect [23]. This experience can have particularly negative effects on health in this population, including longer periods of convalescence [23], due to a diminished ability to defend themselves or to escape from the abusive situation, when compared with other population groups [24].
The underlying rationale is that the more difficulties an individual accumulates, the more vulnerable she or he will be [25]. Thus, in Portugal, a country hit by a recent financial crisis, would be expected to observe the co-occurrence of old-age vulnerabilities and it is expected that the accumulation of vulnerabilities will worsen the health consequences.
Therefore, we hypothesized that there might exist a higher risk of worse health outcomes if individuals have a combined exposure to vulnerabilities. The current study aims to investigate how exposure to poverty, food insecurity, and abuse is related to health outcomes, namely self-perceived health status and reported depressive symptoms among older adults.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Participants

As part of a Portuguese population-based cohort study—the EPIPorto cohort—of urban dwellers, men and women, previously assembled using random digit dialing [26], a study wave under the acronym HARMED: Socioeconomic and Health Determinants of Elder Abuse was conducted. Between April and October of 2017, all members of the cohort that were 60 years or more were contacted to participate in the HARMED project [27]. A letter explaining the HARMED study was sent by postal mail to all the eligible participants. Individuals were contacted by telephone and those who were willing to take part in the project were scheduled for a face-to-face interview in the Department of Public Health Sciences and Forensics and Medical Education. Data were collected by graduated Social and Health Sciences researchers, that received prior training to assure data collection quality and validity, using a structured questionnaire.
Of the 984 subjects that were contacted, 43 were deceased and 244 refused to participate in the evaluation. Of the 697 individuals who accepted to participate, 20 were excluded because of significant cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination—MMSE—score < 24, as recommended in previous studies to ensure the validity of self-reported questionnaires in population studies [28]). The final sample included 677 participants.
The local ethics committee (Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João) approved the study protocol (CES-320/2016). Written informed consent was provided and signed by participants. The World Health Organization (WHO) ethical and safety guidelines for the conduct of research on violence against women were followed [29].

2.2. Measures

Household monthly income was assessed through one question “What is the average monthly income of your household (Euro), after the mandatory discounts for contributions and taxes?”. Participants also reported their self-perception regarding household monthly income adequacy, then dichotomized into sufficient (that corresponds to ‘allows to live comfortably’ and ‘allows to make ends meet’) and insufficient (that collapses the ‘it is hard to make ends meet’ and ‘it is very hard to make ends meet’ categories), according to the variable distribution.
According to Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE), the at-risk-of-poverty rate is the share of people with an equivalized disposable income below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60% of the national median equivalized annual disposable income after social transfers (€9351) [30]. The monthly equivalized disposable income was converted to annual income and then was created a dichotomized variable for risk of poverty, with two categories: ‘no’ (when above the at-risk-of-poverty threshold) and ‘yes’ (when below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold), based on the INE guidelines [30].
Household food security was assessed through the previously validated US Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form, which comprises six questions and was translated to the Portuguese language by the EPIUnit research team (Cronbach α 0.748) [31]. Household food security status was classified as high or marginal, low, and very low. Since the proportion of participants in the two food insecure levels (‘low food security’ and ‘very low food security’) was very low, we decided to merge them into one category only. Household food security status was dichotomized for analysis as ‘food-secure’ vs. ‘food-insecure’.
Exposure to abuse was self-reported considering 52 items on psychological, physical, financial, and sexual violence and neglect, based on the Revised Conflict Tactic Scales [32] and the UK survey of elder abuse and neglect [33]. The several items of each type of abuse were collapsed to define a binary outcome variable for each type of abuse. To assess last year’s abuse, we considered ‘yes’ if they reported any abuse in the past 12 months and ‘no’ if they only reported abuse in the previous years or none ever.
Participants were also asked in one question about their self-perception of health, rating their health status by choosing one of five categories: ‘very good, ‘good’, ‘reasonable’, ‘poor’ and ‘very poor’. These categories were merged into ‘very good/good’, ‘reasonable’ and ‘poor/very poor’ and, for the logistic regression, dichotomized into ‘very good/good or reasonable’ and ‘poor/very poor’. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the translated and validated Portuguese version of the short-form of the Geriatric Depression Scale [34], a 15 items scale. The total score ranges from 0 to 15, a total score higher than five suggests the presence of depressive symptoms.
Sociodemographic and economic variables were assessed, including age, gender, marital status, education, occupational position, housing (own, rented, familiar, social, rent-free houses), and financial support (working, social/sick-leave/other pensions benefits, and other financial support that included financial transfers of (ex-)partner/spouse, children or other family members, other type or no financial support). Education was recoded into three levels (high: >9 years; intermediate: 5–9 years; low: <5 years). The occupational position was grouped into three categories: high (upper white collar), intermediate (lower white-collar), and low (blue-collar) [35,36]. Retired participants were classified considering their main occupation before retirement. Social support was assessed with the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support [37], previously translated to Portuguese (Cronbach α 0.88) [38]. It contains 12 items graded from 1–7 (totally disagree-totally agree). High scores correspond to high social support. Information on chronic diseases encompassing any disease that requires regular medical care was self-reported by participants.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics, as mean and standard deviation (SD) or counting and proportions, whenever applicable, were computed to describe participants. The Chi-square test was used to compare proportions. Crude and adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using logistic regression. Covariates were selected a priori, considering the literature review and those which were known to be moderators or confounders in the effect of vulnerabilities on perceived health status and depression, such as age, gender, marital status, education, occupation, chronic diseases, monthly household income, and perceived social support were tested. For each model, we tested the contribution of all covariates separately. However, only the ones who changed the magnitude of the association by, at least, 10% (change in the adjusted OR compared with crude OR), were included in the final models: gender, marital status, and perceived social support. Also, we evaluated the fit of our models and we found a good fit of the data for all the models (Hosmer-Lemeshow p > 0.05). Statistical analysis was performed using the PASW Statistics version 23.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). A significant level of p < 0.05 was set.

3. Results

Most of the participants were women and were married or cohabiting with a partner. Approximately 40% of the participants had high education and occupational position (Table 1). Table 1 shows that the risk of poverty is significantly more prevalent among older participants, those who are not married or cohabiting, and individuals with low education or low occupation. Food insecurity was significantly more prevalent among women and, likewise poverty, among participants who are not married or co-habiting. Still, food insecurity was significantly more common among participants with low education and low occupational position.
The majority of the participants perceived their monthly household income as sufficient (84.4%), had their own house (63.4%), and had social/sick-leave or other pension benefits (77.4%) as their main income source (Table 2). Table 2 also shows that the risk of poverty and food insecurity is significantly more prevalent among participants who perceived their monthly household income as insufficient and who have rented or lived in other types of housing. Additionally, exposure to any type of abuse was significantly more frequent among participants who perceived their monthly household income as insufficient.
Most of the participants reported having high social support (68.4%) and chronic diseases (93.8%) but only 6.6% perceived their health as (very) poor and 27.4% had depressive symptoms (Table 3). Poverty is more frequent among participants with moderate or low social support, who perceived their health as ‘poor or very poor’ (34.1%) and who reported relevant depressive symptoms (18.2%). Food insecurity was significantly more common among participants who perceived their health as poorer (28.9%) and reported relevant depressive symptoms (15.2%). Exposure to any type of abuse was more prevalent among participants who have reported depressive symptoms (37.6%) (Table 3).
As presented in Table 4, after adjustment for gender, marital status, and perceived social support, participants who only reported being exposed to food insecurity were significantly more likely to perceive their health as (very) poor (OR: 5.01; 95% CI: 1.19–21.14), and participants who reported only to be exposed to abuse were significantly more likely to report the presence of depressive symptoms (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.52–3.86). However, a dose-response association was observed between the combined exposure to these old-age vulnerability factors and (very) poor perceived health status (exposed to one vulnerability OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.20–5.34; exposed to at least two vulnerabilities OR: 7.11; 95% CI: 2.77–18.25) and self-reported depressive symptoms (exposed to one vulnerability OR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.46–3.32; exposed to at least two vulnerabilities OR: 4.34; 95% CI: 2.04–9.22) (Table 3).

4. Discussion

This study shows that, in a population of older adults, combined exposure to poverty, food insecurity, and abuse is significantly associated with worse health outcomes, participants were more likely to perceive their health as poor and to report the presence of relevant depressive symptoms.
Our findings showed a 6.6% prevalence of food insecurity in elders. This prevalence is substantially lower than the ones observed by previous studies, also conducted among Portuguese older people, which reported prevalence estimates of 19 and 23% [39,40]. The presence of food insecurity has been consistently associated with lower education [41,42,43,44]: most of the participants of the two studies mentioned [39,40] presented lower levels of education (less than 5 years), compared with our sample in which most participants had higher levels of education (more than 9 years). Studies developed in other countries, also with older adults, also presented very different prevalence estimates of food insecurity ranging from 2.8% in Australia to 67% in Mexico [42,45,46,47,48,49]. These different estimates among different countries and cultures are expected since the socioeconomic and demographic conditions of the populations are not the same. In addition, once more, the way of measuring food insecurity in the households was different, which could also influence prevalence estimates. Analyzing the isolated impact of the vulnerabilities, food insecurity seems to have a worse impact on health, as it is associated with both worse perceived health status and the presence of depressive symptoms. Involuntary unemployment, early retirement, poverty, or residing in poorer areas are associated with food insecurity [50] and older people are particularly vulnerable to this economic insecurity due to inadequate social protection systems. Then, individuals are forced to live on limited budgets, in which they do not have enough money to spend on food, which will worsen their health and could lead to malnutrition and other chronic diseases, thereby, affecting physical and psychological health and functional capacity [21]. On the other side, limited resources may also postpone needed medical care, which increases health costs and leads to poorer disease management and health status [51]. The more severe the food insecurity, the more compromised a large spectrum of basic needs at risk will be [51]. Regarding the sociodemographic and economic profile of food-insecure participants, we observed that they had had low education, and occupation, insufficient perception of their household income, reported depressive symptoms, lack of or moderate social support and perceived their health status as poor/very poor. Similar characteristics were previously reported in the study of Fernandes and colleagues [39] regarding gender and education and in other studies [42,49,52] regarding income and health status, which is in line with this study results. These findings alert for the need of public health policies and actions to reduce the impact of food insecurity targeting these vulnerable social groups. It was also previously shown that an environment with food insecurity also triggers abuse [53]. Despite the lack of literature about these relationships, some studies have been developed with mothers and support these findings. A study with women aged 18 years or older showed higher odds of intimate partner abuse among those reporting more severe food insecurity [54]. Similar results were found in the study of Hernandez and colleagues reporting that mothers who suffered from intimate partner abuse had an increased risk of food insecurity two years later [55].
Our results showed that approximately 24% of the participants reported abusive behaviors in the last 12 months. Similar prevalence estimates were reported by Martins and colleagues [56] with 23.5% of respondents suffering some kind of abuse and mistreatment and by Gil and colleagues [57] with a slightly lower prevalence of 12.3%. In our study, we observed that psychological abuse was the most frequent (19.9%) in the last 12 months. Other studies among Portuguese elders showed similar results, with a prevalence of psychological abuse of 21.9% in the Abuse and health among elderly in Europe (ABUEL) study [58,59]. A lower prevalence (6.3%) was reported by Gil and colleagues [57], possibly explained by the participants’ levels of education, since it has been shown that psychological abuse is more frequently reported by higher educated individuals [59,60,61]. This reasoning could help to understand the difference in psychological abuse prevalence between our research and Gil and colleagues’ study [57], once the majority of our sample is highly educated (40.2%), contrary to the other study sample (18.2%). The results of our sensitivity analysis corroborated these findings since we observed that adjusting for education increased the association between exposure to abuse and food insecurity. The higher prevalence of psychological abuse was also found in other European countries, as in Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Spain, and Sweden [59], endorsing our findings. The association between socioeconomic factors and abuse did not show consistency because abuse may occur and be reported in every socioeconomic stratum [62]. However, if abuse occurs in a context characterized by other vulnerabilities, it will contribute to worsening the wellbeing status of the older person [62].
Self-perceived health is usually used as a reliable indicator of overall health status, morbidity and mortality and seems to have a positive association with sociodemographic characteristics, such as education and income, and a negative relationship with chronic diseases, functional dependence, depression, in older age [63]. Food insecure people, that consequently may be at risk of poverty due to worse economic conditions, tend to report a worse health status [52], which is in line with this study results [39]. Besides poverty and food insecurity, abuse also seems to have a negative association with the perceived health status [22]. Late-life depression is a devastating health problem that is associated with an increased risk of morbidity and suicide and decreased physical, cognitive, and social status, with individuals with higher education, socioeconomic status, and social support being less prone to suffer from it [64]. Food insecurity seems to be associated with an increase the risk of chronic diseases, among which depression is one of them [10,65,66]. Previous literature demonstrates that the causal pathway between food insecurity and psychiatric illnesses is bidirectional [67]. Depression is also considered a risk factor for elder abuse [22] and the association can also be bidirectional. Therefore, once every single old-age vulnerability seems to be related either to perceived health or depressive symptoms, it is possible to assume that the co-occurrence of these vulnerabilities could lead to an increased risk of worse perceived health status and more reported, and possibly severe, depressive symptoms.
Nevertheless, individuals who have higher social support seem to have a lower risk of experiencing these vulnerabilities once social support attenuates the detrimental effects of economic constraints in depression [68]. A previous study also showed that high social support may attenuate social inequalities in health at older ages [69]. Literature, however, suggests that this is probably a very complex relationship between several aspects that may model the impact of life course vulnerabilities on health once it could be moderated by several biopsychosocial factors [70]. Higher educational and occupational, as well as cognitive and non-cognitive physical or leisure time activities, levels and other beneficial societal changes may underlie a decrease in age-associated psychiatric problems prevalence and incidence in high-income countries [71,72]. However, these epidemiological reserve-related factors are interrelated: literacy may be determined either by genetics or by educational experiences, and social and environmental factors; occupational status is related to education and socioeconomic characteristics and inequalities. So, longitudinal life course studies are needed to fully understand the complex mechanism of neuropsychiatric problems development and risk [72].
These results were observed during a time of economic recovery in Portugal which leads us to speculate that, in a time where an economic crisis is emerging after COVID-19, this relationship can worsen after the pandemic, putting older people in a more difficult situation and increasing suffering.
Some strengths and limitations of this study should be acknowledged. Data were obtained from a large population-based urban cohort, located in a high-income country. Likewise, we used widely accepted tools for the assessment of our study variables. We used the MMSE to screen cognitive impairment and we exclude those participants who score < 24, we might, however, be excluding participants with mild and severe cognitive impairment that might be also exposed to abuse. When participants and nonparticipants were compared, statistically significant differences were observed in age and education, being the participants younger and more educated, those who are more prone to participate. More than a third of the participants had a higher level of education and occupational position, suggesting that this population sample might be biased towards a high socioeconomic position. Although the cross-sectional nature of the study does not allow to infer a causal relation, it is clear that an environment with poverty and food insecurity and abuse predicts worse health. Also, we are probably underestimating the effects of poverty as our sample is highly educated.

5. Conclusions

Aging leads to frailty and, therefore, puts older people at risk of adverse factors (unfavorable economic context, situations of abuse, as well as others). These adversities will not only negatively impact their quality of life and their autonomy but will also place a heavy burden on resources and health and social care services. The particular needs of older people in later life have to be met not only by their families but also by society. Therefore, actions and policies to support this population should be more oriented through a vulnerability perspective, in which promoting more formal and informal support to this population could contribute to reducing the likelihood of experiencing these problems. So, improving socioeconomic conditions and specific legislation against elder abuse would have the potential to benefit the health and well-being of this population.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: J.S. and S.F.; Methodology: I.D., A.L. and S.F.; Formal analysis: J.S.; Writing—original draft preparation: J.S.; Writing—review and editing: J.S., A.H., E.R., I.D., A.L. and S.F.; Supervision: S.F.; Funding acquisition: I.D., A.L. and S.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The present work was carried out under the EPIPorto cohort, developed in the Department of Public Health Sciences and Forensics and Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, and the Institute of Public Health of the University of Porto. Its implementation was only possible with the participation of the older adults who accepted this challenge, to which we thank their availability. The objectives of this study are part of the investigation project HARMED—Socio-economic and health determinants of elder abuse (PTDC/IVC-SOC/6782/2014; POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016670), financed by the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) through the Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Program—COMPETE, the national funding from the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT), and the FCT contracts CEECIND/01516/2017, CEECIND/01793/2017 and SFRH/BD/146241/2019 and the DOCnet (NORTH-01-0145-ERDF-000003), co-financed by the North Operational Regional Program (NORTE 2020) through Portugal 2020 and the FEDER. It is also supported by Unidade de Investigação em Epidemiologia—Instituto de Saúde Pública da Universidade do Porto (EPIUnit) (UIDB/04750/2020) and Laboratório para a Investigação Integrativa e Translacional (ITR)(LA/P/0064/2020). Funders had no role in the design, execution, analysis, and interpretation of data, or writing of the study.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The local ethics committee (Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João) approved the study protocol (CES-320/2016). Written informed consent was provided and signed by participants. Also, the World Health Organization (WHO) ethical and safety guidelines for the conduct of research on violence against women were followed [30].

Informed Consent Statement

Written informed consent was provided and signed by participants. Also, the World Health Organization (WHO) ethical and safety guidelines for the conduct of research on violence against women were followed [30].

Data Availability Statement

Data were obtained from the EPIPorto cohort (https://ispup.up.pt/en/coorte/epiporto-2/ (accessed on 20 May 2022). Data from this structure can be assessed upon request to the coordination.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Veras, R. Population aging today: Demands, challenges, and innovations. Rev. Saúde Pública 2009, 43, 548–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Shrivastava, S.R.; Shrivastava, P.S.; Ramasamy, J. Health-care of elderly: Determinants, needs, and services. Int. J. Prev. Med. 2013, 4, 1224–1225. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  3. Golaz, V.; Wandera, S.O.; Rutaremwa, G. Understanding the vulnerability of older adults: Extent of and breaches in support systems in Uganda. Ageing Soc. 2017, 37, 63–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sarvimäki, A.; Stenbock-Hult, B. The meaning of vulnerability to older persons. Nurs. Ethics 2016, 23, 372–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Zaidi, A. Life Cycle Transitions and Vulnerabilities in Old Age: A Review. 2014. Available online: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2014_zaidi_final.pdf (accessed on 1 November 2021).
  6. Schroder-Butterfill, E.; Marianti, R. A framework for understanding old-age vulnerabilities. Ageing Soc. 2006, 26, 9–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. United Nations For Ageing. Income Poverty in Old Age: An Emerging Development Priority; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ng, C.W.; Luo, N.; Heng, B.H. Health status profiles in community-dwelling elderly using self-reported health indicators: A latent class analysis. Qual. Life Res. 2014, 23, 2889–2898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ganhao-Arranhado, S.; Paul, C.; Ramalho, R.; Pereira, P. Food insecurity, weight and nutritional status among older adults attending senior centers in Lisbon. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2018, 78, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Frith, E.; Loprinzi, P.D. Food insecurity and cognitive function in older adults: A brief report. Clin. Nutr. 2018, 37, 1765–1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Moser, C.; Spagnoli, J.; Santos-Eggimann, B. Self-perception of aging and vulnerability to adverse outcomes at the age of 65–70 years. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2011, 66, 675–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cappelli, M.; Bordonali, A.; Giannotti, C.; Montecucco, F.; Nencioni, A.; Odetti, P.; Monacelli, F. Social vulnerability underlying disability amongst older adults: A systematic review. Eur. J. Clin. Investig. 2020, 50, e13239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cheshmberah, A.; Hoseini, M.; Shojaee Zadeh, D.; Moghimi-Dehkordi, B. Determinants of physical health of older people in Iran. Int. Sch. Res. Not. 2014, 2014, 507568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Debpuur, C.; Welaga, P.; Wak, G.; Hodgson, A. Self-reported health and functional limitations among older people in the Kassena-Nankana District, Ghana. Glob. Health Action 2010, 3, 54–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Gόmez-Olivé, F.X.; Thorogood, M.; Clark, B.D.; Kahn, K.; Tollman, S.M. Assessing health and well-being among older people in rural South Africa. Glob. Health Action 2010, 3, 23–35. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hirve, S.; Juvekar, S.; Lele, P.; Agarwal, D. Social gradients in self-reported health and well-being among adults aged 50 years and over in Pune District, India. Glob. Health Action 2010, 3, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Van Minh, H.; Byass, P.; Thi Kim Chuc, N.; Wall, S. Patterns of health status and quality of life among older people in rural Viet Nam. Glob. Health Action 2010, 3, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Phaswana-Mafuya, N.; Peltzer, K.; Chirinda, W.; Kose, Z.; Hoosain, E.; Ramlagan, S.; Tabane, C.; Davids, A. Self-rated health and associated factors among older South Africans: Evidence from the study on global ageing and adult health. Glob. Health Action 2013, 6, 19880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chilton, M.M.; Rabinowich, J.R.; Woolf, N.H. Very low food security in the USA is linked with exposure to violence. Public Health Nutr. 2014, 17, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Coleman-Jensen, A.; Rabbitt, M.P.; Gregory, C.A.; Singh, A. Household Food Security in the United States in 2016; United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2017; Contract No.: 237.
  21. Holben, D.H.; Marshall, M.B. Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Food insecurity in the United States. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2017, 117, 1991–2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Pillemer, K.; Burnes, D.; Riffin, C.; Lachs, M.S. Elder Abuse: Global situation, risk factors, and prevention strategies. Gerontologist 2016, 56, S194–S205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. World Health Organization. Elder Abuse; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  24. Garre-Olmo, J.; Planas-Pujol, X.; López-Pousa, S.; Juvinyà, D.; Vilà, A.; Vilalta-Franch, J. Frailty and Dependence in Girona Study Group Prevalence and risk factors of suspected elder abuse subtypes in people aged 75 and older. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2009, 57, 815–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Andrew, M.K.; Mitnitski, A.B.; Rockwood, K. Social vulnerability, frailty, and mortality in elderly people. PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e2232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Ramos, E.; Lopes, C.; Barros, H. Investigating the effect of nonparticipation using a population-based case-control study on myocardial infarction. Ann. Epidemiol. 2004, 14, 437–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Dias, I.; Henriques, A.; Lopes, A.; Lemos, R.; Barros, H.; Fraga, S. Abuse among Portuguese older people at a time of economic crisis recovery: Findings from the Harmed study. J. Elder Abus. Neglect. 2022, 34, 109–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Folstein, M.F.; Robins, L.N.; Helzer, J.E. The Mini-Mental State Examination. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1983, 40, 812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. World Health Organization. Putting Women first: Ethical and Safety Recommendations for Research on Domestic Violence against Women; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  30. Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Income and Living Conditions; Instituto Nacional de Estatística: Lisbon, Portugal, 2018.
  31. Maia, I.; Monjardino, T.; Frias, B.; Canhão, H.; Cunha Branco, J.; Lucas, R.; Santos, A.C. Food insecurity in Portugal among middle-and older-aged adults at a time of economic crisis recovery: Prevalence and determinants. Food Nutr. Bull. 2019, 40, 504–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Straus, M.A.; Hamby, S.L.; Boney-McCoy, S.; Sugarman, D.B. The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2) development and preliminary psychometric data. J. Fam. Issues 1996, 17, 283–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. O’Keeffe, M.; Hills, A.; Doyle, M.; McCreadie, C.; Scholes, S.; Constantine, R. UK Study of Abuse and Neglect of Older People: Prevalence Survey Report; Comic Relief: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  34. Pocinho, M.T.; Farate, C.; Dias, C.A.; Lee, T.T.; Yesavage, J.A. Clinical and psychometric validation of the geriatric depression scale (GDS) for Portuguese elders. Clin. Gerontol. 2009, 32, 223–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Instituto Nacional de Estatística. Classificação Portuguesa das Profissões 2010; Instituto Nacional de Estatística: Lisbon, Portugal, 2011.
  36. International Labour Organization. International Standard Classification of Occupations: ISCO-08; International Labour Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  37. Zimet, G.D.; Dahlem, N.W.; Zimet, S.G.; Farley, G.K. The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J. Personal. Assess. 1988, 52, 30–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Carvalho, S.; Pinto-Gouveia, J.; Pimentel, P.; Maia, D.; Mota-Pereira, J. Características psicométricas da versão portuguesa da Escala Multidimensional de Suporte Social Percebido (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support-MSPSS). Psychologica 2011, 54, 331–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fernandes, S.G.; Rodrigues, A.M.; Nunes, C.; Santos, O.; Gregório, M.J.; De Sousa, R.D.; Dias, S.; Canhão, H. Food insecurity in older adults: Results from the Epidemiology of Chronic Diseases Cohort Study 3. Front. Med. 2018, 5, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Gregório, M.J.; Rodrigues, A.M.; Graça, P.; De Sousa, R.D.; Dias, S.S.; Branco, J.C.; Canhao, H. Food Insecurity Is Associated with Low Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet and Adverse Health Conditions in Portuguese Adults. Front. Public Health 2018, 6, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Bishop, N.J.; Wang, K. Food insecurity, comorbidity, and mobility limitations among older US adults: Findings from the Health and Retirement Study and Health Care and Nutrition Study. Prev. Med. 2018, 114, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Souza, B.F.; Marín-León, L. Food insecurity among the elderly: Cross-sectional study with soup kitchen users. Rev. Nutr. 2013, 26, 679–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Jung, S.E.; Kim, S.; Bishop, A.; Hermann, J. Poor nutritional status among low-income older adults: Examining the interconnection between self-care capacity, food insecurity, and depression. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2019, 119, 1687–1694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Lee, J.S.; Frongillo, E.A., Jr. Factors associated with food insecurity among US elderly persons: Importance of functional impairments. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2001, 56, S94–S99. [Google Scholar]
  45. Chang, Y.; Hickman, H. Food Insecurity and Perceived Diet Quality Among Low-Income Older Americans with Functional Limitations. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2018, 50, 476–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Holben, D.H.; Barnett, M.A.; Holcomb, J.P. Food insecurity is associated with health status of older adults participating in the commodity supplemental food program in a rural Appalachian Ohio county. J. Hunger Environ. Nutr. 2007, 1, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Puello, V.V.; Orellana, S.A.; Samur, E.A. Food insecurity among elderly people in 15 districts of the Great Santiago area; an unresolved issue. Nutr. Hosp. 2013, 28, 1430–1437. [Google Scholar]
  48. Rivera-Márquez, J.A.; Mundo-Rosas, V.; Cuevas-Nasu, L.; Perez-Escamilla, R. Food insecurity at the household level and nutritional status of older people in México. Salud Pública México 2014, 56, s71–s78. [Google Scholar]
  49. Temple, J.B. Food insecurity among older Australians: Prevalence, correlates and well-being. Australas. J. Ageing 2006, 25, 158–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Oemichen, M.; Smith, C. Investigation of the food choice, promoters and barriers to food access issues, and food insecurity among low-income, free-living Minnesotan seniors. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2016, 48, 397–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Tarasuk, V.; Cheng, J.; De Oliveira, C.; Dachner, N.; Gundersen, C.; Kurdyak, P. Association between household food insecurity and annual health care costs. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2015, 187, E429–E436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Leroux, J.; Morrison, K.; Rosenberg, M. Prevalence and predictors of food insecurity among older people in Canada. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Lachs, M.S.; Pillemer, K.A. Elder abuse. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 373, 1947–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Ricks, J.L.; Cochran, S.D.; Arah, O.A.; Williams, J.K.; Seeman, T.E. Food insecurity and intimate partner violence against women: Results from the California Women’s Health Survey. Public Health Nutr. 2016, 19, 914–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Hernandez, D.C.; Marshall, A.; Mineo, C. Maternal depression mediates the association between intimate partner violence and food insecurity. J. Women’s Health 2014, 23, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Martins, R.; Neto, M.J.; Andrade, A.; Albuquerque, C. Abuse and maltreatment in the elderly. Aten. Primaria 2014, 46, 206–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Gil, A.P.; Kislaya, I.; Santos, A.J.; Nunes, B.; Nicolau, R.; Fernandes, A.A. Elder abuse in Portugal: Findings from the first national prevalence study. J. Elder Abus. Neglect 2015, 27, 174–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Macassa, G.; Viitasara, E.; Sundin, Ö.; Barros, H.; Gonzales, F.T.; Ioannidi‐Kapolou, E.; Gabriella, M.M.; Lindert, J.; Stankunas, M.; Soares, J.J. Psychological abuse among older persons in Europe: A cross-sectional study. J. Aggress. Confl. Peace Res. 2013, 5, 16–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Soares, J.; Barros, H.; Torres-Gonzales, F.; Ioannidi-Kapolou, E.; Lamura, G.; Lindert, J. Abuse and Health Among Elderly in Europe; Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Press: Kaunas, Lithuania, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  60. Burnes, D.; Pillemer, K.; Caccamise, P.L.; Mason, A.; Henderson Jr, C.R.; Berman, J.; Cook, A.M.; Shukoff, D.; Brownell, P.; Powell, M.; et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for elder abuse and neglect in the community: A population-based study. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2015, 63, 1906–1912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ruelas-González, M.G.; Duarte-Gómez, M.B.; Flores-Hernández, S.; Ortega-Altamirano, D.V.; Cortés-Gil, J.D.; Taboada, A.; Ruano, A.L. Prevalence and factors associated with violence and abuse of older adults in Mexico’s 2012 National Health and Nutrition Survey. Int. J. Equity Health Vol. 2016, 15, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. Naughton, C.; Drennan, J.; Lyons, I.; Lafferty, A.; Treacy, M.; Phelan, A.; O’Loughlin, A.; Delaney, L. Elder abuse and neglect in Ireland: Results from a national prevalence survey. Age Ageing 2012, 41, 98–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Machon, M.; Vergara, I.; Dorronsoro, M.; Vrotsou, K.; Larranaga, I. Self-perceived health in functionally independent older people: Associated factors. BMC Geriatr. 2016, 16, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Fiske, A.; Wetherell, J.L.; Gatz, M. Depression in older adults. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 2009, 5, 363–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Smith, L.; Il Shin, J.; McDermott, D.; Jacob, L.; Barnett, Y.; López‐Sánchez, G.F.; Veronese, N.; Yang, L.; Soysal, P.; Oh, H.; et al. Association between food insecurity and depression among older adults from low-and middle-income countries. Depress. Anxiety 2021, 38, 439–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Brostow, D.P.; Gunzburger, E.; Abbate, L.M.; Brenner, L.A.; Thomas, K.S. Mental illness, not obesity status, is associated with food insecurity among the elderly in the health and retirement study. J. Nutr. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2019, 38, 149–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Huddleston-Casas, C.; Charnigo, R.; Simmons, L.A. Food insecurity and maternal depression in rural, low-income families: A longitudinal investigation. Public Health Nutr. 2009, 12, 1133–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Viseu, J.; Leal, R.; de Jesus, S.N.; Pinto, P.; Pechorro, P.; Greenglass, E. Relationship between economic stress factors and stress, anxiety, and depression: Moderating role of social support. Psychiatry Res. 2018, 268, 102–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Henriques, A.; Silva, S.; Severo, M.; Fraga, S.; Barros, H. Socioeconomic position and quality of life among older people: The mediating role of social support. Prev. Med. 2020, 135, 106073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Levinsky, M.; Schiff, M. Lifetime cumulative adversity and physical health deterioration in old age: Evidence from a fourteen-year longitudinal study. Soc. Sci. Med. 2021, 289, 114407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Kujawski, S.; Kujawska, A.; Perkowski, R.; Androsiuk-Perkowska, J.; Hajec, W.; Kwiatkowska, M.; Skierkowska, N.; Husejko, J.; Bieniek, D.; Newton, J.L.; et al. Cognitive Function Changes in Older People. Results of Second Wave of Cognition of Older People, Education, Recreational Activities, NutritIon, Comorbidities, fUnctional Capacity Studies (COPERNICUS). Front. Aging Neurosci. 2021, 13, 653570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Perneczky, R.; Kempermann, G.; Korczyn, A.D.; Matthews, F.E.; Ikram, M.A.; Scarmeas, N.; Chetelat, G.; Stern, Y.; Ewers, M. Translational research on reserve against neurodegenerative disease: Consensus report of the International Conference on Cognitive Reserve in the Dementias and the Alzheimer’s Association Reserve, Resilience and Protective Factors Professional Interest Area working groups. BMC Med. 2019, 17, 47. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to sociodemographic characteristics (N = 677).
Table 1. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to sociodemographic characteristics (N = 677).
n (%)At-Risk-of-Poverty * (%)Food Insecurity (%)Abuse
(%)
No
553 (81.7)
Yes
76 (12.1)
No
632 (93.4)
Yes
45 (6.6)
No
515 (76.1)
Yes
162 (23.9)
Gender
Women428 (63.2)86.213.891.18.973.826.2
Men249 (36.8)90.89.297.22.879.920.1
p = 0.108p = 0.004p = 0.090
Age (years)
60–69306 (45.2)92.08.094.15.977.122.9
70–79244 (36.0)85.614.493.07.071.728.3
>79127 (18.8)81.218.892.17.981.918.1
p = 0.006p = 0.727p = 0.079
Marital status
Married/Cohabiting418 (61.7)90.89.295.24.876.123.9
Other259 (38.3)82.917.190.39.776.123.9
p = 0.005p = 0.021p = 1.000
Education
High (>9 years)272 (40.2)96.93.198.91.172.127.9
Intermediate (5–9 years)157 (23.2)93.86.394.95.181.518.5
Low (<5 years)247 (36.5)73.926.186.213.876.923.1
p < 0.001p < 0.001p = 0.079
Occupational position
High (Upper white collar)276 (43.6)98.51.597.52.575.424.6
Intermediate (Lower white collar)198 (31.3)84.915.193.46.676.323.7
Low (Blue collar)159 (25.1)76.823.287.412.679.220.8
p < 0.001p < 0.001p = 0.647
Legend: * the at-risk-of-poverty rate was calculated according to INE guidelines; p-value for the Chi-square test.
Table 2. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to economic characteristics (N = 677).
Table 2. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to economic characteristics (N = 677).
n (%)At-Risk-of-Poverty * (%)Food Insecurity (%)Abuse
(%)
No
553 (81.7)
Yes
76 (12.1)
No
632 (93.4)
Yes
6.6%
No
553 (81.7)
Yes
76 (12.1)
Perceived household income adequacy
Sufficient570 (84.4)93.16.997.52.577.922.1
Insufficient105 (15.6)58.541.570.529.565.734.3
p < 0.001p < 0.001p = 0.010
Housing
Own house429 (63.4)91.28.897.03.076.923.1
Rented house182 (26.9)82.018.087.412.675.324.7
Other types of housing 66 (9.7)81.818.286.413.672.727.3
p = 0.003p < 0.001p = 0.726
Financial support 1
Working98 (14.5)91.78.395.94.173.526.5
Social/sick-leave/other pensions benefits524 (77.4)86.813.292.67.476.323.7
Other55 (8.1)91.58.596.43.678.221.8
p = 0.305p = 0.305p = 0.771
Legend: * the at-risk-of-poverty rate was calculated according to INE guidelines; p-value for the Chi-square test; familiar, social, rent-free houses; 1 other financial support included financial transfers of (ex-)partner/spouse, children or other familiars, other type or no financial support.
Table 3. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to health-related characteristics (N = 677).
Table 3. Prevalence of at-risk-of-poverty, food insecurity, and abuse, according to health-related characteristics (N = 677).
n (%)At-Risk-of-Poverty * (%)Food Insecurity (%)Abuse
(%)
No
553 (81.7)
Yes
76 (12.1)
No
632 (93.4)
Yes
6.6%
No
553 (81.7)
Yes
76 (12.1)
Perceived Social Support 1
High support458 (68.4)90.69.496.93.177.922.1
Moderate/low support212 (31.6)81.718.385.414.671.728.3
p = 0.003p < 0.001p = 0.096
Perceived health status
Good/Very good308 (45.5)93.86.297.72.378.221.8
Reasonable324 (47.9)85.314.792.37.775.924.1
Poor/Very poor45 (6.6)65.934.171.128.962.237.8
p < 0.001p < 0.001p = 0.062
Presence of depressive symptoms 2
No472 (72.6)90.59.597.03.081.618.4
Yes178 (27.4)81.818.284.815.262.437.6
p = 0.005p < 0.001p < 0.001
Presence of chronic diseases
No42 (6.2)97.42.692.97.181.019.0
Yes634 (93.8)87.312.793.46.675.724.3
p = 0.103p = 1.000p = 0.559
Legend: * the at-risk-of-poverty rate was calculated according to INE guidelines; p-value for the Chi-square test; 1 perceived social support was assessed by the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support; 2 depressive symptoms were assessed with The Geriatric Depression Scale.
Table 4. Logistic Regression analysis of the association between exposure to poverty, food insecurity, abuse, and the combined exposure with (very) poor perceived health status and the presence of depressive symptoms (N = 629).
Table 4. Logistic Regression analysis of the association between exposure to poverty, food insecurity, abuse, and the combined exposure with (very) poor perceived health status and the presence of depressive symptoms (N = 629).
Perceived Health Status: (Very) PoorPresence of Depressive Symptoms
Unadjusted ModelAdjusted Model Unadjusted ModelAdjusted Model
OR95% CIOR95% CIOR95% CIOR95% CI
Exposure to vulnerabilities
Never exposed to any vulnerabilityRef.-Ref.-Ref.-Ref.-
Only exposed to poverty3.611.23–10.552.830.95–8.441.830.91–3.681.450.69–3.03
Only exposed to food insecurity7.681.92–30.615.011.19–21.144.761.56–14.553.200.98–10.39
Only exposed to abuse2.220.94–5.272.110.88–5.062.611.67–4.072.421.52–3.86
Exposed to at least 2 vulnerabilities9.383.84–22.907.122.78–18.255.712.81–11.584.342.04–9.22
Combined exposure to vulnerabilities
Never exposed to vulnerabilitiesRef.-Ref.-Ref.-Ref.-
Exposed to 1
vulnerability
2.921.41–6.062.541.20–5.342.521.70–3.732.201.46–3.32
Exposed to at least 2 vulnerabilities9.383.84–22.907.112.77–18.255.712.81–11.584.342.04–9.22
Legend: Ref.—reference class; CI—confidence interval; Adjusted model—unadjusted model further adjusted for gender, marital status, and perceived social support.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sampaio, J.; Henriques, A.; Ramos, E.; Dias, I.; Lopes, A.; Fraga, S. Influence of Social Adversity on Perceived Health Status and Depressive Symptoms among Portuguese Older People. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6355. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph19116355

AMA Style

Sampaio J, Henriques A, Ramos E, Dias I, Lopes A, Fraga S. Influence of Social Adversity on Perceived Health Status and Depressive Symptoms among Portuguese Older People. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(11):6355. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph19116355

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sampaio, Joana, Ana Henriques, Elisabete Ramos, Isabel Dias, Alexandra Lopes, and Sílvia Fraga. 2022. "Influence of Social Adversity on Perceived Health Status and Depressive Symptoms among Portuguese Older People" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 11: 6355. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph19116355

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop