Suchergebnisse

Many parts of the world are experiencing rapid demographic restructuring, resulting in an ageing population with increasingly significant work and care pressures on cohorts less able or willing to provide support. This book examines some of the important trends that have underpinned reductions in fertility, including delayed child-bearing and increased childlessness. It demonstrates how relationships between partners have resulted in new living arrangements with changing attitudes from marriage to co-habitation as the social norm, and it considers the health and well-being for particular at risk groups such as the elderly and stepparents as well as aspects of mobility such as household migration and commuting to school. The book brings together a series of studies that all involve quantitative analyses of secondary data from censuses, surveys or administrative records. The trends and patterns reported provide new and interesting insights into behaviour of the household and the roles of adults and children, and point to questions of critical importance for practitioners and policy makers. 'This book is the first of three volumes on ' Understanding Population Trends and Processes'. Volume 2 will report the findings of research on a further set of dimensions including population change, deprivation, educational attainment, employment, health and well-being, identity, religiosity, social values and trust, whilst Volume 3 will have a more specific focus on ethnicity and integration.'

Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to explore how minority stress and the experience of societal level hostility towards lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people and their relationships may have impacted upon their relationships and relationship histories.


Design/methodology/approach
– This paper introduced the minority stress framework and examines the relationship histories of a small cohort aged 50 at the last sweep of data collection.


Findings
– The minority stress framework states that societal level hostility will lead to unequal treatment and psychological distress among minority groups, which could impact on their relationships histories. In these data, those people we identify as being LGB were significantly more likely to have had a higher number of cohabiting partnerships, were less likely to have had longer-term cohabiting relationships, and were less likely to be in a relationship at age 50. This is despite LGB people placing an equal importance on partnership and marriage. These results are accompanied by caveats, but the authors conclude that if minority stress does impact upon relationships, it is upon the stability and length of relationships.


Practical implications
– Compared to older LGB couples, opposite sex couples, are more likely to have been in receipt of peer and especially familial support for their relationship, particularly around times of relationship crisis. Additionally, for those same sex couples that did approach professional sources of support, such as couple counselling, heteronormative and even hostile attitudes from counselling providers may have meant that experienced and informed support was not available when needed. The findings therefore pose a challenge to service providers to ensure that relationship support and allied services are available and adapted to meet the needs of older LGB people, whose previous contacts with these service providers may have been substantially less than positive, and whose need for relationship support may be greater.


Originality/value
– The needs of older LGB people and their relationships are often overlooked. The use of a small sample of cohort data to examine these issues provides new insight into the way in which older LGB people may age differently to non-LGB people.

BACKGROUND: This overview and analysis of UK datasets was commissioned by the UK government to address concerns about children's consumption of caffeinated energy drinks and their effects on health and behaviour. METHODS: We searched nine databases for systematic reviews, published between 2013 and July 2021, in English, assessing caffeinated energy drink consumption by people under 18 years old (children). Two reviewers rated or checked risk of bias using AMSTAR2, and extracted and synthesised findings. We searched the UK Data Service for country-representative datasets, reporting children's energy-drink consumption, and conducted bivariate or latent class analyses. RESULTS: For the overview, we included 15 systematic reviews; six reported drinking prevalence and 14 reported associations between drinking and health or behaviour. AMSTAR2 ratings were low or critically low. Worldwide, across reviews, from 13% to 67% of children had consumed energy drinks in the past year. Only two of the 74 studies in the reviews were UK-based. For the dataset analysis, we identified and included five UK cross-sectional datasets, and found that 3% to 32% of children, across UK countries, consumed energy drinks weekly, with no difference by ethnicity. Frequent drinking (5 or more days per week) was associated with low psychological, physical, educational and overall well-being. Evidence from reviews and datasets suggested that boys drank more than girls, and drinking was associated with more headaches, sleep problems, alcohol use, smoking, irritability, and school exclusion. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessment suggests that the evidence is weak. CONCLUSIONS: Weak evidence suggests that up to a third of children in the UK consume caffeinated energy drinks weekly; and drinking 5 or more days per week is associated with some health and behaviour problems. Most of the evidence is from surveys, making it impossible to distinguish cause from effect. Randomised controlled trials are ...

BACKGROUND: This overview and analysis of UK datasets was commissioned by the UK government to address concerns about children's consumption of caffeinated energy drinks and their effects on health and behaviour. METHODS: We searched nine databases for systematic reviews, published between 2013 and July 2021, in English, assessing caffeinated energy drink consumption by people under 18 years old (children). Two reviewers rated or checked risk of bias using AMSTAR2, and extracted and synthesised findings. We searched the UK Data Service for country-representative datasets, reporting children's energy-drink consumption, and conducted bivariate or latent class analyses. RESULTS: For the overview, we included 15 systematic reviews; six reported drinking prevalence and 14 reported associations between drinking and health or behaviour. AMSTAR2 ratings were low or critically low. Worldwide, across reviews, from 13% to 67% of children had consumed energy drinks in the past year. Only two of the 74 studies in the reviews were UK-based. For the dataset analysis, we identified and included five UK cross-sectional datasets, and found that 3% to 32% of children, across UK countries, consumed energy drinks weekly, with no difference by ethnicity. Frequent drinking (5 or more days per week) was associated with low psychological, physical, educational and overall well-being. Evidence from reviews and datasets suggested that boys drank more than girls, and drinking was associated with more headaches, sleep problems, alcohol use, smoking, irritability, and school exclusion. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessment suggests that the evidence is weak. CONCLUSIONS: Weak evidence suggests that up to a third of children in the UK consume caffeinated energy drinks weekly; and drinking 5 or more days per week is associated with some health and behaviour problems. Most of the evidence is from surveys, making it impossible to distinguish cause from effect. Randomised controlled trials are ...

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans+a (LGBT+) people report poorer health than the general population and worse experiences of healthcare particularly cancer, palliative/end-of-life, dementia and mental health provision. This is attributable to: a) social inequalities, including 'minority stress'; b) associated health-risk behaviours (e.g. smoking, excessive drug/alcohol use, obesity); c) loneliness and isolation, affecting physical/mental health and mortality; d) anticipated/experienced discrimination and e) inadequate understandings of needs among healthcare providers. Older LGBT+ people are particularly affected, due to the effects of both cumulative disadvantage and ageing. There is a need for greater and more robust research data to support growing international and national government initiatives aimed at addressing these health inequalities. We identify seven key research strategies: 1) Production of large datasets; 2) Comparative data collection; 3) Addressing diversity and intersectionality among LGBT+ older people; 4) Investigation of healthcare services' capacity to deliver LGBT+ affirmative healthcare and associated education and training needs; 5) Identification of effective health promotion and/or treatment interventions for older LGBT+ people, and sub-groups within this umbrella category; 6) Development an (older) LGBT+ health equity model; 7) Utilisation of social justice concepts to ensure meaningful, change-orientated data production which will inform and support government policy, health promotion and healthcare interventions.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans+ a (LGBT+) people report poorer health than the general population and worse experiences of healthcare particularly cancer, palliative/end-of-life, dementia and mental health provision. This is attributable to: a) social inequalities, including 'minority stress'; b) associated health-risk behaviours (e.g. smoking, excessive drug/alcohol use, obesity); c) loneliness and isolation, affecting physical/mental health and mortality; d) anticipated/experienced discrimination and e) inadequate understandings of needs among healthcare providers. Older LGBT+ people are particularly affected, due to the effects of both cumulative disadvantage and ageing. There is a need for greater and more robust research data to support growing international and national government initiatives aimed at addressing these health inequalities. We identify seven key research strategies: 1) Production of large datasets; 2) Comparative data collection; 3) Addressing diversity and intersectionality among LGBT+ older people; 4) Investigation of healthcare services' capacity to deliver LGBT+ affirmative healthcare and associated education and training needs; 5) Identification of effective health promotion and/or treatment interventions for older LGBT+ people, and subgroups within this umbrella category; 6) Development an (older) LGBT+ health equity model; 7) Utilisation of social justice concepts to ensure meaningful, change-orientated data production which will inform and support government policy, health promotion and healthcare interventions.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans+a (LGBT+) people report poorer health than the general population and worse experiences of healthcare particularly cancer, palliative/end-of-life, dementia and mental health provision. This is attributable to: a) social inequalities, including 'minority stress'; b) associated health-risk behaviours (e.g. smoking, excessive drug/alcohol use, obesity); c) loneliness and isolation, affecting physical/mental health and mortality; d) anticipated/experienced discrimination and e) inadequate understandings of needs among healthcare providers. Older LGBT+ people are particularly affected, due to the effects of both cumulative disadvantage and ageing. There is a need for greater and more robust research data to support growing international and national government initiatives aimed at addressing these health inequalities. We identify seven key research strategies: 1) Production of large datasets; 2) Comparative data collection; 3) Addressing diversity and intersectionality among LGBT+ older people; 4) Investigation of healthcare services' capacity to deliver LGBT+ affirmative healthcare and associated education and training needs; 5) Identification of effective health promotion and/or treatment interventions for older LGBT+ people, and sub-groups within this umbrella category; 6) Development an (older) LGBT+ health equity model; 7) Utilisation of social justice concepts to ensure meaningful, change-orientated data production which will inform and support government policy, health promotion and healthcare interventions.