This article is
- freely available
Assessing the Impact of Socioeconomic Variables on Small Area Variations in Suicide Outcomes in England
School of Geography, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Rd, London E1 4NS, UK
Received: 23 October 2012; in revised form: 14 December 2012 / Accepted: 20 December 2012 / Published: 27 December 2012
Abstract: Ecological studies of suicide and self-harm have established the importance of area variables (e.g., deprivation, social fragmentation) in explaining variations in suicide risk. However, there are likely to be unobserved influences on risk, typically spatially clustered, which can be modeled as random effects. Regression impacts may be biased if no account is taken of spatially structured influences on risk. Furthermore a default assumption of linear effects of area variables may also misstate or understate their impact. This paper considers variations in suicide outcomes for small areas across England, and investigates the impact on them of area socio-economic variables, while also investigating potential nonlinearity in their impact and allowing for spatially clustered unobserved factors. The outcomes are self-harm hospitalisations and suicide mortality over 6,781 Middle Level Super Output Areas.
Keywords: suicide; self-harm; deprivation; fragmentation; rurality; spatial; nonlinear
Article StatisticsClick here to load and display the download statistics.
Notes: Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Cite This Article
MDPI and ACS Style
Congdon, P. Assessing the Impact of Socioeconomic Variables on Small Area Variations in Suicide Outcomes in England. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 158-177.
Congdon P. Assessing the Impact of Socioeconomic Variables on Small Area Variations in Suicide Outcomes in England. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013; 10(1):158-177.
Congdon, Peter. 2013. "Assessing the Impact of Socioeconomic Variables on Small Area Variations in Suicide Outcomes in England." Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10, no. 1: 158-177.