Behavioral risk factors such as tobacco use, unhealthy diet, insufficient physical activity and the harmful use of alcohol are known and modifiable contributors to a number of NCDs and health mediators. The purpose of this paper is to describe the distribution of main risk factors for NCDs by socioeconomic status (SES) among adults aged 50 years and older within a country and compare these risk factors across six lower- and upper-middle income countries.
The study population in this paper draw from SAGE Wave 1 and consisted of adults aged 50-plus from China (N=13,157), Ghana (N=4,305), India (N=6,560), Mexico (N=2,318), the Russian Federation (N=3,938) and South Africa (N=3,836). Seven main common risk factors for NCDs were identified: daily tobacco use, frequent heavy drinking, low level physical activity, insufficient vegetable and fruit intake, high risk waist-hip ratio, obesity and hypertension. Multiple risk factors were also calculated by summing all these risk factors.
The prevalence of daily tobacco use ranged from 7.7% (Ghana) to 46.9% (India), frequent heavy drinker was the highest in China (6.3%) and lowest in India (0.2%), and the highest prevalence of low physical activity was in South Africa (59.7%). The highest prevalence of respondents with high waist-to-hip ratio risk was 84.5% in Mexico, and the prevalence of self-reported hypertension ranging from 33% (India) to 78% (South Africa). Obesity was more common in South Africa, the Russia Federation and Mexico (45.2%, 36% and 28.6%, respectively) compared with China, India and Ghana (15.3%, 9.7% and 6.4%, respectively). China, Ghana and India had a higher prevalence of respondents with multiple risk factors than Mexico, the Russia Federation and South Africa. The occurrence of three and four risk factors was more prevalent in Mexico, the Russia Federation and South Africa.
There were substantial variations across countries and settings, even between upper-middle income countries and lower-middle income countries. The baseline information on the magnitude of the problem of risk factors provided by this study can help countries and health policymakers to set up interventions addressing the global non-communicable disease epidemic.
Chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) [
The development of a national risk factor profile for NCDs provides key information required for planning prevention and control activities and could also help to predict the future burden of disease. Reliable and comparable analysis of risks to health is especially important for preventing or modifying disease and injury. However, until recently, analysis of health risks were limited by inconsistent methodologies, dated assumptions and/or variations in assessment criteria for evidence on prevalence, causality and hazard size - all of which limited the ability to produce comparable data to estimate population health status [
This study used data from the six countries that implemented the World Health Organization’s Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) Wave 1. The purpose of this paper is to describe the distribution of main risk factors for NCDs by socioeconomic status (SES) within and across countries to better understand the levels of modifiable NCD risk factors for adults aged 50 years and older, and whether these risk factors show age, sex, rural/urban, wealth and country-specific differences.
The study population was drawn from the SAGE Wave 1, which is a longitudinal cohort survey of ageing and older adults from 2007 to 2010 in six low- and middle-income countries (China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russian Federation and South Africa) [
SAGE used a standardized instrument for collection of sociodemographic information and behavioral risk factors based on the WHO STEPwise approach to Surveillance (WHO STEPS, WHO 2005). This includes alcohol and tobacco consumption, diet and physical activity. In addition, a number of more objective risk factors were assessed, including, waist and hip circumferences, weight, height, and blood pressure.
In our study, alcohol consumption was categorized into two broad groups: non-drinkers and drinkers, with the latter subdivided according to the number of alcoholic drinks consumed during the week before the interview. Heavy drinkers were defined as consuming five or more standard drinks per day for men and four or more standard drinks per day for women.
The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) was used to measure the intensity, duration, and frequency of physical activity in three domains: occupational; transport-related; and, discretionary or leisure time [
Tobacco use covered different forms and frequency of tobacco use—manufactured or hand-rolled cigarettes, cigars, cheroots or whether tobacco is smoked, chewed, sucked or inhaled, each day over the week prior to the interview [
Information on fruit and vegetable consumption was based on the number of daily servings typically eaten. Sufficient intake was determined according to the number of servings. Five or more servings are considered sufficient, and fewer than five servings are insufficient [
Waist and hip circumferences were measured to calculate waist-to-hip ratio [
Blood pressure was measured three times on the right arm/wrist of the seated respondent using a wrist blood pressure monitor. Out of three measurements, an average of the latter two measurements was used as the blood pressure value in this analysis. The definition used to designate hypertension is systolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 90 mmHg19 and/or self-reported treatment of hypertension with antihypertensive medication currently (the last two weeks before interview) [
Weight and height were measured to calculate body mass index (BMI), calculated as weight/height2 (kg/m2). According to the classification criteria proposed by the WHO [
All these seven risk factors were summed, and a new variable representing the cumulative number of risk factors reported/measured for each individual was created, with the range from 0 (no risk factors) to 7 (with all risk factors). SAGE was approved by the World Health Organization's Ethical Review Board as well as a national approval in all six countries. Informed consent has been obtained from all study participants.
SAGE used a stratified multistage-cluster design in each country. Each household and individual was assigned a known non-zero probability of being selected. Household and individual weights were post-stratified according to country-specific population data. Prevalence rates for each risk factor were estimated using post-stratified individual probability weights in each nation to compensate for undercoverage. According to the sampling design of each country, country-specific cluster and/or strata were taken into account to estimate the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical analyses were conducted using STATA SE version 11 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX).
A total of 38,670 individuals aged 50 and older participated in the SAGE survey. Individuals who couldn’t completed or partially completed interview or with missing sociodemographic variables were excluded from the analyses. Finally, A total of 34,114 individuals aged 50 and older in the six countries were considered in this analysis. China has the largest sample (N=13,157), and Mexico (N=2,318) the smallest sample. The socio-demographic characteristics for each country are shown in Table
*Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
% % % % % % %
50-59 44.9 39.7 48.6 48.1 44.1 49.9 45.8 60-69 31.9 27.5 30.9 25.6 26.7 30.6 29.7 70-79 18.6 23.1 16 17.8 21.4 14 18.7 80+ 4.6 9.7 4.5 8.6 7.7 5.5 5.8
Men 49.8 52.4 51 46.8 41.9 44.1 47.2 Women 50.2 47.6 49 53.2 58.1 55.9 52.8
Urban 47.3 41.1 28.9 78.8 70.1 64.9 50.4 Rural 52.7 58.9 71.1 21.2 29.9 35.1 49.6
No formal education 23.1 54 51.2 17.2 0.5 25.2 23.8 Less than primary 18.9 10.4 10 38.4 1.2 24 10.1 Primary school completed 21 10.9 14.8 24 5.3 22.4 13.5 Secondary school completed 19.9 4 10.2 9.9 17.9 14.2 16 High school completed 12.6 17.1 8.6 2.4 54.3 8.4 26.2 College completed 4.4 3.4 3.4 5.5 20.7 3.9 9.9 Post graduate degree completed 0.1 0.2 1.7 2.6 0.1 1.8 0.6
Lowest 16.3 18.2 18.2 15.3 13.3 20.7 15.9 Second 18.1 19.1 19.5 24.7 17.1 19.9 18.2 Third 20.5 20.5 18.8 16.8 19.6 18.2 19.6 Fourth 23.4 20.7 19.6 16.6 22.1 19.8 21.7 Highest 21.8 21.6 23.9 26.6 27.8 21.3 24.5
The ranking of all seven NCD risk factors for each country is shown in Figure
The prevalence of daily tobacco use ranged from 7.7% (Ghana) to 46.9% (India). Men were much more likely than women to smoke in all six countries. With increasing age, prevalence of current daily smoker among men decreased in China, and the Russian Federation; however, only minor age differences were seen in Ghana and Mexico. Tobacco use among women declined with age in Mexico and Russia Federation. Older urban residents in China, Ghana, and India were less likely to use tobacco than their rural counterparts, while it was the opposite in Mexico (Table
*Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 58.8 [55.3,62.3] 11.1 [9.0,13.6] 63.8 [58.6,68.7] 18.4 [7.2,39.6] 50.7 [39.2,62.1] 25.8 [19.9,32.7] 60-69 50.1 [46.5,53.6] 11.2 [8.8,14.3] 64.3 [59.5,68.8] 19.4 [13.7,26.6] 43.3 [30.4,57.2] 21.4 [21.4,21.4] 70-79 35.1 [31.2,39.3] 10.7 [7.7,14.6] 60.0 [51.3,68.0] 21.1 [12.5,33.5] 14.0 [8.2,23.0] 15.9 [10.6,23.2] 80+ 29.8 [23.2,37.3] 13.8 [8.9,20.6] 54.7 [43.6,65.4] 14.6 [7.5,26.5] 5.7 [1.9,15.9] 18.1 [5.7,44.5]
50-59 1.4 [1.0,2.0] 2.0 [1.1,3.5] 26.9 [23.7,30.3] 11.0 [3.6,28.9] 7.9 [5.3,11.6] 17.3 [13.6,21.6] 60-69 3.1 [2.2,4.2] 3.7 [2.4,5.8] 33.5 [28.8,38.6] 8.9 [4.5,17.1] 3.8 [2.1,6.9] 14.9 [11.2,19.6] 70-79 6.1 [4.5,8.2] 6.4 [4.2,9.5] 33.2 [25.5,41.8] 3.6 [2.0,6.7] 2.0 [0.7,5.8] 17.4 [11.5,25.5] 80+ 3.7 [1.8,7.5] 3.6 [1.6,7.7] 31.8 [23.3,41.8] 3.3 [1.5,7.1] 0.9 [0.1,5.6] 18.5 [9.7,32.5]
Urban 19.4 [17.9,21.1] 4.1 [3.0,5.5] 37.1 [31.0,43.6] 15.2 [9.5,23.4] 17.3 [14.4,20.5] 19.2 [16.1,22.9] Rural 33.4 [31.0,35.9] 10.2 [8.7,11.9] 50.9 [48.4,53.4] 6.3 [3.9,10.2] 24.4 [16.5,34.6] 19.7 [15.7,24.3]
Lowest 29.1 [25.6,32.8] 16.0 [12.9,19.7] 57.1 [51.9,62.2] 9.3 [5.6,15.3] 17.9 [11.0,27.6] 20.8 [15.6,27.2] Second 30.9 [27.5,34.5] 9.1 [7.3,11.4] 54.7 [51.2,58.1] 12.9 [5.8,26.4] 17.1 [11.5,24.7] 17.7 [13.0,23.7] Middle 26.2 [24.4,28.2] 8.0 [6.0,10.5] 49.8 [45.0,54.7] 11.1 [5.4,21.4] 18.1 [10.9,28.7] 22.3 [17.4,28.1] Fourth 26.8 [25.1,28.5] 4.8 [3.5,6.5] 43.0 [38.9,47.1] 13.5 [8.2,21.4] 22.3 [14.8,32.1] 18.1 [13.4,24.0] Highest 21.9 [19.4,24.7] 1.8 [1.0,3.4] 33.5 [29.3,38.1] 17.2 [7.3,35.4] 20.1 [14.4,27.4] 18.2 [13.1,24.7]
26.7 [25.3,28.2] 7.7 [6.6,8.8] 46.9 [44.4,49.3] 13.3 [8.6,19.9] 19.4 [16.1,23.3] 19.4 [16.8,22.2]
Heavy alcohol consumption was highest in China, where 6.3% of older Chinese were frequent heavy drinkers, compared to just 0.2% of older Indians, the lowest among all six countries. Men were much more likely to drink than women in all countries. For men, the prevalence of heavy alcohol consumption decreased with increasing age in China, Ghana and India. Older rural residents were more likely to drink than their urban dwelling counterparts in all countries, except South Africa (Table
*Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 15.3 [12.7,18.3] 3.2 [2.1,5.0] 0.6 [0.2,1.4] 0 3.9 [1.8,8.5] 1.3 [0.7,2.3] 60-69 12.5 [10.4,15.1] 2.7 [1.6,4.5] 0.4 [0.1,1.0] 0.8 [0.1,5.2] 8.0 [1.7,30.4] 2.1 [1.0,4.5] 70-79 8.5 [6.8,10.6] 1.6 [0.4,5.7] 0 0 0.7 [0.1,4.3] 0 [0.0,0.1] 80+ 3.3 [1.6,6.7] 0.4 [0.1,2.8] 0 1.7 [0.3,11.1] 0 0
50-59 0.5 [0.3,1.1] 0.1 [0.0,0.8] 0.1 [0.0,0.6] 0 - 0 [0.0,0.1] 0.5 [0.2,1.6] 60-69 0.5 [0.2,1.2] 1.2 [0.3,4.5] 0 0 - 2.2 [0.5,9.6] 1.1 [0.2,5.6] 70-79 0.6 [0.3,1.4] 0.2 [0.0,1.7] 0 0 - 0 0.5 [0.2,1.4] 80+ 1.6 [0.6,4.6] 0 0 0 - 0 2.6 [0.6,11.4]
Urban 1.8 [1.3,2.4] 1.2 [0.7,2.1] 0.1 [0.0,0.6] 0.1 [0.0,0.6] 2.2 [0.6,7.3] 1.0 [0.6,1.9] Rural 10.4 [9.1,11.9] 1.7 [1.1,2.6] 0.3 [0.1,0.7] 0.2 [0.0,1.4] 3.2 [0.8,11.6] 1.0 [0.4,2.3]
Lowest 7.0 [5.4,9.1] 1.7 [0.8,3.6] 0.4 [0.1,1.3] 0 2.0 [0.8,4.9] 1.0 [0.4,2.2] Second 6.9 [5.9,7.9] 1.0 [0.4,2.2] 0.3 [0.1,2.3] 0.3 [0.0,2.0] 8.3 [1.9,30.2] 1.8 [1.8,1.8] Middle 7.6 [5.7,10.1] 2.2 [1.1,4.3] 0 [0.0,0.2] 0 0.3 [0.1,1.0] 1.1 [1.1,1.1] Fourth 6.6 [5.2,8.3] 1.6 [0.8,3.2] 0.1 [0.0,0.2] 0.3 [0.0,1.9] 1.2 [0.5,2.8] 0.3 [0.1,1.0] Highest 4.0 [2.8,5.7] 1.0 [0.5,2.1] 0.2 [0.1,0.7] 0 1.9 [0.5,7.0] 1.0 [0.2,4.4]
6.3 [5.6,7.2] 1.5 [1.1,2.1] 0.2 [0.1,0.5] 0.1 [0.0,0.5] 2.5 [1.0,6.1] 1.0 [0.6,1.7]
Prevalence of low level physical activity was highest in South Africa, at 59.7%. A significant age-gradient was seen in all countries, where prevalence consistently increased with increasing age. Older urban residents were more likely to engage in low level physical activity in all countries (Table
*High = Vigorous-intensity activity on at least 3 days achieving a minimum of at least 1,500 MET-minutes/week OR 7 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate- or vigorous intensity activities achieving a minimum of at least 3,000 MET-minutes per week; Moderate = A person not meeting the criteria for the “high” category and: 3 or more days of vigorous-intensity activity of at least 20 minutes per day OR 5 or more days of moderate-intensity activity or walking of at least 30 minutes per day OR 5 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate- or vigorous intensity activities achieving a minimum of at least 600 MET-minutes per week; and, Low = A person not meeting any of the above mentioned criteria falls in this category. **Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 21.4 [19.1,23.8] 15.9 [12.8,19.5] 14.4 [11.4,18.1] 19.3 [11.2,31.3] 14.6 [9.2,22.3] 49.6 [41.5,57.4] 60-69 26.1 [23.6,28.7] 18.6 [15.0,22.9] 25.0 [21.0,29.6] 32.9 [25.0,41.9] 21.3 [12.7,33.5] 60.7 [53.4,68.8] 70-79 35.8 [31.7,40.0] 29.9 [24.7,35.8] 41.9 [34.1,50.1] 48.0 [36.5,59.8] 33.3 [20.1,49.8] 67.0 [57.2,75.5] 80+ 50.2 [43.8,56.6] 37.5 [29.8,46.0] 51.0 [39.9,62.0] 66.8 [55.5,76.5] 50.2 [20.6,79.7] 64.7 [47.0,79.6]
50-59 23.7 [21.4,26.1] 21.3 [17.4,25.8] 17.9 [15.0,21.3] 36.2 [20.7,55.3] 11.1 [6.7,17.8] 56.5 [49.8,62.3] 60-69 28.6 [26.1,31.2] 28.8 [23.5,34.9] 26.8 [22.4,31.6] 46.0 [34.9,57.5] 20.0 [14.4,27.2] 64.9 [57.0,71.2] 70-79 38.4 [34.3,42.7] 39.4 [34.4,44.7] 40.2 [32.7,48.1] 52.9 [37.1,68.1] 32.7 [23.6,43.3] 69.9 [62.3,76.4] 80+ 65.1 [58.4,71.3] 43.4 [36.1,51.0] 60.4 [49.4,70.5] 59.3 [42.7,74.1] 66.4 [49.6,79.9] 81.5 [70.9,88.5]
Urban 28.8 [25.4,32.5] 38.0 [33.5,42.7] 29.8 [24.9,35.2] 39.0 [30.1,48.7] 23.2 [18.8,28.3] 61.2 [55.6,66.4] Rural 27.8 [26.1,29.7] 17.1 [14.2,20.3] 23.0 [21.1,24.9] 33.0 [22.5,45.5] 22.0 [13.4,33.9] 56.7 [48.9,63.6]
Lowest 29.0 [25.8,32.5] 16.9 [14.0,20.1] 23.1 [19.6,27.0] 46.0 [38.7,53.4] 42.4 [29.6,56.3] 60.0 [50.7,68.2] Second 25.7 [22.9,28.6] 21.0 [17.3,25.3] 24.5 [20.9,28.5] 38.2 [22.0,57.6] 32.5 [25.2,40.8] 59.2 [49.8,67.0] Middle 26.4 [23.7,29.3] 21.1 [17.8,24.9] 25.3 [20.3,31.2] 27.4 [16.0,42.8] 19.7 [13.6,27.8] 58.0 [50.9,64.3] Fourth 29.6 [26.7,32.8] 31.2 [26.1,36.7] 27.1 [23.1,31.4] 47.0 [36.3,57.9] 13.5 [9.7,18.4] 63.2 [57.0,69.2] Highest 30.0 [25.9,34.6] 36.3 [31.1,41.9] 24.7 [21.5,28.1] 33.1 [23.0,45.0] 17.2 [11.1,25.7] 58.1 [50.3,65.9]
28.3 [26.4,30.2] 25.6 [23.1,28.3] 24.9 [22.7,27.3] 37.7 [30.3,45.7] 22.8 [18.6,27.7] 59.7 [55.1,63.9]
Prevalence of inadequate fruit and vegetable intake among India’s older population were relatively higher than any other SAGE country; while China had the lowest prevalence at 35.6%. In China and South Africa, respondents with the highest household income had the lowest prevalence (Table
*Insufficient intake is equivalent to less than 5 servings of fruit and vegetables on average per day. **Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 32.0 [27.7,36.7] 67.3 [62.2,72.0] 87.5 [84.4,90.1] 76.4 [48.5,91.8] 80.1 [70.0,87.4] 67.9 [61.8,73.5] 60-69 35.9 [31.0,41.1] 72.3 [67.8,76.4] 86.6 [82.2,90.0] 68.5 [56.9,78.2] 83.2 [70.7,91.1] 60.1 [51.9,67.8] 70-79 41.8 [35.9,47.9] 68.5 [62.7,73.8] 90.9 [87.2,93.7] 79.4 [69.8,86.6] 82.8 [67.4,91.9] 60.3 [49.1,70.6] 80+ 49.5 [42.1,56.9] 77.6 [68.7,84.5] 89.5 [82.2,94.0] 86.2 [75.9,92.5] 82.5 [54.4,94.9] 70.1 [53.2,82.9]
50-59 29.4 [25.7,33.4] 65.1 [60.5,69.5] 91.4 [89.1,93.2] 88.5 [80.4,93.5] 77.0 [70.2,82.7] 71.0 [65.9,75.6] 60-69 35.8 [31.3,40.5] 67.4 [62.8,71.7] 95.0 [93.1,96.4] 83.3 [75.9,88.8] 83.7 [75.4,89.5] 73.4 [66.5,79.3] 70-79 41.9 [36.4,47.5] 72.0 [67.3,76.3] 96.4 [93.2,98.1] 84.1 [76.2,89.7] 81.3 [68.8,89.6] 67.2 [58.8,74.7] 80+ 64.5 [57.6,71.0] 67.8 [60.4,74.5] 95.3 [91.4,97.5] 90.0 [83.6,94.1] 86.2 [74.6,93.1] 77.9 [65.5,86.8]
Urban 34.7 [31.0,38.7] 67.1 [63.1,70.9] 88.2 [84.0,91.5] 84.2 [79.2,88.3] 79.7 [70.6,86.6] 65.0 [60.7,69.1] Rural 36.6 [29.9,43.8] 70.1 [66.5,73.4] 91.6 [90.3,92.8] 70.9 [45.6,87.6] 84.0 [77.4,88.9] 75.1 [68.0,81.1]
Lowest 46.6 [37.4,56.1] 75.1 [70.5,79.3] 95.7 [94.0,96.9] 89.1 [83.5,93.0] 84.3 [72.3,91.7] 75.3 [66.7,82.2] Second 42.0 [34.8,49.5] 70.4 [66.2,74.3] 95.3 [93.2,96.8] 79.8 [52.4,93.5] 72.6 [57.4,83.9] 73.7 [66.2,79.9] Middle 36.7 [32.1,41.5] 68.8 [64.4,72.9] 92.4 [89.2,94.8] 82.2 [69.9,90.2] 78.1 [67.6,85.9] 69.5 [63.5,74.9] Fourth 30.2 [26.3,34.5] 67.5 [62.5,72.1] 88.1 [85.4,90.4] 76.7 [69.1,82.9] 82.4 [74.9,88.0] 69.6 [62.9,75.5] Highest 26.8 [22.7,31.4] 63.7 [59.2,67.9] 83.5 [79.6,86.8] 80.7 [68.9,88.8] 85.5 [78.3,90.7] 54.9 [47.9,61.7]
35.6 [31.6,39.8] 68.9 [66.2,71.4] 90.6 [89.1,91.9] 81.4 [74.1,87.0] 81.0 [74.5,86.2] 68.4 [64.6,72.0]
Central obesity was found in 84.5% of older Mexicans, the highest of all SAGE countries. In China and Ghana, prevalence tended to increase with age, and was higher in urban than in rural areas. The most eye-catching difference is the much higher implied risk among women compared to men in China, Ghana, India and South Africa. Patterns by level of household income were mixed (Table
*High-risk waist to hip ratio: men more than 0.90 and women more than 0.85. **Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 41.4 [38.6,44.3] 61.8 [57.4,66.0] 74.1 [70.6,77.2] 96.3 [92.3,98.3] 69 [53.5,81.2] 54.2 [48.5,59.7] 60-69 48.3 [45.0,51.6] 68 [63.7,72.0] 76.2 [72.3,79.8] 85.9 [68.7,94.4] 69.2 [47.0,85.1] 61.4 [53.7,68.6] 70-79 51.2 [46.8,55.7] 72.2 [66.9,77.0] 66.4 [58.2,73.7] 90.8 [84.4,94.8] 74 [55.9,86.5] 53.5 [42.9,63.8] 80+ 56.2 [48.3,63.9] 74 [65.8,80.8] 83.2 [73.7,89.8] 84.6 [74.3,91.3] 42.3 [15.5,74.6] 49.7 [31.7,67.7]
50-59 63.7 [60.6,66.7] 88.9 [86.3,91.1] 81.4 [78.1,84.2] 84.3 [72.5,91.6] 48.8 [40.5,57.2] 67.8 [62.4,72.7] 60-69 70.9 [67.5,74.1] 89.3 [86.3,91.7] 86.7 [83.5,89.3] 81.4 [74.5,86.8] 65.7 [56.9,73.6] 70.8 [63.7,76.9] 70-79 74.9 [70.7,78.7] 90.2 [86.6,93.0] 86.3 [81.3,90.1] 61.1 [40.9,78.1] 61.4 [47.1,73.9] 76.1 [69.0,82.0] 80+ 75.4 [68.9,80.9] 90.6 [85.9,93.8] 84.6 [75.8,90.5] 72.9 [56.8,84.6] 75.2 [61.6,85.1] 74.9 [61.8,84.6]
Urban 61.4 [58.1,64.6] 78.2 [75.3,80.8] 82.9 [78.9,86.2] 84.3 [78.6,88.7] 62.9 [56.4,68.9] 64.7 [60.7,68.4] Rural 54.1 [51.3,57.0] 77.2 [75.2,79.2] 77.1 [75.2,79.0] 85.2 [72.3,92.7] 60.2 [46.7,72.3] 62.9 [57.8,67.7]
Lowest 59.5 [56.3,62.6] 75.6 [72.3,78.7] 74.8 [70.4,78.7] 84.2 [75.3,90.4] 65.2 [53.9,75.0] 59.4 [52.3,66.1] Second 53.6 [49.8,57.3] 78.5 [74.7,81.8] 75.7 [71.7,79.2] 81.1 [67.5,89.9] 61.2 [51.7,69.9] 59.8 [53.5,65.8] Middle 56.1 [52.4,59.7] 77.8 [73.9,81.2] 76.6 [73.0,79.9] 88.8 [80.6,93.8] 56.6 [46.4,66.2] 67.8 [61.6,73.5] Fourth 56.7 [54.0,59.2] 77.4 [73.2,81.1] 79.5 [75.6,82.9] 87 [80.7,91.5] 66 [57.3,73.6] 67.5 [60.6,73.7] Highest 61.4 [57.2,65.5] 78.6 [75.3,81.5] 85.2 [82.1,87.9] 83.7 [71.9,91.1] 61.9 [49.3,73.1] 65.6 [58.0,72.4]
57.4 [55.2,59.6] 77.6 [75.9,79.2] 78.7 [77.0,80.4] 84.5 [79.5,88.5] 62.1 [56.1,67.7] 63.9 [60.7,67.0]
Prevalence of hypertension in six countries ranged from 33% (India) to 78% (South Africa). For both men and women in China, India and Russia, prevalence of hypertension increased with age. Prevalence were higher in urban than in rural areas in Ghana, India and Mexico. In China, prevalence decreased with increasing household income. But in Ghana and India, respondents with higher household income were more likely to have higher prevalence of self-report hypertension (Table
*Hypertension defined as systolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 90 mmHg19 and/or self-reported current treatment (in previous two weeks) of hypertension with antihypertensive treatments. **Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 53.8 [51.0,56.5] 56.9 [52.3,61.3] 29.3 [26.2,32.6] 49.1 [32.5,66.0] 61.5 [49.6,72.1] 70.5 [65.1,75.5] 60-69 64 [60.6,67.3] 58.2 [52.8,63.4] 29.7 [25.2,34.6] 67.1 [57.7,75.2] 68.9 [59.9,76.7] 79.6 [73.2,84.8] 70-79 69.5 [65.5,73.2] 59.2 [53.3,64.8] 35.9 [28.3,44.3] 70.7 [59.9,79.6] 72 [55.9,83.9] 80 [70.6,87.0] 80+ 78.1 [72.4,82.9] 51.7 [43.9,59.5] 40.1 [30.0,51.3] 70.6 [58.2,80.6] 87.9 [74.4,94.8] 74 [57.5,85.7]
50-59 53 [49.6,56.3] 61 [56.6,65.2] 30.8 [26.9,35.1] 48 [29.6,66.9] 57 [49.2,64.5] 78.9 [74.3,82.9] 60-69 65.8 [62.0,69.3] 62.1 [57.2,66.7] 37.2 [32.5,42.1] 65.3 [52.0,76.6] 77.7 [69.6,84.2] 81.3 [75.3,86.1] 70-79 72.4 [68.7,75.8] 61.9 [56.5,67.0] 43.2 [37.2,49.4] 84.8 [77.7,89.9] 82.1 [71.5,89.4] 84.5 [78.2,89.2] 80+ 74 [66.5,80.4] 60.5 [53.1,67.4] 40.3 [30.3,51.2] 75.9 [62.1,85.8] 88.9 [80.7,93.8] 83.9 [75.2,89.9]
Urban 58.8 [56.3,61.3] 67.1 [63.8,70.2] 36.8 [30.8,43.4] 59.5 [51.8,66.8] 70.1 [64.7,75.0] 77.7 [74.6,80.5] Rural 63.6 [60.2,66.9] 53.7 [50.4,57.0] 31.5 [29.8,33.3] 63.5 [46.8,77.5] 66.9 [60.7,72.5] 78.8 [74.5,82.6]
Lowest 64.6 [60.4,68.7] 50.7 [45.7,55.6] 27.4 [23.3,31.9] 65.2 [58.1,71.7] 72.4 [61.7,81.1] 75.6 [69.4,80.9] Second 60.3 [56.6,63.9] 56.7 [52.3,60.9] 30.9 [27.3,34.8] 70.6 [51.4,84.5] 74.8 [67.5,80.9] 77.4 [71.2,82.6] Middle 60.7 [58.3,63.1] 58 [54.0,62.0] 30.3 [26.2,34.7] 48.5 [27.8,69.6] 71.6 [61.3,80.0] 80.2 [75.2,84.5] Fourth 62.1 [59.4,64.8] 62.6 [58.5,66.6] 34.2 [30.5,38.1] 54 [42.3,65.3] 70.6 [62.4,77.7] 77.8 [71.9,82.8] Highest 59.3 [55.3,63.2] 66.5 [62.4,70.3] 40.2 [36.3,44.2] 59.3 [44.9,72.3] 60.8 [50.2,70.5] 79.2 [74.9,83.0]
61.3 [59.0,63.6] 59.2 [56.8,61.5] 33 [31.0,35.1] 60.3 [53.4,66.9] 69.2 [64.9,73.2] 78 [75.6,80.3]
Obesity was more common in South Africa, the Russia Federation and Mexico (45.2%, 36%, and 28.6%, respectively) compared with China, Ghana and India (15.3%, 9.7%, and 6.4%, respectively). Obesity tended to rise with household income in all six countries, but a slight drop can be seen for the highest income quintile in China, Mexico, Russia Federation and South Africa (Table
* BMI ≥30 kg/m2 or BMI >27.5 kg/m2 in China and India. ** Income levels were generated through a multi-step process, where asset ownership was converted to an asset ladder, a Bayesian post-estimation method used to generate raw continuous income estimates, and then transformed into quintiles. Lowest (Quintile 1) is the quintile with the poorest households and Highest (Quintile 5) the quintile with the richest households.
50-59 11.8 [10.1,13.7] 7.1 [5.4,9.3] 5.3 [3.5,8.0] 22.8 [12.8,37.4] 34.4 [21.2,50.6] 36.5 [30.8,42.5] 60-69 12.6 [10.6,14.9] 6.5 [4.6,9.1] 2.8 [1.6,5.1] 23.4 [16.8,31.4] 18.5 [9.6,32.8] 43.2 [35.0,51.7] 70-79 10.6 [8.3,13.5] 4.8 [2.8,8.3] 3.3 [1.9,5.7] 17.3 [11.2,25.7] 33.2 [20.1,49.7] 37.4 [27.3,48.7] 80+ 9.9 [6.4,15.1] 5.5 [2.3,12.7] 4.0 [1.1,13.8] 16.7 [7.9,31.8] 7.7 [2.6,20.7] 30.7 [18.3,46.7]
50-59 19.7 [17.8,21.6] 19.5 [15.6,24.1] 10.3 [8.4,12.4] 40.4 [23.9,59.4] 46.6 [40.0,53.4] 53.2 [48.2,58.3] 60-69 19.5 [17.1,22.2] 12.3 [9.8,15.5] 8.1 [5.9,10.9] 36 [27.2,45.8] 44.0 [34.7,53.8] 55.2 [49.0,61.3] 70-79 18.2 [15.0,21.9] 8.2 [5.8,11.4] 6.0 [3.2,11.2] 23.9 [15.3,35.3] 34.1 [24.82,44.9] 40.0 [31.4,49.4] 80+ 10.5 [6.8,15.8] 6.4 [3.3,12.1] 3.5 [1.7,7.0] 19.6 [12.0,30.3] 28.9 [18.3,42.5] 33.5 [23.0,46.0]
urban 17.4 [15.7,19.3] 17.6 [14.8,20.9] 12.1 [9.3,15.6] 30.5 [23.3,38.9] 35.9 [30.3,42.0] 47.2 [42.8,51.7] rural 13.7 [11.8,15.9] 4.3 [3.4,5.4] 4.1 [3.4,4.9] 21.8 [15.8,29.3] 36 [25.9,47.5] 41.2 [35.1,47.6]
Lowest 9.0 [6.8,11.9] 2.7 [1.6,4.3] 1.4 [0.8,2.4] 21.0 [14.6,29.1] 31.7 [23.9,40.8] 36.1 [28.1,44.9] Second 12.8 [11.0,14.8] 4.0 [2.7,6.0] 4.9 [1.4,15.9] 27.9 [14.8,46.1] 31.8 [22.8,42.3] 40.5 [34.6,46.7] Middle 16.3 [14.9,17.9] 7.0 [5.3,9.3] 4.0 [2.6,6.0] 28.8 [15.9,46.4] 29.7 [22.4,38.3] 48.6 [42.3,55.0] Fourth 18.1 [16.5,19.8] 10.7 [8.6,13.3] 4.6 [3.4,6.4] 34.3 [24.4,45.7] 43.3 [32.0,55.3] 55.6 [49.3,61.8] Highest 18.4 [16.4,20.6] 22.3 [18.4,26.9] 14.5 [11.7,17.9] 30.1 [19.8,42.9] 38.8 [29.1,49.6] 46.2 [38.9,53.7]
15.3 [13.9,16.8] 9.7 [8.4,11.2] 6.4 [5.2,7.7] 28.6 [22.8,35.3] 36.0 [30.9,41.3] 45.2 [41.6,48.9]
Different combinations of risk factors were found. China, Ghana and India had a higher prevalence of respondents with one risk factor than Mexico, Russia Federation and South Africa. Analysis of combinations of two risk factors indicated a less marked difference between the two groups of countries. The occurrence of three and four risk factors was more prevalent in Mexico, Russia Federation and South Africa (see Figure
This is, to our knowledge, the first population-based comparative paper of NCD risk factors specifically designed for older adults residing in LMIC. Participating SAGE countries, China, India, the Russian Federation and South Africa are part of the BRICS countries. Being the biggest countries in the world, China and India together constitute about 38% of the world’s population aged 50 years and older [
We found that central obesity, inadequate vegetable fruit intake and hypertension are the most common risk factors for NCDs across all six countries except India, where current daily tobacco use replaced hypertension. The highest burden of hypertension was found in South Africa and the Russian Federation, with 78% and 69%, respectively, followed by China, Ghana and Mexico, all over 50%. These figures seem to be higher than previously found among older adult populations in Africa (rural Malawi, Rwanda and Tanzania (36.6–41.0%) [
The results of this study also show that older adults from upper-middle income countries such as Mexico, Russian Federation and South Africa are more likely than those from low or lower-middle income countries such like China, India and Ghana to be obese. South Africa has the highest prevalence of obesity (45.2%), even higher than Europeans aged 50 years and older [
Tobacco use is serious health-damaging behavior in China [
Analysis of the simultaneous occurrence of more than one risk factor indicates that people aged 50 years and older across six countries engage in a number of risk factors that put them at high risk of NCDs, however, we found that these selected risk factors occurred much more frequently in upper-middle income countries than in low-middle income countries. This difference may reflect the fact that compared with older adults in upper middle-income countries, older adults in lower middle-income countries are more likely to have had lower levels of exposure to NCD-risk factors associated with urban living (such as smoking, sedentary lifestyles and processed foods) [
We also found the pattern of associations between income and risk factors for NCDs vary among countries. The association of income with smoking has been reported before in other studies on Western societies [
Some limitation must be taken into account in this study. First, there are different response rate across six countries,from 51% in Mexico to 93% in China. The low response rate was potential selection bias to this study. The main reason for household non-response was inability to locate the selected household, or the household refusing to participate even before a roster could be obtained. Second, a limitation to this study is the use of self-report for part of risk factors for NCDs. It can lead to recall bias, although self-reported method widely applied in population study and other studies have illustrated the reliability and validity of self-report for behaviors such as cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity [
In conclusion, this study estimated the prevalence rates of common risk factors for NCDs and showed the pattern of these risk factors in six main LMIC. The baseline information on the magnitude of the problem of risk factors provided by this study can help countries and health policymakers to set up interventions addressing the global non communicable disease epidemic. Understanding the relationship of risk factors pattern and burden of NCDs in LMIC presents an important challenge for further research.
Chronic non-communicable diseases
socioeconomic status
Study on global AGEing and adult health
low- and middle-income countries
The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire
waist-hip ratio
Fan Wu and Yanfei Guo contributed equally to this work.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
FW, SC, PK, YFG, YZ and YJ designed, implemented the conduct of this study. FW and YFG conceived of the analysis, and drafted the manuscript. YFG, YZ and NN(5th) contributed to the statistical analyses. RB, AY, NM, AR, BE, TM, KP, NP, JJS, ET and NN (18th) contributed to the editing of initial draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
The authors would like to thank more than 2000 field interviewers from six SAGE countries for their support and hard work, we also thank Rong Sun and Shuangyuan Sun, both of whom are from Shanghai CDC, for help with literature search and retrieval.
Funding
This study was funded by the US National Institute on Aging through Interagency Agreements (OGHA 04034785; YA1323-08-CN-0020; Y1-AG-1005-01) and through a research grant (R01-AG034479); Field work of china was partially funded by Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (Grant No. 10XD1403600) and the Health Fields Specific Research Grant(Grant No.201202012).