Preprint Review Version 2 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Sleep Disorders as a Mediator Between Socioeconomic Status and Health Outcomes: A Review of Differents Theories

Version 1 : Received: 17 November 2018 / Approved: 20 November 2018 / Online: 20 November 2018 (15:37:27 CET)
Version 2 : Received: 8 December 2018 / Approved: 10 December 2018 / Online: 10 December 2018 (14:18:30 CET)

How to cite: Etindele Sosso, F.A.; Papadopoulos, D. Sleep Disorders as a Mediator Between Socioeconomic Status and Health Outcomes: A Review of Differents Theories. Preprints 2018, 2018110506. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201811.0506.v2 Etindele Sosso, F.A.; Papadopoulos, D. Sleep Disorders as a Mediator Between Socioeconomic Status and Health Outcomes: A Review of Differents Theories. Preprints 2018, 2018110506. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201811.0506.v2

Abstract

The variations in socioeconomic status (SES) between different social classes of a population correspond to differences in accessibility to all resources available and able to improve global health. While SES is now known as one of the main determinants for a good health and a good aging, its influence on sleep disorders (SD) is not well understood. SES is a concept, not directly observable but estimated using indicators like income, education, occupational status and area of living. This theoretical review explores some theories linking environment of people with occurrence of SD, with different patterns associated to SES. A model of interaction is proposed to summarize and conceptualizes these interactions and to promote more research on the topic.

Keywords

circadian rhythm; sleep disorders; socioeconomic status; stress; allostatic load; health outcome

Subject

Medicine and Pharmacology, Psychiatry and Mental Health

Comments (2)

Importance: How significant is the paper to the field?
Outstanding/highlight paper
0%
Significant contribution
0%
Incremental contribution
100%
No contribution
0%
Soundness of evidence/arguments presented:
Conclusions well supported
0%
Most conclusions supported (minor revision needed)
0%
Incomplete evidence (major revision needed)
100%
Hypothesis, unsupported conclusions, or proof-of-principle
0%
Comment 1
Received: 11 January 2019
Commenter: (Click to see Publons profile: )
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: The theoretical aspect of this article is well written but there is a need of some more illustrations as well.
Overall manuscript is good and clear
+ Respond to this comment
Response 1 to Comment 1
Received: 20 August 2019
Commenter: (Click to see Publons profile: )
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Thank Dr Aslam,

We just post this preprint at a draft level, and he was not proofreading yet (a mistake we have corrected in the new version). Thanks for the recognition of the quality of the theoretical content, it was a conceptualization of how we see the environmental stressors impact on health.
Will be glad to have your feedback on other papers as well if you are available.

Best,

F

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 2
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.