Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neighborhood Typologies Associated with Alcohol Use among Adults in Their 30s: a Finite Mixture Modeling Approach

  • Published:
Journal of Urban Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There has been increasing interest in how neighborhood context may be associated with alcohol use. This study uses finite mixture modeling to empirically identify distinct neighborhood subtypes according to patterns of clustering of multiple neighborhood characteristics and examine whether these subtypes are associated with alcohol use. Neighborhoods were 303 census block groups in the greater Seattle, WA, area where 531 adults participating in an ongoing longitudinal study were residing in 2008. Neighborhood characteristics used to identify neighborhood subtypes included concentration of poverty, racial composition, neighborhood disorganization, and availability of on-premise alcohol outlets and off-premise hard liquor stores. Finite mixture models were used to identify latent neighborhood subtypes, and regression models with cluster robust standard errors examined associations between neighborhood subtypes and individual-level typical weekly drinking and number of past-year binge drinking episodes. Five neighborhood subtypes were identified. These subtypes could be primarily characterized as (1) high socioeconomic disadvantage, (2) moderate disadvantage, (3) low disadvantage, (4) low poverty and high disorganization, and (5) high alcohol availability. Adjusted for covariates, adults living in neighborhoods characterized by high disadvantage reported the highest levels of typical drinking and binge drinking compared to those from other neighborhood subtypes. Neighborhood subtypes derived from finite mixture models may represent meaningful categories that can help identify residential areas at elevated risk for alcohol misuse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Diez Roux AV, Mair C. Neighborhoods and health. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1186:125–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Karriker-Jaffe KJ. Areas of disadvantage: a systematic review of effects of area-level socioeconomic status on substance use outcomes. Drug and alcohol review. 2011;30(1):84–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim D. Blues from the neighborhood? Neighborhood characteristics and depression. Epidemiol Rev. 2008;30:101–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cerda M, Diez-Roux AV, Tchetgen ET, Gordon-Larsen P, Kiefe C. The relationship between neighborhood poverty and alcohol use: estimation by marginal structural models. Epidemiology. 2010;21(4):482–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Karriker-Jaffe KJ, Zemore SE, Mulia N, Jones-Webb R, Bond J, Greenfield TK. Neighborhood disadvantage and adult alcohol outcomes: differential risk by race and gender. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2012;73(6):865–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kuipers MA, van Poppel MN, van den Brink W, Wingen M, Kunst AE. The association between neighborhood disorder, social cohesion and hazardous alcohol use: a national multilevel study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;126(1–2):27–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hill TD, Angel RJ. Neighborhood disorder, psychological distress, and heavy drinking. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(5):965–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brenner AB, Diez Roux AV, Barrientos-Gutierrez T, Borrell LN. Associations of alcohol availability and neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics with drinking: cross-sectional results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Subst Use Misuse. 2015;50(12):1606–17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kavanagh AM, Kelly MT, Krnjacki L, et al. Access to alcohol outlets and harmful alcohol consumption: a multi-level study in Melbourne, Australia. Addiction. 2011;106(10):1772–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Theall KP, Lancaster BP, Lynch S, et al. The neighborhood alcohol environment and at-risk drinking among African-Americans. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011;35(5):996–1003.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Oakes JM. The (mis)estimation of neighborhood effects: causal inference for a practicable social epidemiology. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58(10):1929–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Messer LC, Oakes JM, Mason S. Effects of socioeconomic and racial residential segregation on preterm birth: a cautionary tale of structural confounding. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;171(6):664–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Keyes K, Galea S. The limits of risk factors revisited: is it time for a causal architecture approach? Epidemiology. 2017;28(1):1–5.

  14. Collins LM, Lanza ST. Latent class and latent transition analysis: with applications in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Adams MA, Ding D, Sallis JF, et al. Patterns of neighborhood environment attributes related to physical activity across 11 countries: a latent class analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phy. 2013;10:34.

  16. Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Rehkopf DH, Subramanian SV. Race/ethnicity, gender, and monitoring socioeconomic gradients in health: a comparison of area-based socioeconomic measures—the public health disparities geocoding project. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(10):1655–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Stockwell T, Zhao J, Martin G, et al. Minimum alcohol prices and outlet densities in British Columbia, Canada: estimated impacts on alcohol-attributable hospital admissions. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(11):2014–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Bandeen-Roche K, Miglioretti DL, Zeger SL, Rathouz PJ. Latent variable regression for multiple discrete outcomes. J Am Stat Assoc. 1997;92(440):1375–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley-Interscience; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Atkins DC, Gallop RJ. Rethinking how family researchers model infrequent outcomes: a tutorial on count regression and zero-inflated models. J Fam Psychol. 2007;21(4):726–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. [computer program]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2012. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 7 January 2015.

  22. Graham N, Arai M, Hagströmer B. multiwayvcov: multi-Way Standard Error Clustering [computer program]. R package version 1.2.3. 2016. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=multiwayvcov. Accessed 7 January 2015.

  23. Lumley T. mitools: tools for multiple imputation of missing data [computer program]. R package version 2.3. 2014. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=mitools. Accessed 7 January 2015.

  24. Gruenewald PJ. Regulating availability: how access to Alcohol affects drinking and problems in youth and adults. Alcohol Res Health. 2011;34(2):248–56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Halonen JI, Kivimaki M, Virtanen M, et al. Proximity of off-premise alcohol outlets and heavy alcohol consumption: a cohort study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132(1–2):295–300.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Mujahid MS, Roux AVD, Morenoff JD, Raghunathan T. Assessing the measurement properties of neighborhood scales: from psychometrics to ecometrics. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(8):858–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported the National Institute on Drug Abuse [grant numbers R01DA033956, R01DA09679]. Content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agency. The authors thank J. David Hawkins for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. They also are grateful to Lawrence Frank and Jim Chapman at Urban Design 4 Health for their assistance with geocoding and creation of geospatial measures used in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Center for the Study of Health and Risk Behaviors, University of Washington, Box 354944, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Isaac C. Rhew

  2. Social Development Research Group, University of Washington, 9725 3rd Ave NE, Suite 401, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA

    Rick Kosterman

  3. School of Social Work, University of Southern California, 669 W 34th St, Montgomery Ross Fisher, #325, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA

    Jungeun Olivia Lee

Authors
  1. Isaac C. Rhew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rick Kosterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jungeun Olivia Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isaac C. Rhew.

Ethics declarations

This study was approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rhew, I.C., Kosterman, R. & Lee, J.O. Neighborhood Typologies Associated with Alcohol Use among Adults in Their 30s: a Finite Mixture Modeling Approach. J Urban Health 94, 542–548 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-017-0161-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-017-0161-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation