Housing Australian children: A snapshot of health inequities in the first 2000 days

Housing is a critical social determinant of children’s health. While individual pathways between housing and health are well evidenced, there has been less attention on the co-occurrence of housing disadvantages. We aim to identify typologies of children’s housing disadvantage and describe the health inequities they generate.

A cross-sectional latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted on 4355 Australian children aged 4 to 5 years who participated in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Nine binary indicators—dwelling tenure, external condition, affordability, stability, crowding, cleanliness, fuel poverty, and noise exposure—were used to generate latent housing typologies. Generalized linear models with robust standard errors described disparities in quality of life, injury, disability, and health service use across these housing typologies.

Four distinct housing typologies were identified in this cohort: “good condition, affordable, and secure” (60%); “insecure” (11%); “crowded” (24%); and “unsuitable” (5%). Unsuitable housing, characterized by crowding, poor external conditions, and noise exposure, was more likely to be occupied by single-parent families, low-income households, and be headed by parents with low levels of education. Children in unsuitable housing lagged on quality of life indicators at preschool age (e.g., by 8.0 points on emotional functioning, 95% CI − 10.6, − 5.5), and underutilized primary healthcare services (e.g., prevalence ratio 0.76 for GP services, 95% CI 0.67, 0.87), compared to children in good quality housing.

This finding supports the case for early intervention strategies that account for children’s housing circumstances.