IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v58y2004i10p2035-2043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of survival: a comparison between two subjective health measures in an elderly population

Author

Listed:
  • Baron-Epel, Orna
  • Shemy, Galia
  • Carmel, Sara

Abstract

A large amount of evidence shows that the subjective evaluation of health is a predictor of survival in many different populations. Subjective health (SH) is measured using different types of measures such as a general evaluation of health or a comparative evaluation of health. The aim of this study was to compare the prediction of survival by two measures of SH (a general measure and an age-related measure) and evaluate the association with other variables in an elderly population. The baseline survey was conducted during 1994, covering 1138 men and women aged over 70. The survival status was ascertained 7 years later. After adjustment for age, sex, education, marital status, perceived socioeconomic status and presence of diseases the two SH measures were found to be predictors of mortality, but only in men. In men, there was no significant difference between the two types of SH measures in their prediction of mortality. Also in men, when there was only one or no disease, being married had a protective effect compared with not being married when both types of SH measures were used. In elderly women, the association between the two types of SH and survival diminished after adjusting for the various variables. However, the general SH measure may be the preferable measure to use when needed. Education in women was associated with mortality only via the age-related SH measure.

Suggested Citation

  • Baron-Epel, Orna & Shemy, Galia & Carmel, Sara, 2004. "Prediction of survival: a comparison between two subjective health measures in an elderly population," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 58(10), pages 2035-2043, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:58:y:2004:i:10:p:2035-2043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(03)00412-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Moustapha Dramé & Eléonore Cantegrit & Lidvine Godaert, 2023. "Self-Rated Health as a Predictor of Mortality in Older Adults: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Yael Benyamini & Edith Burns, 2020. "Views on aging: older adults’ self-perceptions of age and of health," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 477-487, December.
    3. Baron-Epel, Orna & Kaplan, Giora & Haviv-Messika, Amalia & Tarabeia, Jalal & Green, Manfred S. & Nitzan Kaluski, Dorit, 2005. "Self-reported health as a cultural health determinant in Arab and Jewish Israelis: MABAT--National Health and Nutrition Survey 1999-2001," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 1256-1266, September.
    4. Manzoli, Lamberto & Villari, Paolo & M Pirone, Giovanni & Boccia, Antonio, 2007. "Marital status and mortality in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 77-94, January.
    5. Ania Filus & Doerte U. Junghaenel & Stefan Schneider & Joan E. Broderick & Arthur A. Stone, 2020. "Age Effects of Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-Being, Fatigue and Pain," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 35-54, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:58:y:2004:i:10:p:2035-2043. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.