4.5 Article

Successful Aging in the United States: Prevalence Estimates From a National Sample of Older Adults

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbp101

Keywords

Health disparities; Healthy aging; Prevalence; Successful aging

Funding

  1. Department of Health Behavior and Health Education at the University of Michigan School of Public Health
  2. Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies at the University of Michigan
  3. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research of the U.S. Department of Education [H133P050001]
  4. National Institute on Aging [U01AG009740]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To estimate the prevalence of successful aging in the United States, with the broad aim of contributing to the dialogue on Rowe and Kahn's concept of successful aging. Using data from the Health and Retirement Study, the prevalence of successful aging was calculated for adults aged 65 years and older at four time points: 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. Successful aging was operationalized in accordance with Rowe and Kahn's definition, which encompasses disease and disability, cognitive and physical functioning, social connections, and productive activities. No greater than 11.9% of older adults were aging successfully in any year. The adjusted odds of successful aging were generally lower for those of advanced age, male gender, and lower socioeconomic status. Between 1998 and 2004, the odds of successful aging declined by 25%, after accounting for demographic changes in the older population. Few older adults meet the criteria put forth in Rowe and Kahn's definition of successful aging, suggesting the need for modification if the concept is to be used for broad public health purposes. Disparities in successful aging were evident for socially defined subgroups, highlighting the importance of structural factors in enabling successful aging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available