4.6 Article

Modeling predicted that tobacco control policies targeted at lower educated will reduce the differences in life expectancy

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 9, Pages 1002-1008

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.02.008

Keywords

educational differences; life expectancy; modeling; mortality; smoking

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Objective: To estimate the effects of reducing the prevalence of smoking in lower educated groups on educational differences in life expectancy. Methods: A dynamic Markov-type multistate transition model estimated the effects on life expectancy of two scenarios. A maximum scenario where educational differences in prevalence of smoking disappear immediately, and a policy target-scenario where difference in prevalence of smoking is halved over a 20-year period. The two scenarios were compared to a reference scenario, where smoking prevalences do not change. Five Dutch cohort studies, involving over 67,000 participants aged 20 to 90 years, provided relative mortality risks by educational level, and smoking habits were assessed using national data of more than 120,000 persons. Results: In the reference scenario, the difference in life expectancy at age 40 between highest and lowest educated groups was 5.1 years for men and 2.7 years for women. In the maximum scenario these differences were reduced to 3.6 years for men and 1.7 years for women (reduction approximate to 30%), and in the policy target-scenario differences were 4.7 years for men and 2.4 years for women (reduction approximate to 10%). Conclusion: Theoretically, educational differences in life expectancy would be reduced by 30% at maximum, if variations in smoking prevalence were eliminated completely. In practice, tobacco control policies that are targeted at the lower educated may reduce the differences in life expectancy by approximately 10%. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available