4.5 Article

Sex differences in healthy life expectancy among nonagenarians: A multistate survival model using data from the Vitality 90+study

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL GERONTOLOGY
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 80-85

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2018.12.015

关键词

Nonagenarians; Disability; Life expectancy; Multistate modeling

资金

  1. NWO/ZonMw Veni fellowship [91618067]
  2. Integrative Analysis of Longitudinal Studies of Aging and Dementia (IALSA) research network [NIA P01AG043362]
  3. Academy of Finland [250602]
  4. Competitive Research Funding of the Pirkanmaa University Hospital
  5. NordForsk (Social Inequalities in Ageing) [74637]
  6. Academy of Finland (AKA) [250602] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Little is known about sex differences in healthy life expectancy among the oldest old, the fastest growing segment of the older population. This study examines sex differences in total, healthy and unhealthy life expectancy among nonagenarians. Methods: Longitudinal data of 884 older adults aged 90 and over participating in the Vitality 90 + study (Tampere, Finland) were used, including 2501 observations (health or death states) from 5 measurement waves between 2001 and 2014. Using the MSM and ELECT packages in R, multistate survival models were performed to estimate the transition probabilities of older adults through the different health states and to calculate life expectancies. The analyses were done separately for two health indicators (disability and multimorbidity) to see whether patterns were consistent. Results: Women had higher total life expectancies than men (about 8 months), but also higher unhealthy life expectancies. Men had a higher disability-free life expectancy between the age of 90 and 95 compared to women. For multimorbidity, no sex differences in healthy life expectancy were found. Conclusions: This study showed that the male-female health-survival paradox remains at very old age. Women aged 90 + live longer than men, and spend more time in poor health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据