4.5 Article

Decomposition of age- and cause-specific adult mortality contributions to the gender gap in life expectancy from census and survey data in Zambia

期刊

SSM-POPULATION HEALTH
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 218-226

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2018.07.003

关键词

Decomposition-analysis; Age-cause-specific mortality; Verbal autopsy; Life expectancy; Adult mortality; Zambia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the context of high adult mortality and an immense impact on the health burden of Zambia, a decomposition analysis of age- and cause-specific mortality in age group 15-59 was performed to determine the contributions to the gap in life expectancy at birth between males and females. Previous studies on decomposition have examined income groups, ethnicity, and regional differences' contributions to gaps in life expectancy, but not the adult mortality age group 15-59. These studies focus on developed countries and few on developing countries. Arriaga's decomposition method was applied to 2010 census and 2010-2012 sample vital registration with verbal autopsy survey (SAVVY) data to decompose contributions of age- and cause-specific adult mortality to the gap in life expectancy at birth between males and females. The decomposition analysis revealed that mortality was higher among males than females and concentrated in age groups 20-49. Age- and cause-specific adult mortality contributed positively, 50% of the years to the gap in life expectancy at birth between males and females. Major cause-specific mortality contributors to the gap in life expectancy were infectious and parasitic diseases (1.17 years, 26.3%), accidents and injuries (0.54 years, 12.2%), suicide and violence (0.30 years, 6.8%). Female HIV mortality offset male mortality. Neoplasms deaths among females contributed negatively to the gap in life expectancy (-0.22 years, -5.4%). Accidents, injuries, suicide, and violence are emerging major causes of death in age group 20-49 in Zambia which health policy and programmes should target.

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