Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17372295›Full record

ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2007

Is economic adversity always a killer? Disadvantaged areas with relatively low mortality rates.

Helena Tunstall, Richard Mitchell, Julia Gibbs, Stephen Platt, Danny Dorling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Helena TunstallResearch Unit In Health, Behaviour and Change, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK.
Richard Mitchell
Julia Gibbs
Stephen Platt
Danny Dorling

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify areas of Britain whose residents have relatively low age specific mortality, despite experiencing long-term economic adversity.

methodsLongitudinal, ecological study of all residents of Britain from 1971 to 2001.

results54 of Britain's 641 parliamentary constituencies were identified as having been persistently economically disadvantaged in the period 1971-2001. Within this group, there was marked variation in age group specific mortality and in the age ranges with relatively high or low mortality. A systematic scoring process identified 18 constituencies as providing strong and consistent evidence of low mortality across a range of age groups, relative to the 54 constituencies as a whole. These 18 were labelled "resilient". Among age groups >24 years, mortality rates in the resilient areas were significantly lower than in the other economically disadvantaged areas. For example, at ages 45-59 years, the average all cause mortality rate in the resilient constituencies was 607 per 100 000 population (95% CI 574 to 641) and 728 (670 to 787) in the non-resilient constituencies (p = 0.013).

conclusionsAreas with similar adverse economic histories do not all have similarly high mortality rates. It is unlikely that a single factor explains these results. Selective migration cannot be discounted as an explanation, but particular sociocultural features of areas (including the political, economic, ethnic and religious characteristics of their population) may also be protective.

Indexed as

MortalityAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionChildChild, PreschoolEmploymentFemaleHealth SurveysHumansInfantLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID17372295
PMCPMC2652946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.