ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2008
Are social inequalities in mortality in Britain narrowing? Time trends from 1978 to 2005 in a population-based study of older men.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Time trends in socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality: results from a 35 year prospective study in British men.BMC cancer · 2014Article
- Unequal trends in coronary heart disease mortality by socioeconomic circumstances, England 1982-2006: an analytical study.PloS one · 2013Article
- Inequalities of health indicators for policy makers: six hints.International journal of public health · 2012Article
- Article
- Article
- Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QRISK2.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine whether social inequalities in all-cause and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in Britain have reduced between 1978 and 2005.
designA prospective study of a socioeconomically representative population.
setting24 British towns.
participants7735 Men, aged 40-59 years at recruitment in 1978-1980 and followed up until 2005 through the National Health Service Central Register (164 120 person-years).
main outcome measuresRelative hazards and absolute risk differences for all-cause and CHD death comparing manual with non-manual social classes, calculated for different calendar periods.
results3009 Deaths from all causes (1003 from CHD) occurred during follow-up. The overall hazard ratio (manual versus non-manual) was 1.56 (95% CI 1.45 to 1.69, p<0.001) for all-cause mortality and 1.54 (95% CI 1.35 to 1.76, p<0.001) for CHD mortality. The relative difference between these social groups tended to increase over time. The overall relative increase in hazard ratio comparing manual with non-manual groups over a 20-year calendar period was 1.22 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.80, p = 0.31) for all-cause mortality and 1.75 (95% CI 0.89 to 3.45, p = 0.11) for CHD mortality. The absolute difference in probability of survival to age 65 years between non-manual and manual groups fell from 29% in 1981 to 19% in 2001 for all-cause mortality and from 17% to 7% for CHD mortality.
conclusionRelative differences in all-cause and CHD mortality between manual and non-manual social class groups persisted and may have increased during this period. Absolute differences in mortality between these social groups decreased as a result of falling overall mortality rates. Greater effort is needed to reduce social inequalities in all-cause and CHD mortality in the new millennium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.