Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25752350›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2015

Benefits gained, benefits lost: comparing baby boomers to other generations in a longitudinal cohort study of self-rated health.

Elizabeth M Badley, Mayilee Canizares, Anthony V Perruccio, Sheilah Hogg-Johnson, Monique A M Gignac

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Life satisfaction of Korean Vietnam War Veterans in later life: A lifespan approach.Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Elizabeth M BadleyToronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto.
Mayilee Canizares
Anthony V Perruccio
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson
Monique A M Gignac

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research SEC 117113
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledPOLICY POINTS: Despite beliefs that baby boomers are healthier than previous generations, we found no evidence that the health of baby boomers is substantially different from that of the previous or succeeding cohorts. The effects of increased education, higher income, and lower smoking rates on improving self-rated health were nearly counterbalanced by the adverse effect of increasing body mass index (BMI). Assumptions that baby boomers will require less health care as they age because of better education, more prosperity, and less propensity to smoke may not be realized because of increases in obesity. CONTEXT: Baby boomers are commonly believed to be healthier than the previous generation. Using self-rated health (SRH) as an indicator of health status, this study examines the effects of age, period, and birth cohort on the trajectory of health across 4 generations: World War II (born between 1935 and 1944), older baby boomers (born between 1945 and 1954), younger baby boomers (born between 1955 and 1964), and Generation X (born between 1965 and 1974).

methodsWe analyzed Canada's longitudinal National Population Health Survey 1994-2010 (n = 8,570 at baseline), using multilevel growth models to estimate the age trajectory of SRH by cohort, accounting for period and incorporating the influence of changes in education, household income, smoking status, and body mass index (BMI) on SRH over time.

findingsSRH worsened with increasing age in all cohorts. Cohort differences in SRH were modest (p = 0.034), but there was a significant period effect (p = 0.002). We found marked cohort effects for increasing education, income, and BMI, and decreasing smoking from the youngest to the oldest cohorts, which were much reduced (education and smoking) or removed (income and BMI) once period was taken into account. At the population level, multivariable analysis showed the benefits of increasing education and income and declines in smoking on the trajectory of improving SRH were almost counterbalanced by the effects of increasing BMI (obesity).

conclusionsWe found no evidence to support the expectation that baby boomers will age more or less healthily than previous cohorts did. We also found that increasing BMI has likely undermined improvements in health that might have otherwise occurred, with possible implications for the need for health care. Period effects had a more profound effect than birth cohort effects. This suggests that interventions to improve health, such as reducing obesity, can be targeted to the entire, or a major portion of the, population and need not single out particular birth cohorts.

Indexed as

Health StatusSocial Determinants of HealthAdultAgedAge DistributionAgingBody Mass IndexCanadaCohort StudiesEducational StatusFemaleHealth SurveysHumansIncomeLongitudinal StudiesMaleage-period-cohortobesityself-rated healthsocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID25752350
PMCPMC4364431

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.