Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27192433›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

A Twin Protection Effect? Explaining Twin Survival Advantages with a Two-Process Mortality Model.

David J Sharrow, James J Anderson

Erratum issuedAbstract readTwin Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David J SharrowUniversity of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
James J AndersonUniversity of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.

Funding

Vitality Theory for BiodemographyR21AG046760 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ANDERSON, JAMES JAY · 2014 to 2015
$330k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG046760
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Twin studies that focus on the correlation in age-at-death between twin pairs have yielded important insights into the heritability and role of genetic factors in determining lifespan, but less attention is paid to the biological and social role of zygosity itself in determining survival across the entire life course. Using data from the Danish Twin Registry and the Human Mortality Database, we show that monozygotic twins have greater cumulative survival proportions at nearly every age compared to dizygotic twins and the Danish general population. We examine this survival advantage by fitting these data with a two-process mortality model that partitions survivorship patterns into extrinsic and intrinsic mortality processes roughly corresponding to acute, environmental and chronic, biological origins. We find intrinsic processes confer a survival advantage at older ages for males, while at younger ages, all monozygotic twins show a health protection effect against extrinsic death akin to a marriage protection effect. While existing research suggests an increasingly important role for genetic factors at very advanced ages, we conclude that the social closeness of monozygotic twins is a plausible driver of the survival advantage at ages <65.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEnvironmentFemaleHumansLongevityMaleMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalMortalitySocial BehaviorTwins, DizygoticTwins, Monozygotic

Identifiers

PMID27192433
PMCPMC4871430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.