ArticleEuropean journal of ageing2018
Does use of long-term care differ between occupational classes among the oldest old? Vitality 90 + Study.
Article in European journal of ageing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cohort profile: The Vitality 90+ Study-a cohort study on health and living conditions of the oldest old in Tampere, Finland.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Predictive factors for entry to long-term residential care in octogenarian Māori and non-Māori in New Zealand, LiLACS NZ cohort.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Association between Socioeconomic Status, Physical Health and Need for Long-term Care among the Chinese Elderly.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long-term care (LTC) use increases with ageing due to an age-related increase in disability. Both the levels of disability and social resources vary among socioeconomic groups. The association of socioeconomic status with LTC use is largely unexplored for the oldest old. This study examined how occupational class is associated with LTC use among nonagenarians in the context of universal care coverage. A population-based prospective cohort study with 2862 participants who answered the Vitality 90 + Study surveys in 2001, 2003, 2007, or 2010 in Tampere, Finland, was combined with national register data on LTC use. LTC use in total and separately for publicly and privately provided LTC facilities was assessed in a cross-sectional setting and during the 34-month follow-up by using logistic regression and competing-risks regression methods. Functional status, multimorbidity, family relations, and help at home were controlled. In total or public LTC use, only a few differences between occupational classes were found at baseline. However, upper non-manuals used more private LTC than lower non-manuals (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35-0.85), skilled manuals (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26-0.62), or housewives (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22-0.74). There were no statistically significant differences in entering any kind of LTC after adjustments for all independent variables. During the study period, the share of privately provided care out of all LTC increased and the upper non-manuals no more used private care more than other groups. This study underlines the importance of following the structural changes in LTC provision to guarantee that the need for LTC is met equally for all socioeconomic groups.
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.