ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2020
Relative Income Deprivation and All-Cause Mortality in Japan: Do Life Priorities Matter?
Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2020. 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.
- Roles of self-efficacy and self-control in the association between relative deprivation and psychological well-being among undergraduate students during COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Relationship between dietary knowledge, food preference, and long-short term health status among Chinese adults.Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition · 2024Article
- A study assessing the impact of income relative deprivation and cooperative membership on rural residents' health: A pathway towards improving the health status of rural residents.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background/purposeRelative deprivation (RD) is proposed to affect health through psychosocial stress stemming from upward social comparisons. This study hypothesized that prioritizing values, such as social engagement and personal growth (as opposed to prioritizing work), would inoculate against the toxic effects of upward social comparisons.
methodsProspective data of 9,533 subjects (4,475 men and 5,058 women) participating in the Komo-Ise study answering a baseline questionnaire in 1993 and a follow-up survey in 2000 were analyzed. Associations between RD-using Yitzhaki Index (YI) and Income Rank (IR)-and mortality were evaluated using Cox proportional-hazard regression models. At follow-up, people were also asked about what they prioritized in life: work, social engagement, or personal growth.
results1,168 deaths (761 men and 407 women) occurred during follow-up (to the end of 2011). Controlling for sociodemographic factors, the hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 1.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-1.38) per a standard deviation (SD) increase in YI and 1.18 (95% CI = 1.03-1.35) per an SD decrease in IR. Life priorities (LP) were not statistically significantly associated with mortality. In women, the interaction between LP and YI was statistically significant. In fully adjusted models, women who endorsed only work as very important in their lives had a 2.66 (95% CI = 1.23-5.77) times higher HR for mortality per SD increase in YI compared to women who valued social engagement/personal growth. An interaction between LP and RD was not found in men.
conclusionsIncreased relative income deprivation was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality independently of absolute income. Focusing on social engagement/personal growth (as opposed to work) appears to inoculate women against the toxic effects of relative deprivation.
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.