Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36460979›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Does it matter how we measure the health of older people in places for associations with labour market outcomes? A cross-sectional study.

Emily T Murray, Jenny Head, Nicola Shelton, Brian Beach, Paul Norman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Emily T MurrayDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. emily.murray@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6297-6920
Jenny HeadDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Nicola SheltonDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Brian BeachDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Paul NormanSchool of Geography, University of Leeds, 10.11 Irene Manton, 6 Clarendon Way, Woodhouse, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.

Funding

The Health Foundation R-000002350
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInequalities between different areas in the United Kingdom (UK) according to health and employment outcomes are well-documented. Yet it is unclear which health indicator is most closely linked to labour market outcomes, and whether associations are restricted to the older population.

methodsWe used the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Longitudinal Study (LS) to analyse which measures of health-in-a-place were cross-sectionally associated with three employment outcomes in 2011: not being in paid work, working hours (part-time, full-time), and economic inactivity (unemployed, retired, sick/disabled, other). Seven health indicators from local-authority census and vital records data were chosen to represent the older working age population (self-rated health 50-74y, long-term illness 50-74y, Age-specific mortality rate 50-74y, avoidable mortality, life expectancy at birth and 65 years, disability-free life expectancy at 50 years, and healthy life expectancy at 50 years). An additional two health indicators (life expectancy at birth and infant mortality rate) were included as test indicators to determine if associations were limited to the health of older people in a place. These nine health indicators were then linked with the LS sample aged 16-74y with data on employment outcomes and pertinent demographic and individual health information. Interactions by gender and age category (16-49y vs. 50-74y) were also tested.

findingsFor all health-in-a-place measures, LS members aged 16-74 who resided in the tertile of local authorities with the 'unhealthiest' older population, had higher odds of not being in paid work, including all four types of economic inactivity. The strongest associations were seen for the health-in-a-place measures that were self-reported, long-term illness (Odds Ratio 1.60 [95% Confidence Intervals 1.52, 1.67]) and self-rated health (1.60 [1.52, 1.68]). Within each measure, associations were slightly stronger for men than women and for the 16-49y versus 50-74y LS sample. In models adjusted for individual self-rated health and gender and age category interactions, health-in-a-place gradients were apparent across all economic inactivity's. However, these same gradients were only apparent for women in part-time work and men in full-time work.

conclusionImproving health of older populations may lead to wider economic benefits for all.

Indexed as

EmploymentRetirementAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesMaleUnemploymentEconomic inactivityEngland and WalesGeographic inequalitiesHealth indicatorsLabour marketPopulation health

Identifiers

PMID36460979
PMCPMC9719185

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.