Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38656349›Full record

ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2024

[Healthy life expectancy: a critical look at the benefits and potential of the demographic health indicator].

Marc Luy

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2024. 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

1 author.

Marc LuyVienna Institute of Demography, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Dominikanerbastei 16, 1010, Wien, Österreich. marc.luy@oeaw.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Demographic ageing yields many societal consequences that depend strongly on the health status of the population. Special indicators have been developed for tracking and assessing population health, which are referred to with the overarching term healthy life expectancy (HLE). The derivation of HLE is intuitive and easily comprehensible. However, an overly simplistic interpretation hides the extreme complexity inherent in adding the health dimension to the life table. This makes HLE compared to classic life expectancy (LE) extremely sensitive to certain conceptual and methodological features. In the article, this is presented in more detail for three aspects: the underlying definition of health, the choice of survey data as a basis for estimating health status, and the reporting behavior of survey participants. It is shown that the impact on HLE can be enormous, leading to considerable bias in the interpretation of levels and trends, but also in the analysis of differences between populations. Nevertheless, the extension of classical LE to HLE is an important achievement that must not be abandoned. Therefore, the article also discusses ways in which the HLE indicator could be made more robust and reliable. Until this is achieved, however, the high methodological sensitivity of HLE must not be ignored if it is used to assess the health status of populations and as a basis for health policy measures.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsLife ExpectancyAgedDemographyFemaleGermanyHealth StatusHumansMaleDifferential item functioningExpansion-compressionGlobal activity limitation indicatorHealthHealthy life years

Identifiers

PMID38656349
PMCPMC11093867

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.