Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38662021›Full record

ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2024

[The gender paradox in health-impaired lifetime-end of a myth?]

Marc Luy

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article 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

backgroundWomen live longer than men, but they spend more life years with health-impairment. This article examines the extent to which this gender paradox can be explained by two factors: the "mortality effect," which results from the higher life expectancy of women, and "differential item functioning" (DIF), which refers to gender differences in reporting behavior.

methodsImpaired life expectancy at age 50 is calculated for the health indicators general health, limitations, and chronic morbidity using the Sullivan method. Data on health prevalence are obtained from the 2012 survey "Gesundheit in Deutschland aktuell" (GEDA), data on mortality is taken from the Human Mortality Database. The gender difference in impaired life expectancy is decomposed into the mortality effect and the health effect. The latter is finally adjusted for DIF effects on the basis of vignettes from the 2004 SHARE survey.

resultsThe gender paradox can be resolved not only partially but completely for all three health indicators considered by the mortality effect and DIF. After taking these two factors into account, the gender difference in impaired life expectancy reverses from higher values for women to higher values for men. DISCUSSION: The causes of the gender paradox are highly complex and the differences between women and men in total and impaired life expectancy are not necessarily going into contradictory directions. The extent of women's higher impaired life expectancy depends decisively on the underlying health indicator and is largely explained by the mortality effect.

Indexed as

Life ExpectancyAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseFemaleGermanyHealth Status DisparitiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMortalityRisk FactorsSex DistributionWomen's HealthDifferential item functioningGender differenceHealthLife expectancyMortality effect

Identifiers

PMID38662021
PMCPMC11093859

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.