ArticleBMC public health2025
Health disparities between native and foreign-born older population in India: Does migration status matter in later life?
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAgeing and migration are both contemporary phenomena and challenging for modern society in the 21st century. Persons ageing with migration status might have a double risk of vulnerability to poor health outcomes. This study examines the health disparities between foreign-born and native populations in India.
methodsThe data drawn for the study from the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India (LASI) Wave-I (2017-18). The study used univariate and bivariate analysis to examine health disparities between native and foreign-born groups, and logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between migration status and health outcomes of older persons.
resultsOver fifty percent (56.5%) of the older persons (age 60+ years) were migrants; of these migrants of older persons, 55% were internally migrated, and 1.5% were foreign-born migrants in India. The foreign-born migrants persons showed a higher prevalence of poor SRH, chronic conditions, depression symptoms, and physical limitations than internal migrants and non-migrant groups. Further, the logistic regression result shows that foreign-born migrants were more likely to have poor SRH [AOR:1.72; CI: 1.45-2.04], chronic conditions [AOR=1.56; CI: 1.26-1.81], depression symptoms [AOR 1.14; CI: 1.07-1.21], and physical limitations [AOR 1.29; CI: 1.21-1.38], than non-migrants. Moreover, the study shows that the migrants' health disparities also vary with their length of stay and country of origin.
conclusionsThis cross-sectional study suggests that persons with internal and foreign-born migrant status were more vulnerable to poor health outcomes than non-migrants in their later life. This study predicts that migrants need separate health policies as they are in poorer health conditions than non-migrants. Policymakers should initiate equal access to healthcare services for older internal and foreign-born migrants in India.
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.