Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40755267›Full record

ArticleDemography2025

Widow and Widower Mortality in India: A Research Note.

Megan N Reed, Babul Hossain, Srinivas Goli, K S James, Aashish Gupta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Demography, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Megan N ReedDepartment of Sociology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9910-523X
Babul HossainDepartment of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.ORCID 0000-0001-5355-1429
Srinivas GoliDepartment of Fertility and Social Demography, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8481-484X
K S JamesNewcomb Institute, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Aashish GuptaSocial Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-1522-1119

Funding

GRADUATE TRAINING IN DEMOGRAPHYT32HD007242 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MICHEL GUILLOT · 1985 to 2026
$6.6M
Sci-Tech Core-Population Dynamics Research CenterP2CHD044964 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI EMILIO ALBERTO PARRADO · 2018 to 2026
$5.3M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD044964NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007242
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widowhood is associated with elevated mortality risk in many social contexts. This research note is the first study to quantify and contextualize the mortality risk of widowhood for men (widowers) and women (widows) in India. We do so by using data from the first wave of the India Human Development Survey (2004-2005) on individuals whose survival status was observed seven years later in the second wave of the survey. We find no differences in mortality by widowhood status for adults aged 60 or older. However, we find higher mortality risks for widows and widowers aged 25-59 than for individuals who are married. Despite the unique vulnerabilities experienced by Indian widows, we find similar levels of elevated mortality for widows and widowers relative to married individuals aged 25-59. In this age group, we also document higher mortality for widows exposed to conservative and less egalitarian gender norms. These findings suggest that despite India's similarity to other contexts with elevated mortality for both widows and widowers, unequal gender norms still shape life chances for Indian widows.

Indexed as

MortalityWidowhoodAdultAgedFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedSocioeconomic FactorsGender normsIndiaMortalityWidowhood

Identifiers

PMID40755267
PMCPMC12955742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.