Sociodemographics, self-rated health, and mortality in the US
Using data from the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey, a representative sample of US civilians, and their 5-year mortality, we examined the adjusted relationships among baseline self-reported health, derived from SF-20 subscales (health perceptions, physical function, role function and mental health) and sociodemographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, income and education) and subsequent mortality. Included were 21,363 persons aged 21 and over, with complete follow-up on 19,812. Physical function showed the greatest decline with age, whereas mental health increased slightly. Women reported lower health for all scales except role function. Greater income was associated with better health, least marked for mental health. Greater education was associated with better health, most marked for health perceptions. Compared with whites, blacks reported lower health, whereas Latinos reported higher health. Lower self-reported health predicted increased adjusted mortality. After adjustment for baseline self-rated health, the relationships between income and education and mortality were greatly attenuated, whereas the relationships between age, gender, race/ethnicity and mortality were not. Self-rated health exhibited more profound relationships with mortality in younger persons, those with more education, and whites. In conclusion, lower socioeconomic status (SES), and being black are associated with lower reported health status and higher mortality; women report lower health status but exhibit lower mortality; and Latinos report higher health status and exhibit lower mortality. The effects of SES on mortality are largely explained by their associations with self-rated health, whereas, the effects of gender and race/ethnicity on mortality appear to act through independent pathways. Because of these differential sociodemographic relationships caution is urged when using self-rated health measures in research, clinical, and policy settings.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 56 (2003)
Issue (Month): 12 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:12:p:2505-2514. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.