Differential Trends in Disability among Rich and Poor Adults in the United States and England from 2002 to 2016
Journals of Gerontology - Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, ISSN: 1079-5014, Vol: 77, Issue: Suppl_2, Page: S189-S198
2022
- 9Citations
- 21Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes8
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures21
- Readers21
- 21
Article Description
Objectives: Disability in the United States has not improved in recent decades. Comparing temporal trends in disability prevalence across different income groups, both within and between the United States and England, would inform public policy aimed at reducing disparities in disability. Methods: Using the Health and Retirement Study and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we estimated annual percent change from 2002 to 2016 in disability among community-dwelling adults (197,021 person-years of observations). Disability was defined based on self-report of limitations with 5 instrumental activities of daily living and 6 activities of daily living. We examined the trends by age and income quintile and adjusted for individual-level sociodemographic status and survey design. Results: The adjusted annual percent change (AAPC) in disability prevalence declined significantly in both countries for ages 75 and older during 2002-2016. For ages 55-64 and 65-74, disability prevalence was unchanged in the United States but declined in England. Both countries experienced a widening gap in disability between low- and high-income adults among the younger age groups. For example, for those ages 55-64 in each country, there was no significant improvement in disability for the low-income group but a significant improvement for the high-income group (AAPC = -3.60; 95% confidence interval [CI; -6.57, -0.63] for the United States; AAPC = -6.06; 95% CI [-8.77, -3.35] for England). Discussion: Improvements in disability were more widespread in England than in the United States between 2002 and 2016. In both countries, the disparity in disability between low- and high-income adults widened for middle-aged adults. Policies targeted at preventing disability among low-income adults should be a priority in both countries.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85131269723&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbac029; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35191479; https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/77/Supplement_2/S189/6534285; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbac029
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know