Aging Research Center (ARC), Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm University, Sweden.
National Institute for the Study of Ageing and Later Life (NISAL), Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden.
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2019 Oct 4;74(8):e125-e134. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbx032.
The present study analyzed whether estimates of health inequalities in old age are sensitive to the exclusion of people living in institutions and nonuse of proxy interviews.
Pooled data from the 2004 wave (n = 1,180, aged 69-100, primarily interviewed over the phone) and the 2011 wave (n = 931, aged 76-101, primarily interviewed face-to-face) of the Swedish Panel Study of Living Conditions of the Oldest Old were used to compare absolute and relative differences in disability and mortality between people with compulsory education and people with more than compulsory education.
Both absolute and relative health inequalities would have been underestimated in a survey that excluded institutionalized people and proxy-interviewed community dwellers. The same patterns were found in men and women and regardless of the mode of data collection (telephone or face-to-face interview). The degree of underestimation was lower in those 85 years and older than in those 69 to 84 years.
A survey that only includes people who live in the community and can participate without the help of a proxy might give the impression that those with low levels of education have less extensive health disadvantages than they actually have.
本研究分析了在排除居住在机构中的人群和不使用代理访谈的情况下,老年健康不平等的估计值是否敏感。
使用瑞典老年人生活条件面板研究的 2004 年波(n=1180,年龄 69-100 岁,主要通过电话进行访谈)和 2011 年波(n=931,年龄 76-101 岁,主要通过面对面进行访谈)的汇总数据,比较了接受义务教育和接受超过义务教育的人群在残疾和死亡率方面的绝对和相对差异。
在排除了机构化人群和代理访谈的社区居民的调查中,绝对和相对健康不平等都会被低估。在男性和女性中以及无论数据收集方式(电话或面对面访谈)如何,都发现了相同的模式。在 85 岁及以上的人群中,低估的程度低于 69 至 84 岁的人群。
仅包括居住在社区中并且可以在没有代理帮助的情况下参与的调查可能会给人留下这样的印象,即受教育程度低的人群的健康劣势比实际情况要小。