BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies in gerontology are characterized by termination of measurement from death. Death is related to many important gerontological outcomes, such as functional disability, and may, over time, change the composition of an older study population. For these reasons, treating death as noninformative censoring of a longitudinal outcome may result in biased estimates of regression coefficients related to that outcome. METHODS: In a longitudinal study of community-living older persons, we analytically and graphically illustrate the dependence between death and functional disability. Relative to survivors, decedents display a rapid decline of functional ability in the months preceding death. Death's strong relationship with functional disability demonstrates that death is not independent of this outcome and, hence, leads to informative censoring. We also demonstrate the "healthy survivor effect" that results from death's selection effect, with respect to functional disability, on the longitudinal makeup of an older study population. RESULTS: We briefly survey commonly used approaches for longitudinal modeling of gerontological outcomes, with special emphasis on their treatment of death. Most common methods treat death as noninformative censoring. However, joint modeling methods are described that take into account any dependency between death and a longitudinal outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In longitudinal studies of older persons, death is often related to gerontological outcomes and, therefore, cannot be safely assumed to represent noninformative censoring. Such analyzes must account for the dependence between outcomes and death as well as the changing nature of the cohort.
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies in gerontology are characterized by termination of measurement from death. Death is related to many important gerontological outcomes, such as functional disability, and may, over time, change the composition of an older study population. For these reasons, treating death as noninformative censoring of a longitudinal outcome may result in biased estimates of regression coefficients related to that outcome. METHODS: In a longitudinal study of community-living older persons, we analytically and graphically illustrate the dependence between death and functional disability. Relative to survivors, decedents display a rapid decline of functional ability in the months preceding death. Death's strong relationship with functional disability demonstrates that death is not independent of this outcome and, hence, leads to informative censoring. We also demonstrate the "healthy survivor effect" that results from death's selection effect, with respect to functional disability, on the longitudinal makeup of an older study population. RESULTS: We briefly survey commonly used approaches for longitudinal modeling of gerontological outcomes, with special emphasis on their treatment of death. Most common methods treat death as noninformative censoring. However, joint modeling methods are described that take into account any dependency between death and a longitudinal outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In longitudinal studies of older persons, death is often related to gerontological outcomes and, therefore, cannot be safely assumed to represent noninformative censoring. Such analyzes must account for the dependence between outcomes and death as well as the changing nature of the cohort.
Authors: Mary E Tinetti; Dorothy I Baker; Mary King; Margaret Gottschalk; Terrence E Murphy; Denise Acampora; Bradley P Carlin; Linda Leo-Summers; Heather G Allore Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-07-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rebecca V Galloway; Amol M Karmarkar; James E Graham; Alai Tan; Mukaila Raji; Carl V Granger; Kenneth J Ottenbacher Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2015-12-04
Authors: Fredric D Wolinsky; Padmaja Ayyagari; Theodore K Malmstrom; J Phillip Miller; Elena M Andresen; Mario Schootman; Douglas K Miller Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Terrence E Murphy; Thomas M Gill; Linda S Leo-Summers; Evelyne A Gahbauer; Margaret A Pisani; Lauren E Ferrante Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-12-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Terrence E Murphy; Heather G Allore; Ling Han; Peter N Peduzzi; Thomas M Gill; Xiao Xu; Haiqun Lin Journal: Exp Aging Res Date: 2015 Impact factor: 1.645
Authors: Ted G Graber; Lisa Ferguson-Stegall; Jong-Hee Kim; LaDora V Thompson Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Eliza F Chakravarty; Helen B Hubert; Eswar Krishnan; Bonnie B Bruce; Vijaya B Lingala; James F Fries Journal: Am J Med Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Robin L Kruse; Gregory F Petroski; David R Mehr; Jane Banaszak-Holl; Orna Intrator Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 5.562