Literature DB >> 25809809

Providing instrumental social support is more beneficial to reduce mortality risk among the elderly with low educational level in Taiwan: a 12-year follow-up national longitudinal study.

C C Liao1, C J Yeh, S H Lee, W C Liao, M Y Liao, M C Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether the effects of providing or receiving social support are more beneficial to reduce mortality risk among the elderly with different educational levels.
METHODS: In this long-term prospective cohort study, data were retrieved from the Taiwan Longitudinal Study on Aging. This study was initiated from 1996 until 2007. The complete data from 1492 males and 1177 females aged ≥67 years were retrieved. Participants received financial, instrumental, and emotional support, and they actively provided instrumental and emotional support to others and involved in social engagement. Education attainment was divided into two levels: high and low. The low education level included illiterate and elementary school. The high education level included junior high school to senior high school and above college. Cox regression analysis was used to examine the association between providing or receiving social support on mortality with different educational levels.
RESULTS: The average age of the participants in 1996 was 73.0 (IQR=8.0) years, and the median survival following years (1996-2007) of participants was 10.3 (IQR=6.7) years. Most participants were low educational level including illiterate (39.3%) and elementary school (41.2%). Participants with high educational level tend to be younger and more male significantly. On the contrary, participants with low educational level tend to have significant more poor income, more depression, more cognition impairment, more with IADL and ADL disability than high educational level. Most participants received instrumental support from others (95.5%) and also provided emotional support to others (97.7%). Providing instrumental support can reduce 17% of mortality risk among the elderly with a low level of education after adjusting several covariates [Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.70-0.99; p = 0.036].
CONCLUSIONS: Providing instrumental social support to others confer benefits to the giver and prolong life expectancy among the elderly with low educational levels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25809809     DOI: 10.1007/s12603-014-0545-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging        ISSN: 1279-7707            Impact factor:   4.075


  45 in total

1.  Emotional well-being predicts subsequent functional independence and survival.

Authors:  G V Ostir; K S Markides; S A Black; J S Goodwin
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.562

2.  Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it: results from a prospective study of mortality.

Authors:  Stephanie L Brown; Randolph M Nesse; Amiram D Vinokur; Dylan M Smith
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2003-07

3.  Characteristics of polymedicated (≥ 4) elderly: a survey in a community-dwelling population aged 60 years and over.

Authors:  N Husson; G Watfa; M-C Laurain; C Perret-Guillaume; J-Y Niemier; P Miget; A Benetos
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.075

4.  Higher levels of social support predict greater survival following acute myocardial infarction: the Corpus Christi Heart Project.

Authors:  I P Farmer; P S Meyer; D J Ramsey; D C Goff; M L Wear; D R Labarthe; M Z Nichaman
Journal:  Behav Med       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.104

5.  Socioeconomic indicators and mortality from coronary heart disease and cancer: a 22-year follow-up of middle-aged men.

Authors:  H C Bucher; D R Ragland
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Social support and social structure: a descriptive epidemiology.

Authors:  R J Turner; F Marino
Journal:  J Health Soc Behav       Date:  1994-09

7.  Socioeconomic and behavioral risk factors for mortality in a national 19-year prospective study of U.S. adults.

Authors:  Paula M Lantz; Ezra Golberstein; James S House; Jeffrey Morenoff
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-02-20       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Socioeconomic factors, health behaviors, and mortality: results from a nationally representative prospective study of US adults.

Authors:  P M Lantz; J S House; J M Lepkowski; D R Williams; R P Mero; J Chen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-06-03       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Mortality by indicators of socioeconomic status among the Finnish elderly.

Authors:  T Martelin
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.634

10.  Socioeconomic status, structural and functional measures of social support, and mortality: The British Whitehall II Cohort Study, 1985-2009.

Authors:  Silvia Stringhini; Lisa Berkman; Aline Dugravot; Jane E Ferrie; Michael Marmot; Mika Kivimaki; Archana Singh-Manoux
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 4.897

View more
  4 in total

1.  Visual Impairment Screening at the Geriatric Frailty Clinic for Assessment of Frailty and Prevention of Disability at the Gérontopôle.

Authors:  V Soler; S Sourdet; L Balardy; G Abellan van Kan; D Brechemier; M E Rougé-Bugat; N Tavassoli; M Cassagne; F Malecaze; F Nourhashémi; B Vellas
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 4.075

2.  Association of social relationships with incident cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality.

Authors:  Janine Gronewold; Rene Kropp; Nils Lehmann; Börge Schmidt; Simone Weyers; Johanne Siegrist; Nico Dragano; Karl-Heinz Jöckel; Raimund Erbel; Dirk M Hermann
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Impact of Frailty on Dietary Habits among Community-Dwelling Older Persons during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan.

Authors:  K Kinoshita; S Satake; H Arai
Journal:  J Frailty Aging       Date:  2022

4.  Associations of face-to-face and non-face-to-face social isolation with all-cause and cause-specific mortality: 13-year follow-up of the Guangzhou Biobank Cohort study.

Authors:  Jiao Wang; Wei Sen Zhang; Chao Qiang Jiang; Feng Zhu; Ya Li Jin; Kar Keung Cheng; Tai Hing Lam; Lin Xu
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 11.150

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.