| Literature DB >> 29855297 |
Arnhild Myhr1, Tommy Haugan2, Monica Lillefjell3, Thomas Halvorsen4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: School non-completion and early work disability is a great public health challenge in Norway, as in most western countries. This study aims to investigate how medically based disability pension (DP) among young adults varies geographically and how municipal socioeconomic conditions interact with non-completion of secondary education in determining DP risk.Entities:
Keywords: Community characteristics; Disability pension; Geographic information systems; Multilevel; Norway; Secondary education; Social inequality
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29855297 PMCID: PMC5984305 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5551-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Flow chart of the participants in the present study who where included in the analysis. The proportion of eligible subjects with complete data is 88.7%
The impact of non-completion of secondary education and its interaction with period of birth on the probability of receiving disability pension (DP)
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef | SE | Coef | SE | Coef | SE | Coef | SE | |
| Fixed effects | ||||||||
| Secondary education non-completion | 1.8604*** | 0.0449 | 1.8063*** | 0.0452 | 1.5831*** | 0.0464 | ||
| Cohort | ||||||||
| 1970–74 | ref | ref | ref | |||||
| 1975–79 | −0.3847*** | 0.0819 | −0.4013*** | 0.0822 | −0.1267 | 0.0851 | ||
| 1980–84 | −0.6735*** | 0.1243 | −0.7075*** | 0.1246 | −0.2871* | 0.1322 | ||
| 1985–89 | −1.6452*** | 0.1982 | −1.6817*** | 0.1987 | −1.6253*** | 0.2109 | ||
| Non-completion*Cohort | ||||||||
| 1* 1970–74 | ref | ref | ref | |||||
| 1*1975–79 | 0.5471*** | 0.0775 | 0.5619*** | 0.0777 | 0.4528*** | 0.0799 | ||
| 1* 1980–84 | 0.7691*** | 0.0958 | 0.7825*** | 0.0960 | 0.4657*** | 0.0995 | ||
| 1* 1985–89 | 1.7037*** | 0.1528 | 1.7275*** | 0.1529 | 1.2582*** | 0.1551 | ||
| Male | 0.5092** | 01526 | 0.4742** | 0.1532 | 0.7858*** | 0.1659 | ||
| Age | 0.0734*** | 0.0092 | 0.0737*** | 0.0092 | 0.1365*** | 0.0101 | ||
| Age*male | −0.0177*** | 0.0045 | −0.0169*** | 0.0045 | −0.0222*** | 0.0049 | ||
| Maternal DP | ||||||||
| No | ref | ref | ||||||
| Yes | 0.6020*** | 0.0318 | 0.5009*** | 0.0354 | ||||
| Mother’s identity unknown | 0.2322** | 0.0808 | −0.1565 | 0.0914 | ||||
| Paternal DP | ||||||||
| No | ref | ref | ||||||
| Yes | 0.4298*** | 0.0347 | 0.2996*** | 0.0388 | ||||
| Father’s identity unknown | −1.6170*** | 0.1218 | −2.5678*** | 0.1334 | ||||
| No previous employment records | 3.7955*** | 0.0405 | ||||||
| Random effects | ||||||||
| Neighbourhood variance (95% CI) | 0.4775 | 0.0289 | 0.4297 | 0.0285 | 0.4319 | 0.0288 | 0.3022 | 0.0283 |
| PCVa | −10.0% | −9.6% | −36.7% | |||||
| ICC(%) | 0.1240 | 0.0069 | 0.1133 | 0.0070 | 0.1142 | 0.0070 | 0.0827 | 0.0074 |
| MOR | 1.93 | 1.87 | 1.87 | 1.69 | ||||
| Municipality variance (95% CI) | 0.0823 | 0.0129 | 0.0741 | 0.0127 | 0.0619 | 0.0115 | 0.0622 | 0.0119 |
| PCVa | −10.0% | −24.8% | −24.4% | |||||
| ICC (%) | 0.0214 | 0.0033 | 0.0195 | 0.0033 | 0.0164 | 0.0030 | 0.0170 | 0.0032 |
| MOR | 1.32 | 1.30 | 1.27 | 1.27 | ||||
| -2loglikeliehood | 67,825.348 | 59,195.306 | 58,211.102 | 48,854.622 | ||||
aThe proportional change in variance expresses the change in variance at the particular level from the empty model
∗∗∗p < 0.001, ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗p < 0.05
Parameter estimates and log-likelihood values for the random intercept and random slope logistic regression models
| Random intercept | Random slope (coefficient) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Coef | SE | Coef | SE |
| Individual level | ||||
| Intercept | −5.1818*** | 0.0322 | −5.1694*** | 0.0376 |
| School non-completion | 2.3159*** | 0.0354 | 2.2977*** | 0.0364 |
| Municipality level random part | ||||
| Residual variance intercept | 0.0914 | 0.0131 | 0.0941 | 0.0245 |
| Residual variance slope | 0.0337 | 0.0237 | ||
| Intercept-slope covariance | −0.0148 | 0.0208 | ||
| -2Log likelihood | 61,010.002 | 60,994.002 | ||
| BIC | 61,048.3 | 61,045.07 | ||
| AIC | 61,016 | 61,002 | ||
***p < 0.001
Likelihood ratio test: LR chi2 = 16.65, p-value = 0.0002
The impact of non-completion of secondary education, municipal socioeconomic factors and their interactionsa on the probability of receiving disability pension (DP)
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef | SE | Coef | SE | Coef | SE | Coef | SE | Coef | SE | |
| Fixed effects | ||||||||||
| Individual level | ||||||||||
| Non-completion | 2.2416*** | 0.0329 | 1.0613* | 0.4800 | 1.3491*** | 0.2916 | 2.6458*** | 0.1449 | 2.5850*** | 0.1049 |
| Neighbourhood level | ||||||||||
| Rural settlement | −0.3896*** | 0.0404 | −0.3894*** | 0.0404 | −0.3889*** | 0.0404 | −0.3896*** | 0.0404 | −0.3887*** | 0.0404 |
| Municipality level | ||||||||||
| Socioeconomic factors | ||||||||||
| Education | 0.0226*** | 0.0052 | 0.0074 | 0.0080 | 0.0221*** | 0.0052 | 0.0225*** | 0.0052 | 0.0224*** | 0.0052 |
| Household income | −4.14e-06*** | 8.95e-07 | −4.11e-06*** | 8.95e-07 | −6.20e-06*** | 1.12e-06 | −4.13e-06*** | 8.96e-07 | −4.09e-06*** | 8.94e-07 |
| Unemployment | −0.0286 | 0.0309 | −0.0285 | 0.0308 | −0.0283 | 0.0308 | 0.0760 | 0.0475 | −0.0285 | 0.0308 |
| Social security benefits | 0.0127 | 0.0107 | 0.0129 | 0.0107 | 0.0130 | 0.0107 | 0.0129 | 0.0108 | 0.0611*** | 0.0175 |
| DP spatlag | 0.0302** | 0.0117 | 0.0303** | 0.0117 | 0.0306** | 0.0117 | 0.0300* | 0.0117 | 0.0302** | 0.0117 |
| Interactions non-completion and municipality factors | ||||||||||
| 1*Education | 0.0177* | 0.0072 | ||||||||
| 1*household income | 2.60e-06** | 8.47e-07 | ||||||||
| 1*Unemployment | −0.1248** | 0.0433 | ||||||||
| 1* Social security benefits | −0.0572*** | 0.0164 | ||||||||
| General contextual effects | ||||||||||
| Neighbourhood variance | 0.4214 | 0.0288 | 0.4206 | 0.0288 | 0.4201 | 0.0288 | 0.4213 | 0.0288 | 0.4206 | 0.0288 |
| PCV | −11.8% | −11.9% | −12.0% | −11.8% | −11.9% | |||||
| ICC (%) | 0.1120 | 0.0070 | 0.1118 | 0.0070 | 0.1117 | 0.0070 | 0.1120 | 0.0070 | 0.1118 | 0.0070 |
| MOR | 1.86 | 1.86 | 1.86 | 1.86 | 1.86 | |||||
| Municipality variance | 0.0503 | 0.0104 | 0.0503 | 0.0104 | 0.0503 | 0.0104 | 0.0503 | 0.0104 | 0.0500 | 0.0103 |
| PCV | −38.9% | −38.9% | −38.9% | −38.9% | −39.2% | |||||
| ICC (%) | 0.0134 | 0.0027 | 0.0134 | 0.0027 | 0.0134 | 0.0027 | 0.0134 | 0.0027 | 0.0133 | 0.0027 |
| MOR | 1.24 | 1.24 | 1.24 | 1.24 | 1.24 | |||||
| -2loglikelihood | 58,304,708 | 58,298,74 | 58,295,14 | 58,296,46 | 58,292,728 | |||||
aadjusted for age, gender and parental DP receipt bThe proportional change in variance expresses the change in variance at the particular level from the empty model ∗∗∗p < 0.001, ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗p < 0.05
Individual and community characteristics of young receivers and non-receivers of disability pension (DP)
| Variable | DP receivers ( | Non-receivers ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | |
| Individual level variables | ||||
| Male | 3673 | 52.0 | 174,696 | 50.8 |
| Mean Age (SD) | 33.4b | 5.50 | 30.7 | 5.92 |
| Secondary education non-completion | 5876a | 83.2 | 110,719 | 32.2 |
| Birth cohort | ||||
| 1970–1974 | 3204a | 45.4 | 94,279 | 27.4 |
| 1975–1979 | 1798a | 25.5 | 81,946 | 23.9 |
| 1980–1984 | 1180a | 16.7 | 80,537 | 23.4 |
| 1985–1989 | 883a | 12.5 | 86,872 | 25.3 |
| No previous employment records | 2615a | 37.0 | 9191 | 2,7 |
| Maternal DP | 1544a | 21.9 | 32,551 | 9.5 |
| Mother’s identity unknown | 282a | 4.0 | 23,570 | 6.9 |
| Paternal DP | 1218a | 17.2 | 27,781 | 8.1 |
| Father’s identity unknown | 114a | 1.6 | 18,669 | 5.4 |
| Neighbourhood level variable | ||||
| Rural place of residence | 1304 | 18.5 | 63,435 | 18.5 |
| Municipality level variables | ||||
| Socioeconomic variables | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Secondary or tertiary education % | 66.0b | 4.64 | 66.7 | 4.46 |
| Unemployment % | 3.3b | 0.76 | 3.2 | 0.71 |
| Social security benefits % | 6.1b | 2.07 | 5.7 | 1.86 |
| Disability benefits % | 9.7b | 2.91 | 8.7 | 2.76 |
| Gross household income (thousands) | 339.4b | 382.2 | 349.8 | 398.5 |
aSignificant difference (p-value≤0.05) between groups tested by chi square test b Significant mean difference (p-value≤0.05) between groups tested by independent sample t-test
Fig. 2The geographic distribution of non-completers of upper secondary education (percentages) among individuals aged 21–40 years (born between 1970 and 1989 in Norway, 2010
Fig. 3The geographic distributions of disability pensions (percentages) among young adults aged 21–40 years (born between 1970 and 1989 in Norway, 2010
Fig. 4Local indicators of spatial association (LISA) for secondary education non-completion rates and disability pension rates
Fig. 5Predictive margins of school completers and non-completers predicting probability (Pr) of receiving DP by percentages of municipal residents with secondary or tertiary education