What Matters Most for Predicting Survival? A Multinational Population-Based Cohort Study

Noreen Goldman, Dana A Glei and Maxine Weinstein

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 7, 1-11

Abstract: Despite myriad efforts among social scientists, epidemiologists, and clinicians to identify variables with strong linkages to mortality, few researchers have evaluated statistically the relative strength of a comprehensive set of predictors of survival. Here, we determine the strongest predictors of five-year mortality in four national, prospective studies of older adults. We analyze nationally representative surveys of older adults in four countries with similar levels of life expectancy: England (n = 6113, ages 52+), the US (n = 2023, ages 50+), Costa Rica (n = 2694, ages 60+), and Taiwan (n = 1032, ages 53+). Each survey includes a broad set of demographic, social, health, and biological variables that have been shown previously to predict mortality. We rank 57 predictors, 25 of which are available in all four countries, net of age and sex. We use the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and assess robustness with additional discrimination measures. We demonstrate consistent findings across four countries with different cultural traditions, levels of economic development, and epidemiological transitions. Self-reported measures of instrumental activities of daily living limitations, mobility limitations, and overall self-assessed health are among the top predictors in all four samples. C-reactive protein, additional inflammatory markers, homocysteine, serum albumin, three performance assessments (gait speed, grip strength, and chair stands), and exercise frequency also discriminate well between decedents and survivors when these measures are available. We identify several promising candidates that could improve mortality prediction for both population-based and clinical populations. Better prognostic tools are likely to provide researchers with new insights into the behavioral and biological pathways that underlie social stratification in health and may allow physicians to have more informed discussions with patients about end-of-life treatment and priorities.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159273 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 59273&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0159273

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159273

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().