| Title |
The earnings and employment losses before entering the disability system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10198-018-0960-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria Cervini-Pla, Judit Vall Castelló |
| Abstract |
Although a number of papers in the literature have shown the employment and wage differences between individuals receiving disability benefits and non-disabled individuals, not much is known about the potential employment and wage losses that disabled individuals suffer before being officially accepted into the disability insurance system (DI). Therefore, in this paper we compare individuals that enter into the DI system due to a progressive deterioration in the health status (ordinary illness) to similar non-disabled individuals. Our aim is to identify the differences in employment and wages between these two groups before disabled individuals are officially accepted into the DI system. We combine matching models and difference-in-difference and we find that the wage (employment) growth patterns of both groups of workers become significantly different three (five) years before entering the DI system. More specifically, our estimates suggest that 1 year before entering the system, there is a difference of 79 Euros/month in the wages of the two groups (8.3% of average wage) as well as a 7.8% point difference in employment probabilities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 9 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 12% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 9 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,267,105
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#488
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,370
of 344,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.