| Title |
Investigating the causal relationship between employment and informal caregiving of the elderly
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-018-3684-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edel Walsh, Aileen Murphy |
| Abstract |
Examining the causal relationship between employment and informal caring to date has been impeded in countries like Ireland where there is a lack of suitable panel data and/or variables for instrument construction. This paper employs propensity score matching to control for non-random selection into treatment and control groups which controls for differences in employment outcomes between carers and non-carers in Ireland using data from Quarterly National Household Survey 2009 Quarter 3. Earlier papers focus on using regression techniques which may lead to biased estimates. Results suggest that differences exist between carers and non-carers with respect to their employment status in Ireland. Overall the results suggest that the effects are more significant for those providing greater hours of informal care per week than those providing fewer hours of care per week. The effects estimated in this paper are likely to be more precise as failing to account for potential biases in the relationship are likely to underestimate the true effect of caring on employment outcomes. We find that propensity score matching provides an alternative method of examining the relationship when suitable panel data and/or variables for instrument construction are not available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 7 | 54% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 62% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 20% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Psychology | 2 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 01 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,413,116
of 25,436,226 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#307
of 4,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,393
of 341,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#8
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,436,226 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 341,444 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.