↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Life Expectancy Gain Due to Employment Status Depends on Race, Gender, Education, and Their Intersections

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 1,002)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
72 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
137 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Life Expectancy Gain Due to Employment Status Depends on Race, Gender, Education, and Their Intersections
Published in
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40615-017-0381-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shervin Assari

Abstract

Despite the well-established health effects of socioeconomic status (SES), SES resources such as employment may differently influence health outcomes across sub-populations. This study used a national sample of US adults to test if the effect of baseline employment (in 1986) on all-cause mortality over a 25-year period depends on race, gender, education level, and their intersections. Data came from the Americans' Changing Lives (ACL) study, which followed 2025 Whites and 1156 Blacks for 25 years from 1986 to 2011. The focal predictor of interest was baseline employment (1986), operationalized as a dichotomous variable. The main outcome of interest was time to all-cause mortality from 1986 to 2011. Covariates included baseline age, health behaviors (smoking, drinking, and exercise), physical health (obesity, chronic disease, function, and self-rated health), and mental health (depressive symptoms). A series of Cox proportional hazard models were used to test the association between employment and mortality risk in the pooled sample and based on race, gender, education, and their intersections. Baseline employment in 1986 was associated with a lower risk of mortality over a 25-year period, net of covariates. In the pooled sample, baseline employment interacted with race (HR = .69, 95% CI = .49-.96), gender (HR = .73, 95% CI = .53-1.01), and education (HR = .64, 95% CI = .46-.88) on mortality, suggesting diminished protective effects for Blacks, women, and individuals with lower education, compared to Whites, men, and those with higher education. In stratified models, the association was significant for Whites (HR = .71, 95%CI = .59-.90), men (HR = .60, 95%CI = .43-.83), and individuals with high education (HR = .66, 95%CI = .50-.86) but not for Blacks (HR = .77, 95%CI = .56-1.01), women (HR = .88, 95%CI = .69-1.12), and those with low education (HR = .92, 95%CI = .67-1.26). The largest effects of employment on life expectancy were seen for highly educated men (HR = .50, 95%CI = .32-.78), White men (HR = .55, 95%CI = .38-.79), and highly educated Whites (HR = .63, 95%CI = .46-.84). The effects were non-significant for Black men (HR = 1.10, 95%CI = .68-1.78), Whites with low education (HR = 1.01, 95%CI = .67-1.51), and women with low education (HR = 1.06, 95%CI = .71-1.57). In the USA, the health gain associated with employment is conditional on one's race, gender, and education level, along with their intersections. Blacks, women, and individuals with lower education gain less from employment than do Whites, men, and highly educated people. More research is needed to understand how the intersections of race, gender, and education alter health gains associated with socioeconomic resources.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Student > Master 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 43 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 14%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Psychology 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 48 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 600. 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 23 June 2022.
All research outputs
#30,502
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
#4
of 1,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#719
of 316,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 316,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.