Optimism and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort Study
[ABSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, the Oxford Academic article page, which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT IS PAYWALLED AND WAS NOT READ, so nothing beyond the abstract is recorded here] Kim, E. S., Hagan, K. A., Grodstein, F., DeMeo, D. L., De Vivo, I., & Kubzansky, L. D. (2017). 'Optimism and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort Study.' American Journal of Epidemiology 185(1), 21-29. doi:10.1093/aje/kww182. Nurses' Health Study, n = 70,021, optimism measured in 2004, all-cause and cause-specific mortality from 2006 to 2012. From the abstract, verbatim: 'After adjustment for sociodemographic confounders, compared with women in the lowest quartile of optimism, women in the highest quartile had a hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.66, 0.76) for all-cause mortality. Adding health behaviors, health conditions, and depression attenuated but did not eliminate the associations (hazard ratio = 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.85, 0.97). Associations were maintained for various causes of death, including cancer, heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease, and infection.' This is the clearest single statement of the attenuation problem in the file: a 29 per cent lower risk of death becomes 9 per cent once behaviours, existing conditions and depression are in the model. NOTE THE LIMIT ON USING IT: that model bundles behaviour with baseline disease and depression, so it is not a behaviour estimate and must not be used as one. Kim is first and corresponding author.
[ABSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, the Oxford Academic article page, which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT IS PAYWALLED AND WAS NOT READ, so nothing beyond the abstract is recorded here] Kim, E. S., Hagan, K. A., Grodstein, F., DeMeo, D. L., De Vivo, I., & Kubzansky, L. D. (2017). 'Optimism and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort Study.' American Journal of Epidemiology 185(1), 21-29. doi:10.1093/aje/kww182. Nurses' Health Study, n = 70,021, optimism measured in 2004, all-cause and cause-specific mortality from 2006 to 2012. From the abstract, verbatim: 'After adjustment for sociodemographic confounders, compared with women in the lowest quartile of optimism, women in the highest quartile had a hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.66, 0.76) for all-cause mortality. Adding health behaviors, health conditions, and depression attenuated but did not eliminate the associations (hazard ratio = 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.85, 0.97). Associations were maintained for various causes of death, including cancer, heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease, and infection.' This is the clearest single statement of the attenuation problem in the file: a 29 per cent lower risk of death becomes 9 per cent once behaviours, existing conditions and depression are in the model. NOTE THE LIMIT ON USING IT: that model bundles behaviour with baseline disease and depression, so it is not a behaviour estimate and must not be used as one. Kim is first and corresponding author.
Written from the aBSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, the Oxford Academic article page, which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT IS PAYWALLED AND WAS NOT READ, so nothing beyond the abstract is recorded here.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Kim, E. S., Hagan, K. A., Grodstein, F., DeMeo, D. L., De Vivo, I., & Kubzansky, L. D. (2017). Optimism and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort Study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 185(1), 21-29. doi:10.1093/aje/kww182