(Healthy) Aging Patterns in Europe: A Multistate Health Transition Approach

3Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We explore patterns and determinants of health transition probabilities by combining outcomes of morbidity and mortality to examine different aging patterns across Europe, and to ascertain how individual socio-demographic characteristics modify these patterns. We use panel data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (2004– 2017) for 76,536 individuals aged 50 + in 20 European countries who participated in at least two waves. All transition probabilities were calculated applying a multistate analytical approach. Our findings show significant gender, education, and cohort differences in health transition probabilities and marked cross-country group differences. Central and Northern European countries present lower probabilities of health deterioration than Southern and, especially, Eastern European countries. Having a high level of education, living in Central Europe, and being younger are associated with lower probabilities of health deterioration and, if any, a higher probability of being restored to good health. We found less evidence of differences when transitions end in death. Our study contributes to this line of research by implementing a multistate approach using European harmonized panel dataset, to examine the effects of birth cohort, educational attainment and gender differences on health transitions. Our findings point to the need to consider the specific influence of individual factors in the aging process in different transitions according to the context and with reference to specific vulnerable groups. In the context of aging societies, such a consideration is both essential and policy relevant.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Solé-Auró, A., & Gumà, J. (2023). (Healthy) Aging Patterns in Europe: A Multistate Health Transition Approach. Journal of Population Ageing, 16(1), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-022-09403-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free