3432
Views
448
Downloads |
How is health associated with employment during later working life in Croatia?*
Article | Year: 2020 | Pages: 99 - 116 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 1 Received: June 1, 2019 | Accepted: October 31, 2019 | Published online: March 3, 2020
|
FULL ARTICLE
FIGURES & DATA
REFERENCES
CROSSMARK POLICY
METRICS
LICENCING
PDF
|
Variable
|
Non-missing Na
|
Mean (standard deviation) or percent sharea
|
|
Employed
|
Not employed
|
Employed
|
Not employed
|
All respondents
|
|
Age
|
451
|
831
|
56.28
(3.50)
|
58.74 (3.81)
|
57.87
(3.88)
|
|
Gender
|
451
|
831
|
|
|
Female (%)
|
|
|
48.56
|
61.37
|
56.86
|
|
Male (%)
|
|
|
51.44
|
38.63
|
43.14
|
|
Living arrangements
|
451
|
831
|
|
|
Lives with partner (%)
|
|
|
86.92
|
81.47
|
83.39
|
|
Lives alone (%)
|
|
|
8.87
|
10.35
|
9.83
|
|
Lives with others (%)
|
|
|
4.21
|
8.18
|
6.79
|
|
Children
|
450
|
831
|
1.77
(0.88)
|
1.97
(1.02)
|
1.90
(0.98)
|
|
Education
|
451
|
830
|
|
|
Low (%)
|
|
|
9.76
|
33.37
|
25.06
|
|
Medium (%)
|
|
|
62.97
|
57.47
|
59.41
|
|
High (%)
|
|
|
27.27
|
9.16
|
15.53
|
|
SRH
|
451
|
831
|
2.60
(1.06)
|
3.30
(1.18)
|
3.05
(1.18)
|
|
Chronic conditions
|
451
|
831
|
0.86
(1.03)
|
1.71
(1.53)
|
1.41
(1.44)
|
|
(I)ADLs
|
451
|
831
|
0.05
(0.29)
|
0.42
(1.72)
|
0.29
(1.40)
|
|
Depression symptoms
|
446
|
821
|
1.69
(1.90)
|
2.64
(2.38)
|
2.30
(2.27)
|
|
Grip strength
|
421
|
773
|
40.04
(12.29)
|
35.90
(11.77)
|
37.36
(12.11)
|
|
BMI
|
444
|
819
|
26.64
(4.04)
|
27.65
(4.71)
|
27.29
(4.51)
|
a Unweighted figures. Source: Authors’ calculations based on SHARE Wave 6 data.
|
Variables (ref. denotes base levels for factors)
|
Univariate ORs
|
Model 1
|
Model 2
|
|
Agea
|
0.837 ***
|
1.215
|
1.205
|
|
Age squared
|
|
0.977 ***
|
0.977 ***
|
|
Gender
|
|
|
Male
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
|
Female
|
0.585 ***
|
1.973
|
1.842
|
|
Age-gender interaction
|
|
|
|
Age x female
|
|
0.734 *
|
0.740 *
|
|
Age squared x female
|
|
1.015
|
1.016
|
|
Living arrangements
|
|
|
|
Lives with partner
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
|
Lives alone
|
0.817
|
0.735
|
0.707
|
|
Lives with others
|
0.501 **
|
0.467 **
|
0.536 **
|
|
Children
|
0.811 ***
|
0.810 ***
|
0.825 **
|
|
Education
|
|
|
Low
|
0.267 ***
|
0.401 ***
|
0.412 ***
|
|
Medium
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
ref.
|
|
High
|
2.641 ***
|
3.259 ***
|
3.527 ***
|
|
SRHc
|
0.590 ***
|
0.684 ***
|
0.905
|
|
Chronic conditions
|
0.582 ***
|
|
0.719 ***
|
|
(I)ADLs
|
0.552 ***
|
|
0.814 **
|
|
Depression symptoms
|
0.812 ***
|
|
0.934 *
|
|
Grip strength
|
|
|
|
First quintile
|
0.702 *
|
|
1.106
|
|
Second quintile
|
0.852
|
|
0.982
|
|
Third quintile
|
ref.
|
|
ref.
|
|
Fourth quintile
|
1.236
|
|
1.036
|
|
Fifth quintile
|
1.467 *
|
|
1.175
|
|
BMId
|
0.946***
|
|
0.968 *
|
|
Constant
|
|
1.291
|
2.262
|
|
N
|
1248
|
1248
|
1248
|
|
Clusters in sample
|
868
|
868
|
868
|
|
Wald Chi squared
|
|
225.03 ***
|
252.34 ***
|
* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. a Values are centred around age 50. b Values are centred around 3 (good SRH). c Observations with missing data on grip strength are included as a separate category; however, we do not report the associated odds ratio (it is insignificant). d Values are centred around BMI of 25 (cut-off for overweight).Source: Authors’ calculations based on SHARE Wave 6 data.
|
Variables
|
Model 1
|
Model 2
|
|
SRH
|
−0.065***
|
−0.016
|
|
Chronic conditions
|
|
−0.054***
|
|
(I)ADLs
|
|
−0.034**
|
|
Depression symptoms
|
|
−0.011*
|
|
Grip strengtha
|
|
|
|
First quintile
|
|
0.017
|
|
Second quintile
|
|
−0.003
|
|
Third quintile
|
|
ref.
|
|
Fourth quintile
|
|
0.006
|
|
Fifth quintile
|
|
0.027
|
|
BMI
|
|
−0.005*
|
* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. a Average marginal effect for factor levels is the discrete change from the base level (ref.). Source: Authors’ calculations based on SHARE Wave 6 data.
Table 1Descriptive statistics DISPLAY Table
Table 2Odds ratio estimates from logistic regression models DISPLAY Table
Table 3Average marginal effects associated with health-related variables DISPLAY Table
Figure 1Estimated probabilities of employment by SRH DISPLAY Figure
Figure 2Estimated probabilities of employment by objective health indicators DISPLAY Figure
* The authors would like to thank the two anonymous referees for helpful comments on the paper.
1 Different studies operationalize SRH in different ways. Many authors opt for a dichotomized scale (e.g. Desesquelles, Egidi and Salvatore,  2009; Giatti, Barreto and César, 2010; Zajacova and Dowd, 2011). Our conclusions do not change substantially if using a binary SRH variable (we re-ran our analyses using both very good or excellent SRH versus good or worse SRH, and poor or fair SRH versus good or better SRH; results not shown, but available from the authors upon request).
2 Note that each SHARE household designates only one of its members as a family respondent. The family respondent (alone) answers questions about children. To provide scope for an individual-level analysis, we copied the data provided by the family respondent to the partner within the same household.
|
|
March, 2020
I/2020
|
