Poor self-rated health associated with an increased risk of subsequent development of lung cancer

Does intergenerational support affect older People's social participation? An Empirical study of an older Chinese population

As a means of social support, intergenerational support plays an essential role in encouraging older people to participate in society. Data on 3142 older adults were collected from the China Survey of Elderly Health Influencing Factors (CLHLS), and logistic regression models were used to determine the effects of several types of intergenerational support on social participation and whether self-rated health and life satisfaction mediated the associations between intergenerational support and social participation. Among all the three types of intergenerational support, the results showed that financial support and emotional support were positively associated with the social participation of the older Chinese in our sample. We observed rural-urban differences in the effects of financial support and emotional support on social participation, which were significant in the urban groups. Gender differences also exist in these relationships. The effects of emotional support on social participation were significant in both groups and the impact of financial support was obvious only in the female group. Regarding the mediating effect, financial support was found to improve the participants' self-rated health, which enhanced their social participation. Emotional support increased the participants' life satisfaction, which led to higher levels of social participation. Based on the findings of this study, policymakers should advocate to strengthen financial and emotional support from adult children in the community.

Self-rated health and venous thromboembolism among middle-aged women: a population-based cohort study

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the most common types of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and is associated with increased mortality-risk. Poor-self rated health (SHR) has been associated with elevated inflammatory markers and CVDs. However, little is known about as a predictor of incident VTE. To examine the association between self-rated health, lifestyle and incident VTE among middle-aged women. 6917 women aged 50–64 years, followed for 20 years in the Women’s Health In the Lund Area (WHILA) study. After exclusion of those who medicated with anticoagulants, were living in nursing homes or suffered from cancer, stroke, VTE or CHD before baseline, a cohort of 5626 women remained. Cox regression was used to analyse the relationship between self-rated health and time to VTE, censored for any of the previous mentioned diseases during follow-up. Data were collected by questionnaires, physical examinations and Swedish registers. In total, 220 women were affected by VTE corresponding to an incidence rate of 3.9 per 1000 person-years. Adjustment for self-rated health did not significantly predict incident VTE, and neither did any of the lifestyle-related habits (e.g. physical activity and dietary habits including alcohol consumption), besides smoking. This study supports previous results with varicose veins and waist circumference as strong predictors of VTE. Poor self-rated health does not seem to be a valid predictor of VTE. Among lifestyle-related parameters, smoking was significantly associated with risk of VTE. We could also confirm the effect of the other already known risk factors.

Are Leading Risk Factors for Cancer and Mental Disorders Multimorbidity Shared by These Two Individual Conditions in Community-Dwelling Middle-Aged Adults?

Data on the leading shared risk factors of cancer and mental disorders are limited. We included 98,958 participants (54.8% women) aged 45-64 years from the 45 and Up Study who were free of cancer, depression, and anxiety at baseline (2006-2009). The incidence of cancer, mental disorders, and multimorbidity (concurrent cancer and mental disorders) was identified using claim databases during follow-up until 31 December 2016. During a nine-year follow-up, the cumulative incidence of cancer, mental disorders, and multimorbidity was 8.8%, 17.4%, and 2.2%, respectively. Participants with cancer were 3.41 times more likely to develop mental disorders, while individuals with mental disorders were 3.06 times more likely to develop cancer than people without these conditions. The shared risk factors for cancer and mental disorders were older age, female gender, smoking, psychological distress, low fruit intake, poor/fair self-rated health, hypertension, arthritis, asthma, and diabetes. Low education, low income, overweight/obesity, and family history of depression were risk factors for mental disorders and multimorbidity but not cancer. In conclusion, smoking, low fruit intake, and obesity are key modifiable factors for the prevention of cancer and mental disorders. Individuals with poor/fair self-rated health, high psychological distress, asthma, hypertension, arthritis, or diabetes should be targeted for the prevention and screening of cancer and mental disorders.

Gender differences in the effect of self-rated health (SRH) on all-cause mortality and specific causes of mortality among individuals aged 50 years and older

Although different gender associations between self-rated health (SRH) and mortality have been reported, the results of the respective studies have been inconsistent and little is known about the cause-specific relation of mortality with SRH by gender. Therefore, to evaluate the gender differences in all-cause or specific causes of mortality by SRH, this retrospective cohort study was conducted using the data of 19,770 Korean adults aged 50 years and over who underwent health screening at Seoul National University Hospital between March 1995 and December 2008. SRH was surveyed using a simple questionnaire, and the all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality were followed up from baseline screening until December 31, 2016. Results showed that the relationship between SRH and all-cause mortality differed by gender, and the differences also varied depending on the cause of death. In men, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause mortality was higher in the poor SRH group than the very good SRH groups even after adjustment for socio-demographic, clinical, and behavioral risk factors (aHR:1.97, 95% CI 1.51-2.56), and these results were similar to those for cancer, cardiovascular, and respiratory disease mortalities (aHR:1.52, 95% CI 0.93-2.50; aHR: 2.11, 95% CI 1.19-3.74; aHR:10.30, 95% CI 2.39-44.44, respectively). However, in women, the association between SRH and all-cause mortality was insignificant, and inverse relationships were found for cardiovascular and respiratory disease mortalities in the poor and very good SRH groups. Cancer mortality had a positive relation with SRH (aHR: 1.14, 95% CI 0.75-1.72; aHR: 2.58, 95% CI 1.03-6.48; aHR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.98; aHR: 0.15, 95% CI 0.04-0.57: all-cause, cancer, cardiovascular, and respiratory disease mortalities, respectively). Clinicians need to take these gender differences by SRH into account when evaluating the health status of over-middle aged adults.

Health-related predictors of cancer registry-notified cancer of unknown primary site (CUP)

BACKGROUND

The relationship between comorbid disease and health service use and risk of cancer of unknown primary site (CUP) is uncertain.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 266,724 people aged 45 years and over in New South Wales, Australia. Baseline questionnaire data were linked to cancer registration, health service records 4-27 months prior to diagnosis, and mortality data. We compared individuals with incident registry-notified CUP (n = 327; 90% C80) to two sets of randomly selected controls (3:1): (i) incident metastatic cancer of known primary site (n = 977) and (ii) general cohort population (n = 981). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

In fully adjusted models incorporating sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, people with cancer registry-notified CUP were more likely to have fair compared with excellent self-rated overall health (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.01-3.14) and less likely to self-report anxiety (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97) than those registered with metastatic cancer of known primary. Compared to general cohort population controls, people registered with CUP were more likely to have poor rather than excellent self-rated overall health (OR 6.22, 95% CI 1.35-28.6), less likely to self-report anxiety (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12-0.63), and more likely to have a history of diabetes (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.15-3.10) or cancer (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.03-2.57). Neither tertiary nor community-based health service use independently predicted CUP risk.

CONCLUSION

Low self-rated health may be a flag for undiagnosed cancer, and an investigation of its clinical utility in primary care appears warranted.

The association between life satisfaction, vitality, self-rated health, and risk of cancer

PURPOSE

Only few prospective studies have been conducted on the contribution of quality of life-related factors to the risk of cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the prospective associations of three quality of life-related factors with the risk of cancer; life satisfaction, vitality, and self-rated health.

METHODS

In 2009-2011, 7189 participants in the Copenhagen Aging and Midlife Biobank were asked to rate their life satisfaction, their vitality, and their health. The study population was followed until the end of 2015 for registration of cancer in the Danish National Patient Register.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, cancer was diagnosed in 312 individuals. Life satisfaction was not associated with the risk of cancer. Vitality was significantly associated with the risk of cancer, but the association became non-significant after adjustment for age, sex, socioeconomic position, and lifestyle factors. However, when additionally adjusting for life satisfaction, individuals who rated their vitality as low had a hazard ratio of 1.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-2.07) for the development of cancer. Individuals who rated their health as poor had a hazard ratio of 1.70 (95% CI 1.27-2.26) for the development of cancer, compared with individuals with good, very good, or excellent self-rated health. The association remained significant after adjustment for basic confounders, life satisfaction, and vitality.

CONCLUSION

A better grasp of the significance of quality of life-related factors for the risk of cancer may be of great importance to population-based cancer prevention that aims to target early risk factors for development of cancer across widespread cancer sites.

Self-rated health and cancer risk - a prospective cohort study among Danish women

BACKGROUND

Self-rated health (SRH) has been shown to be a strong predictor of mortality from a number of major chronic diseases, however, the association with cancer remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate a possible association between change in SRH and cancer incidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SRH and information on lifestyle and other risk factors were obtained for 13-636 women in the Danish Nurse Cohort. Cancers that developed during 12 years of follow-up were identified in the National Patient Registry. An association between SRH and cancer was examined in a Cox proportional hazards model with adjustment for age, smoking, alcohol, marital status, physical activity, body mass index and estrogen replacement therapy.

RESULTS

No significant association was found between SRH and overall cancer incidence in the age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model (1.04; 95% CI 0.93-1.16), even after adjustment for potential confounding factors (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.96-1.21). Likewise, there was no significant association between SRH and breast cancer (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.89-1.33), lung cancer (HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.71-1.49) or colon cancer (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.75-1.54).

CONCLUSION

SRH is not significantly associated with the incidence of all cancers or breast, lung or colon cancer among Danish female nurses. Women who reported a decrease in SRH between 1993 and 1999 had the same risk for cancer as those who reported unchanged or improved SRH.

Question order sensitivity of subjective well-being measures: focus on life satisfaction, self-rated health, and subjective life expectancy in survey instruments

PURPOSE

This study examines the effect of question context created by order in questionnaires on three subjective well-being measures: life satisfaction, self-rated health, and subjective life expectancy.

METHODS

We conducted two Web survey experiments. The first experiment (n = 648) altered the order of life satisfaction and self-rated health: (1) life satisfaction asked immediately after self-rated health; (2) self-rated health immediately after life satisfaction; and (3) two items placed apart. We examined their correlation coefficient by experimental condition and further examined its interaction with objective health. The second experiment (n = 479) asked life expectancy before and after parental mortality questions. Responses to life expectancy were compared by order using ANOVA, and we examined interaction with parental mortality status using ANCOVA. Additionally, response time and probes were examined.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficients between self-rated health and life satisfaction differed significantly by order: 0.313 (life satisfaction first), 0.508 (apart), and 0.643 (self-rated health first). Differences were larger among respondents with chronic conditions. Response times were the shortest when self-rated health was asked first. When life expectancy asked after parental mortality questions, respondents reported considering parents more for answering life expectancy; and respondents with deceased parents reported significantly lower expectancy, but not those whose parents were alive.

CONCLUSION

Question context effects exist. Findings suggest placing life satisfaction and self-rated health apart to avoid artificial attenuation or inflation in their association. Asking about parental mortality prior to life expectancy appears advantageous as this leads respondents to consider parental longevity more, an important factor for true longevity.

Are Single-Item Global Ratings Useful for Assessing Health Status?

The research performance of the single-item self-rating In general, would you say your health is: excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor? was evaluated relative to the SF-36 General Health Scale that contains this item, using data for a sample of psychiatric outpatients who had co-occurring chronic physical conditions (N = 177). The scale was more robust than the single-item in cross-sectional validity tests and for predicting 2-year outcomes, but the single-item had stronger discriminant validity as a measure of physical health, especially in post-baseline analyses. Single-item and scale were both sensitive enough to detect change in perceived health over 2 years and a conditional experimental effect on health self-perceptions in a randomized trial. These findings demonstrate that a global single-item can be as valid, reliable, and sensitive as a multi-item scale for longitudinal research purposes, even if the scale performs better in cross-sectional surveys or as a screening measure.

Are Single-Item Global Ratings Useful for Assessing Health Status?

The research performance of the single-item self-rating In general, would you say your health is: excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor? was evaluated relative to the SF-36 General Health Scale that contains this item, using data for a sample of psychiatric outpatients who had co-occurring chronic physical conditions (N = 177). The scale was more robust than the single-item in cross-sectional validity tests and for predicting 2-year outcomes, but the single-item had stronger discriminant validity as a measure of physical health, especially in post-baseline analyses. Single-item and scale were both sensitive enough to detect change in perceived health over 2 years and a conditional experimental effect on health self-perceptions in a randomized trial. These findings demonstrate that a global single-item can be as valid, reliable, and sensitive as a multi-item scale for longitudinal research purposes, even if the scale performs better in cross-sectional surveys or as a screening measure.

A cross-sectional study of self-reported general health, lifestyle factors, and disease: the Hordaland Health Study

Background. Information on self-reported health is important for health professionals, and the aim of this study was to examine associations between lifestyle factors and self-reported health and the mediating effect of disease in a Norwegian population.

Methods and Materials. The data collection was conducted as part of the Hordaland Health Study (HUSK) 1997–99, which was a cross-sectional epidemiological study. All individuals in Hordaland county born in 1953–1957 were invited to participate (aged 40–44 years). Complete information for the present study was obtained from 12,883 individuals (44% response rate). Height and weight were measured at a physical examination. Information on lifestyle factors, self-reported health, disease (heart attack, apoplexy, angina pectoris, and diabetes), and socio-demographic variables was obtained from a self-administered questionnaire. Self-reported health was measured with a one-item question. Odds ratios for fair or poor self-reported health were calculated using multiple logistic regression analyses adjusted for disease and socio-demographic variables.

Results. Respondents reporting adverse lifestyle behaviours (obesity (odds ratio (OR) 1.7, p < 0.001), smoking (OR 1.2, p < 0.001), or excessive intake of alcohol (OR 3.3, p < 0.001)) showed an increased risk of poor self-reported health. Furthermore, a moderate intake of wine (OR 0.6, p < 0.001) or strenuous physical activity (OR 0.5, p < 0.001) decreased the risk of poor health. Disease did not mediate the effect.

Conclusion. A one-item question measuring self-reported health may be a suitable measure for health professionals to identify levels of subjective health and reveal a need to target lifestyle factors in relatively young individuals with or without disease.