Religion, Life Expectancy, and Disability-Free Life Expectancy Among Older Women and Men in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Existing literature shows religion is associated with health and survival separately. We extend this literature by considering health and survival together using a multistate life table approach to estimate total, disability-free, and disabled life expectancy (LE), separately for women and men, for 2 disability measures, and by 2 indicators of religion. METHOD: Data come from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2014 waves). Predictors include importance of religion and attendance at religious services. The disability measures are defined by ADLs and IADLs. Models control for sociodemographic and health covariates. RESULTS: Attendance at religious services shows a strong and consistent association with life and health expectancy. Men and women who attend services at least once a week (compared with those who attend less frequently or never) have between 1.1 and 5.1 years longer total LE and between 1.0 and 4.3 years longer ADL disability-free LE. Findings for IADL disability are similar. Importance of religion is related to total and disabled LE (both ADL and IADL), but the differentials are smaller and less consistent. Controlling for sociodemographic and health factors does not explain these associations. DISCUSSION: By estimating total, disability-free, and disabled LE, we are able to quantify the advantage of religion for health. Results are consistent with previous studies that have focused on health and mortality separately.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".