MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3146249514 · doi:10.1002/hec.4259

The effects of sudden health reductions on labor market outcomes: Evidence from incidence of stroke

2021· article· en· W3146249514 on OpenAlexaff
Atsuko Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)EarningsMedicineIncidence (geometry)DemographyFixed effects modelDiseaseGerontologyDemographic economicsEconomicsPanel data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While increasing attention is given to how health reductions affect workers, estimating their effects is usually challenging. This paper aims to identify the causal effect of health deterioration on labor market outcomes by exploiting the incidence of stroke. Stroke, which often reduces health suddenly and unexpectedly, allows us to exploit the within-person random variation of the timing and isolate the effects of health reduction. By applying the fixed-effects method to a sample of stroke survivors in the University of Michigan Health and Retirement Study data, I find that stroke immediately halves the employment probability as well as hours and weeks worked 1 year after the occurrence and its effects persist for at least 3 years, while earnings reduction is relatively moderate and gradual. I also find the negative effects of stroke are larger among men with severe stroke and women with longer pre-stroke job tenure, while the effects are mitigated for younger women. These results make a stark contrast with the studies on other health events such as cancer diagnosis, which generally find much smaller effects and significant heterogeneity by education and occupation. This analysis shows that the labor market effects largely differ by types of diseases and calls for disease-specific studies in order to understand the social gradient in health and how workers adjust to work limitations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth EconomicsSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207