MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322757374 · doi:10.1002/hec.4669

Short‐term effect of retirement on health: Evidence from nonparametric fuzzy regression discontinuity design

2023· article· en· W4322757374 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Ebeid, Umut Oguzoglu

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegression discontinuity designNonparametric statisticsWeightingHealth and Retirement StudyTerm (time)Logistic regressionMedicineEconometricsPsychologyGerontologyEconomicsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We estimate the short-term effect of retirement on health in the US using the Health and Retirement Study survey. We use the nonparametric fuzzy regression discontinuity design to avoid assuming any functional form on the age-health profile and minimize potential bias in identifying the causal effect of retirement on health status in the short term. Estimates indicate an 8% decline in the cognitive functioning score of retirees and a 28% increase in the CESD depression scale. The likelihood of being in good health status declined by 16%. The transition from working to retirement has more significant negative impacts on males than females. In addition, retirement has more considerable adverse effects on less-educated individuals compared to high-educated individuals. The short-term effects of retirement on health are consistent and robust across different bandwidths, weighting kernel functions, and age-profile specifications. Moreover, the Treatment Effect Derivative test results highly support the external validity of the nonparametric estimates of the retirement effect on health.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.397
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.089 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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