Cited by 521Health disparities and outcomesPublic Health and Social InequalitiesHealth, psychology, and well-being

Cumulative biological risk and socio-economic differences in mortality: MacArthur Studies of Successful Aging

Seeman, Teresa E, Crimmins, Eileen, Huang, Mei-Hua, Singer, Burton, Bucur, Alexander, Gruenewald, Tara, Berkman, Lisa F, Reuben, David B·2004·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

Previous research has suggested that socio-economic status (SES) differences in mortality are only partially explained by differences in life-style, psychological and social factors. Seven year mortality data (1988-1995) from the MacArthur Study of Successful Aging, a longitudinal study of adults, aged 70-79, from New Haven, CT; East Boston, MA; and Durham, NC; were used to test the hypothesis that a cumulative measure of biological dysregulation ("allostatic load"), reflecting multiple regulatory systems, would serve as a further mediator of SES differences in mortality. Logistic regression analyses revealed that a cumulative index of biological risk explained 35.4% of the difference in mortality risk between those with higher versus lower SES (as measured by less than high school education versus high school or greater educational attainment). Importantly, the cumulative index provided independent explanatory power, over and above a measure of doctor-diagnosed disease, though the latter also contributed to education-related variation in mortality risks. The summary measure of biological risk also accounted for more variance than individual biological parameters, suggesting the potential value of a multi-systems view of biological pathways through which SES ultimately affects morbidity and mortality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00402-7

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seeman, T. E., Crimmins, E., Huang, M.-H., Singer, B., Bucur, A., Gruenewald, T., Berkman, L. F., & Reuben, D. B.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Seeman, Teresa E
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-05
Volume
58
Issue
10
Pages
1985-1997
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2083274461
Cited by
521
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 27
FWCI
17.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  • University of Vermont
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ag017056-03)
  • National Institute on Aging (AG17265, P30AG017265, AG 17056)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, psychology, and well-being
Keywords
socioeconomic status, mortality, allostatic load, biological dysregulation, successful aging, older adults, educational attainment, disease diagnosis
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Aged, Aging, Allosteric Regulation, Boston, Connecticut, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Life Style, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mortality, North Carolina, Social Class, Socioeconomic Factors, Sociology, Medical, Logistic Models, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review