Cited by 94Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management

The forgotten griever: A nationwide follow-up study of mortality subsequent to the death of a sibling

Open access
Rostila, M., Saarela, J., Kawachi, I.·2012·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

Previous findings have suggested that the loss of a family member is associated with mortality among bereaved family members. The least-studied familial relationship in the bereavement literature is that of siblings, although loss of a sibling may also involve health consequences. The authors conducted a follow-up study based on data from the Swedish total population register, covering the period 1981-2002. Using Cox regression, mortality risk ratios for bereaved and nonbereaved persons aged 18-69 years were estimated. All-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality (unnatural causes, natural causes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, suicide, accidents, and all other causes) were examined. In men, the mortality risk for bereaved persons versus nonbereaved persons was 1.26 (95% confidence interval: 1.22, 1.30), and in women it was 1.33 (95% confidence interval: 1.28, 1.39). An elevated mortality risk associated with a sibling's death was found in all age groups studied, but the association was generally stronger at younger ages and could be observed predominantly after more than 1 year of follow-up. There was also an increased mortality risk if the sibling had died from a discordant main cause, which may strengthen the possibility that the association observed is not due to confounding alone.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/aje/kws163

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Rostila, M., Saarela, J., & Kawachi, I.
Affiliations
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Åbo Akademi University (FI)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Rostila, M.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2012-07-19
Volume
176
Issue
4
Pages
338-346
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2112729307
Cited by
94
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Insurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Keywords
loss of a sibling, mortality risk, bereavement, grief, cardiovascular mortality, cancer mortality, suicide, cause-specific mortality, sex differences, age differences
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Bereavement, Cause of Death, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Registries, Sex Factors, Sweden, Proportional Hazards Models, Siblings, Young Adult

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