Skip to main content

Table 5 Association between caregiver type and all-cause mortality among urban and rural Chinese older adults by residence

From: Association between primary caregiver type and mortality among Chinese older adults with disability: a prospective cohort study

Residence of care receiver Caregiver type Multivariable adjusted with interaction term in residence and type
Count HR (95% CI) P-value
Urban Married (N = 169)
Spouse 83 Ref.  
Son/daughter-in-law 36 1.85 (1.14, 3.01) .013
Daughter/son-in-law 30 1.54 (0.86, 2.75) .133
Widowed (N = 1754)
Son/daughter-in-law 877 Ref.  
Daughter/son-in-law 492 0.88 (0.77, 1.02) .074
Grandchildren 183 0.89 (0.72, 1.09) .274
Domestic helper 202 0.84 (0.68, 1.03) .100
Rural Married (N = 191)
Spouse 99 Ref.  
Son/daughter-in-law 70 1.27 (0.87, 1.86) .219
Daughter/son-in-law 17 1.83 (0.92, 3.57) .080
Widowed (N = 2164)
Son/daughter-in-law 1553 Ref.  
Daughter/son-in-law 360 0.87 (0.76, 1.00) .046
Grandchildren 214 0.84 (0.70, 1.00) .055
Domestic helper 37 1.50 (1.04, 2.18) .031
  1. Abbreviations: HR Hazard ratio, CI Confidence interval, ADL Activity of daily living
  2. Notes: Other caregiver types (including other relatives, neighbours, social services, and nobody) were excluded due to small sample sizes
  3. Adjusted variables include age, sex, number of ADL disability, co-residence (living with children vs. not living with children), education years, financial independence (yes vs. no), self-rated health (very good/good/so-so/bad/very bad), number of chronic conditions, cognitive impaired (MMSE< 18), and caregiving quality