As global deaths from COVID-19 continue to rise, the world’s governments, institutions, and agencies are still working toward an understanding of who is most at risk of death. In this study, data on all recorded COVID-19 deaths in Sweden up to May 7, 2020 are linked to high-quality and accurate individual-level background data from administrative registers of the total population. By means of individual-level survival analysis we demonstrate that being male, having less individual income, lower education, not being married all independently predict a higher risk of death from COVID-19 and from all other causes of death. Being an immigrant from a low- or middle-income country predicts higher risk of death from COVID-19 but not for all other causes of death. The main message of this work is that the interaction of the virus causing COVID-19 and its social environment exerts an unequal burden on the most disadvantaged members of society.

No abstract

Background Housing characteristics and neighbourhood context are considered risk factors for COVID-19 mortality among older adults. The aim of this study was to investigate how individual-level housing and neighbourhood characteristics are associated with COVID-19 mortality in older adults. Methods For this population-based, observational study, we used data from the cause-of-death register held by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare to identify recorded COVID-19 mortality and mortality from other causes among individuals (aged ≥70 years) in Stockholm county, Sweden, between March 12 and May 8, 2020. This information was linked to population-register data from December, 2019, including socioeconomic, demographic, and residential characteristics. We ran Cox proportional hazards regressions for the risk of dying from COVID-19 and from all other causes. The independent variables were area (m 2 ) per individual in the household, the age structure of the household, type of housing, confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the borough, and neighbourhood population density. All models were adjusted for individual age, sex, country of birth, income, and education. Findings Of 279 961 individuals identified to be aged 70 years or older on March 12, 2020, and residing in Stockholm in December, 2019, 274 712 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the study population. Between March 12 and May 8, 2020, 3386 deaths occurred, of which 1301 were reported as COVID-19 deaths. In fully adjusted models, household and neighbourhood characteristics were independently associated with COVID-19 mortality among older adults. Compared with living in a household with individuals aged 66 years or older, living with someone of working age (<66 years) was associated with increased COVID-19 mortality (hazard ratio 1·6; 95% CI 1·3–2·0). Living in a care home was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 mortality (4·1; 3·5–4·9) compared with living in independent housing. Living in neighbourhoods with the highest population density (≥5000 individuals per km 2 ) was associated with higher COVID-19 mortality (1·7; 1·1–2·4) compared with living in the least densely populated neighbourhoods (0 to <150 individuals per km 2 ). Interpretation Close exposure to working-age household members and neighbours is associated with increased COVID-19 mortality among older adults. Similarly, living in a care home is associated with increased mortality, potentially through exposure to visitors and care workers, but also due to poor underlying health among care-home residents. These factors should be considered when developing strategies to protect this group. Funding Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (FORTE), Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences.

Divorce, widowhood, living alone, low educational attainment, and low income increase the risk of each subtype of esophageal and gastric cancer. These associations require attention when high-risk individuals are being identified. Cancer 2016;122:207-212. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

I use hazard regression methods to examine how the age difference between spouses affects their survival. In many countries, the age difference between spouses at marriage has remained relatively stable for several decades. In Denmark, men are, on average, about three years older than the women they marry. Previous studies of the age gap between spouses with respect to mortality found that having a younger spouse is beneficial, while having an older spouse is detrimental for one's own survival. Most of the observed effects could not be explained satisfactorily until now, mainly because of methodological drawbacks and insufficiency of the data. The most common explanations refer to selection effects, caregiving in later life, and some positive psychological and sociological effects of having a younger spouse. The present study extends earlier work by using longitudinal Danish register data that include the entire history of key demographic events of the whole population from 1990 onward. Controlling for confounding factors such as education and wealth, results suggest that having a younger spouse is beneficial for men but detrimental for women, while having an older spouse is detrimental for both sexes.

BackgroundIt is not clear if the downward trend in cardiovascular disease (CVD) observed for ages up to 85 years can be extended to the oldest old, those 85 years and above.Methods and FindingsThis nationwide cohort study presents age specific trends of CVD as well as for myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke separately for the period 1994 to 2010 for individuals 85 to 99 years old in Sweden. Data were extracted from national registries. All analyses were based on one-year age- and sex- specific figures. The risk for CVD increased with every age above 85 years although the rate of increase leveled off with age. Over time, the risk for CVD and MI decreased for all ages, and for stroke for ages up to 89 years. However, the risk of MI increased until around 2001 in all age groups and both sexes but decreased after that. The overall mortality improved for all outcomes over the period 1994 to 2010, so did the survival within 28 days from an event. The average annual decline in mortality over all ages, 85 and above was 3% for MI, 2% for stroke and for 2% CVD. Corresponding figures for ages 60–84 was 4% for each of MI, stroke and CVD. The results were similar for men and women.ConclusionsImprovements in CVD risks observed among ages up to 85 years appear to have extended also to ages above 85 years, even if the rate of improvement plateaued with age. The improvements in survival for all ages up to 99 years give no support to the hypothesis that more fragile individuals reach higher ages. Additional research is needed to find out if improvement in survival can be seen also for the second and third event of CVD, stroke and MI.

Estimating the number of individuals living in a country is an essential task for demographers. This study assesses the potential bias in estimating the size of different migrant populations due to over-coverage in population registers. Over-coverage-individuals registered but not living in a country-is an increasingly pressing phenomenon; however, there is no common understanding of how to deal with over-coverage in demographic research. This study examines different approaches to and improvements in over-coverage estimation using Swedish total population register data. We assess over-coverage levels across migrant groups, test how estimates of age-specific death and fertility rates are affected when adjusting for overcoverage, and examine whether over-coverage can explain part of the healthy migrant paradox. Our results confirm the existence of over-coverage and we find substantial changes in mortality and fertility rates, when adjusted, for people of migrating age. Accounting for over-coverage is particularly important for correctly estimating migrant fertility.

The age-specific hip fracture incidence has decreased over time. Yet the lifetime risk of a hip fracture has not decreased because life expectancy in the population has increased in parallel. Overall, survival after hip fracture has not improved.