Probit vs. semi-nonparametric estimation: examining the role of disability on institutional entry for older adults

Abstract

Public health professionals can use these results to better understand why certain interventions have not shown promise. Equally important, healthcare workers can use this research to evaluate which type of treatment plans may delay institutionalization and improve the quality of life for older adults. Implications for rehabilitation With on-going global aging, understanding the association between disability and institutional entry is important in devising successful rehabilitation interventions. Semi-nonparametric is preferred to probit and shows ambulatory and cognitive impairments present high risk for institutional entry (long-term care). Informal caregiving and home-based care require further examination as forms of rehabilitation/therapy for certain types of disabilities.

Access to Long-Term Care for Minority Populations: A Systematic Review

“…We screened 191 studies at the full-text stage and selected 59 studies for inclusion. Of the 60 studies, 42 were conducted in the United States (Ahmed, Ali, Lefante, Mullick, & Kinney, 2006; Ahmed, Allman, & DeLong, 2003; Akamigbo, 2007; Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2006, 2007; Andel, Hyer, & Slack, 2007; Angel, Angel, Aranda, & Miles, 2004; Angel, Douglas, & Angel, 2003; Angelelli, Grabowski, & Mor, 2006; Aykan, 2002; Baxter, Bryant, Scarbro, & Shetterly, 2001; Berridge & Mor, 2017; Cai, Salmon, & Rodgers, 2009; Duffy, Jackson, Schim, Ronis, & Fowler, 2006; Feng, Fennell, Tyler, Clark, & Mor, 2011; Friedman, Steinwachs, Rathouz, Burton, & Mukamel, 2005; Gandhi, Lim, Davis, & Chen, 2017; Gaugler, Kane, Kane, & Newcomer, 2006; Gaugler, Leach, Clay, & Newcomer, 2004; Goodwin, Howrey, Zhang, & Kuo, 2011; Harris, 2007; Harris & Cooper, 2006; Iwasaki, Pierson, Madison, & McCurry, 2016; Jackson, Johnson, & Roberts, 2008; Jang, Kim, Chiriboga, & Cho, 2008; Kersting, 2001a,b; Liu, Wissoker, & Swett, 2007; McCormick et al, 2002; McLaughlin, Elahi, Ciesielski, & Pomerantz, 2016; Miller, Schneider, & Rosenheck, 2011; Min, 2005; Putney, Keary, Hebert, Krinsky, & Halmo, 2018; Quigley, 2017; Riley, 2019; Rodriguez, 2004; Sharma, 2017; Spillman & Long, 2009; Stein, Beckerman, & Sherman, 2010; Stevens et al, 2004; Temple, Andel, & Dobbs, 2010; Yaffe et al, 2002), seven in Canada (Brotman, Ryan, & Cormier, 2003; Forgues, Doucet, & Noël, 2011; Gui & Koropeckyj-Cox, 2016; Kortes-Miller, Boulé, Wilson, & Stinchcombe, 2018; Lai, 2004; Metz, 2007; Qureshi et al, 2021), three in Norway (Arora, Rechel, Bergland, Straiton, & Debesay, 2020; Czapka & Sagbakken, 2020; Hanssen & Tran, 2018), two in Australia (Basic, Shanley, & Gonzales, 2017; Waling et al, 2019), two in Sweden (Heikkilä & Ekman, 2003; Innes, 2020), and one each in Belgium (Ahaddour, van den Branden, & Broeckaert, 2016…”

“…Of the 60 studies, 33 studies were rated as being of excellent quality (Akamigbo, 2007; Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2006, 2007; Arora et al, 2020; Basic et al, 2017; Berridge & Mor, 2017; Brotman et al, 2003; Cai et al, 2009; Chui et al, 2019; Chung et al, 2008; Czapka & Sagbakken, 2020; Friedman et al, 2005; Gandhi et al, 2017; Gaugler et al, 2006; Gui & Koropeckyj-Cox, 2016; Harris, 2007; Harris & Cooper, 2006; Heikkilä & Ekman, 2003; Liu et al, 2007; McCormick et al, 2002; Metz, 2007; Miller et al, 2011; Min, 2005; Putney et al, 2018; Quigley, 2017; Qureshi et al, 2021; Riley, 2019; Rodriguez, 2004; Sharma, 2017; Spillman & Long, 2009; Stein et al, 2010; Stevens et al, 2004; Yaffe et al, 2002), 22 were rated good quality (Ahmed et al, 2003, 2006; Andel et al, 2007; Angel et al, 2003, 2004; Aykan, 2002; Forgues et al, 2011; Gaugler et al, 2004; Goodwin et al, 2011; Hanssen & Tran, 2018; Herat-Gunaratne et al, 2020; Iwasaki et al, 2016; Jackson et al, 2008; Jenkins Morales & Robert, 2020; Kersting, 2001a,b; Kortes-Miller et al, 2018; Lai, 2004; McLaughlin et al, 2016; Tenand et al, 2020; Travers, Hirschman, & Naylor, 2020; Waling et al, 2019), and 5 were rated fair quality (Appendix 6) (Ahaddour et al, 2016; Innes, 2020; Jang et al, 2008; Lehnert, Heuchert, Hussain, & König, 2019; Mahieu, Cavolo, & Gastmans, 2019).…”

“…Twenty-eight studies reported the influence of minority status on long-term care admission (Ahmed et al, 2003, 2006; Akamigbo, 2007; Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2006, 2007; Andel et al, 2007; Angel et al, 2003, 2004; Aykan, 2002; Berridge & Mor, 2017; Cai et al, 2009; Friedman et al, 2005; Gandhi et al, 2017; Gaugler et al, 2004, 2006; Goodwin et al, 2011; Harris, 2007; Harris & Cooper, 2006; Jenkins Morales & Robert, 2020; Kersting, 2001a,b; Liu et al, 2007; Miller et al, 2011; Qureshi et al, 2021; Sharma, 2017; Spillman & Long, 2009; Stevens et al, 2004; Yaffe et al, 2002). All studies were conducted in the United States.…”

“…There were 21 studies comparing two or more ethnocultural groups (Table 2) (Ahmed et al, 2003, 2006; Akamigbo, 2007; Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2006, 2007; Andel et al, 2007; Aykan, 2002; Friedman et al, 2005; Gaugler et al, 2006; Goodwin et al, 2011; Harris, 2007; Harris & Cooper, 2006; Kersting, 2001a,b; Liu et al, 2007; Miller et al, 2011; Sharma, 2017; Spillman & Long, 2009; Stevens et al, 2004; Temple et al, 2010; Yaffe et al, 2002). Two studies only reported crude outcome measures or estimates based on bivariate analyses (Ahmed et al, 2003; Stevens et al, 2004).…”

“…Twenty-one studies used multivariable regressions, adjusting for a variety of covariates (Appendix 6). Outcomes examined in these studies included incident admissions to long-term care ( n = 12) (Ahmed et al, 2006; Akamigbo, 2007; Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2006, 2007; Friedman et al, 2005; Goodwin et al, 2011; Harris & Cooper, 2006; Kersting, 2001a,b; Liu et al, 2007; Sharma, 2017; Spillman & Long, 2009) and time to admission ( n = 6) (Akamigbo & Wolinsky, 2007; Andel et al, 2007; Aykan, 2002; Gaugler et al, 2006; Temple et al, 2010; Yaffe et al, 2002), as well as both time to and odds of an incident admission ( n = 1) (Cai et al, 2009). Length of follow-up ranged from immediate admission post hospital discharge to 12 years following baseline measurement (e.g., from a survey).…”