Views
1 year ago

The prevalence and dynamics of social care receipt George Stoye

R125_The%20prevalence%20and%20dynamics%20of%20social%20care%20receipt

Appendix C: Additional

Appendix C: Additional Tables Any assistance Informal assistance Formal assistance Effect Std error Effect Std error Effect Std error Aged 75–84 0.071*** (0.021) 0.062*** (0.021) 0.029*** (0.011) Aged 85+ 0.115*** (0.041) 0.109*** (0.042) 0.047* (0.028) Female 0.079*** (0.020) 0.069*** (0.020) 0.014 (0.009) Male · · · · · · Couple · · · · · · Always single –0.209*** (0.047) –0.167*** (0.047) –0.049 (0.032) Widowed –0.127*** (0.023) –0.144*** (0.023) 0.013 (0.014) Separated/divorced –0.149*** (0.032) –0.159*** (0.032) 0.002 (0.020) Lose partner between interviews New partner between interviews –0.059 (0.057) –0.040 (0.059) 0.040 (0.042) 0.244 (0.191) 0.285 (0.195) 0.080 (0.112) No siblings · · · · · · Has sibling(s) –0.018 (0.019) –0.025 (0.019) –0.005 (0.011) No children 0.038 (0.033) –0.018 (0.034) 0.057** (0.024) Has child(ren) · · · · · · Low education 0.028 (0.026) 0.023 (0.026) 0.010 (0.015) Mid education 0.041* (0.024) 0.033 (0.024) 0.005 (0.013) High education · · · · · · Least wealthy 0.107** (0.053) 0.106* (0.056) –0.025 (0.041) Wealth quintile 2 0.107*** (0.032) 0.128*** (0.032) –0.021 (0.017) Wealth quintile 3 0.042 (0.026) 0.062** (0.025) –0.031** (0.014) Wealth quintile 4 0.058** (0.025) 0.072*** (0.024) –0.005 (0.015) Wealthiest · · · · · · Homeowner 0.044 (0.045) 0.029 (0.049) –0.003 (0.037) Other tenure · · · · · · Self-reported health: Excellent/Very good · · · · · · Good 0.008 (0.020) 0.002 (0.020) –0.001 (0.011) © Institute for Fiscal Studies 57

The Prevalence and Dynamics of Social Care Receipt Any assistance Informal assistance Formal assistance Effect Std error Effect Std error Effect Std error Fair/Poor/Very bad 0.062** (0.028) 0.061** (0.027) –0.008 (0.016) Ever diagnosed with: Parkinson’s disease –0.097 (0.135) –0.058 (0.126) –0.078** (0.032) Alzheimer’s disease 0.370*** (0.140) 0.381*** (0.135) 0.295** (0.125) Blood disorder 0.080 (0.149) 0.139 (0.148) –0.067* (0.039) Congestive heart failure 0.400*** (0.131) 0.421*** (0.132) –0.034 (0.027) New diagnoses: Dementia 0.201* (0.103) 0.165 (0.104) –0.001 (0.056) Alzheimer’s disease 0.135 (0.135) 0.187 (0.126) –0.181*** (0.054) Asthma –0.178*** (0.055) –0.168*** (0.057) 0.009 (0.037) High blood pressure –0.072* (0.043) –0.066 (0.041) 0.001 (0.019) Congestive heart failure 0.050 (0.104) 0.079 (0.121) –0.071* (0.038) Angina –0.049 (0.081) –0.027 (0.079) –0.050** (0.021) Diabetes –0.036 (0.054) –0.018 (0.055) –0.041*** (0.014) Stroke 0.042 (0.058) 0.061 (0.060) –0.063** (0.027) High cholesterol –0.002 (0.040) 0.024 (0.039) –0.036** (0.014) Parkinson’s disease –0.184** (0.083) –0.188** (0.085) –0.147* (0.084) Observations 1,842 1,842 1,842 R-squared 0.358 0.318 0.175 Note: Results from linear probability models. For example, –0.052 in the first cell indicates that those who report a new difficulty with mobility between interviews are 5.2 percentage points less likely to report receiving care in their next interview than an otherwise-identical individual who did not report a new mobility difficulty (the reference category). Results are clustered at the individual level, and standard errors are robust to heteroscedasticity. ***, ** and * indicate significance at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels, respectively. Regressions control for whether individuals ever had a diagnosis of lung disease, asthma, arthritis, cancer, psychiatric problems, blood disorders, hypertension, angina, heart attack, heart failure, heart murmur, heart rhythm, diabetes, stroke, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, osteoporosis or high cholesterol, whether they experienced a new diagnosis of one of these categories between interviews, and dummy variables for the wave in which they were first interviewed. Related coefficients that are not statistically significant are not displayed in this table. Sample is restricted to individuals who appeared in two consecutive surveys, who did not receive care at the time of their initial interview and who did not report any difficulties in their initial interview (but do in their second interview). Source: Authors’ calculations using ELSA 2002–03 to 2010–11. 58 © Institute for Fiscal Studies

The dynamics of social assistance benefit receipt in Britain