Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population: Prospective cohort study

Shan P. Tsai, Judy K. Wendt, Robin P. Donnelly, Geert De Jong, Farah S. Ahmed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether early retirement is associated with better survival. Design: Long term prospective cohort study. Setting: Petroleum and petrochemical industry, United States. Subjects: Past employees of Shell Oil who retired at ages 55, 60, and 65 between 1 January 1973 and 31 December 2003. Main outcome measure: Hazard ratio of death adjusted for sex, year of entry to study, and socioeconomic status. Results: Subjects who retired early at 55 and who were still alive at 65 had a significantly higher mortality than those who retired at 65 (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.73). Mortality was also significantly higher for subjects in the first 10 years after retirement at 55 compared with those who continued working (1.89, 1.58 to 2.27). After adjustment, mortality was similar between those who retired at 60 and those who retired at 65 (1.06, 0.92 to 1.22). Mortality did not differ for the first five years after retirement at 60 compared with continuing work at 60 (1.04, 0.82 to 1.31). Conclusions: Retiring early at 55 or 60 was not associated with better survival than retiring at 65 in a cohort of past employees of the petrochemical industry. Mortality was higher in employees who retired at 55 than in those who continued working.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)995-997
Number of pages3
JournalBMJ (Online)
Volume331
Issue number7523
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 29 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Retirement
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies
Mortality
Population
Social Class
Industry
Oils
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Confidence Intervals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Tsai, S. P., Wendt, J. K., Donnelly, R. P., De Jong, G., & Ahmed, F. S. (2005). Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population: Prospective cohort study. BMJ (Online), 331(7523), 995-997. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38586.448704.E0

Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population : Prospective cohort study. / Tsai, Shan P.; Wendt, Judy K.; Donnelly, Robin P.; De Jong, Geert; Ahmed, Farah S.

In: BMJ (Online), Vol. 331, No. 7523, 29.10.2005, p. 995-997.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tsai, SP, Wendt, JK, Donnelly, RP, De Jong, G & Ahmed, FS 2005, 'Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population: Prospective cohort study', BMJ (Online), vol. 331, no. 7523, pp. 995-997. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38586.448704.E0
Tsai, Shan P. ; Wendt, Judy K. ; Donnelly, Robin P. ; De Jong, Geert ; Ahmed, Farah S. / Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population : Prospective cohort study. In: BMJ (Online). 2005 ; Vol. 331, No. 7523. pp. 995-997.
@article{0d1293ab4073448eb31e84dbcb735096,
title = "Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population: Prospective cohort study",
abstract = "Objective: To assess whether early retirement is associated with better survival. Design: Long term prospective cohort study. Setting: Petroleum and petrochemical industry, United States. Subjects: Past employees of Shell Oil who retired at ages 55, 60, and 65 between 1 January 1973 and 31 December 2003. Main outcome measure: Hazard ratio of death adjusted for sex, year of entry to study, and socioeconomic status. Results: Subjects who retired early at 55 and who were still alive at 65 had a significantly higher mortality than those who retired at 65 (hazard ratio 1.37, 95{\%} confidence interval 1.09 to 1.73). Mortality was also significantly higher for subjects in the first 10 years after retirement at 55 compared with those who continued working (1.89, 1.58 to 2.27). After adjustment, mortality was similar between those who retired at 60 and those who retired at 65 (1.06, 0.92 to 1.22). Mortality did not differ for the first five years after retirement at 60 compared with continuing work at 60 (1.04, 0.82 to 1.31). Conclusions: Retiring early at 55 or 60 was not associated with better survival than retiring at 65 in a cohort of past employees of the petrochemical industry. Mortality was higher in employees who retired at 55 than in those who continued working.",
author = "Tsai, {Shan P.} and Wendt, {Judy K.} and Donnelly, {Robin P.} and {De Jong}, Geert and Ahmed, {Farah S.}",
year = "2005",
month = "10",
day = "29",
doi = "10.1136/bmj.38586.448704.E0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "331",
pages = "995--997",
journal = "British Medical Journal",
issn = "0959-8146",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "7523",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Age at retirement and long term survival of an industrial population

T2 - Prospective cohort study

AU - Tsai, Shan P.

AU - Wendt, Judy K.

AU - Donnelly, Robin P.

AU - De Jong, Geert

AU - Ahmed, Farah S.

PY - 2005/10/29

Y1 - 2005/10/29

N2 - Objective: To assess whether early retirement is associated with better survival. Design: Long term prospective cohort study. Setting: Petroleum and petrochemical industry, United States. Subjects: Past employees of Shell Oil who retired at ages 55, 60, and 65 between 1 January 1973 and 31 December 2003. Main outcome measure: Hazard ratio of death adjusted for sex, year of entry to study, and socioeconomic status. Results: Subjects who retired early at 55 and who were still alive at 65 had a significantly higher mortality than those who retired at 65 (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.73). Mortality was also significantly higher for subjects in the first 10 years after retirement at 55 compared with those who continued working (1.89, 1.58 to 2.27). After adjustment, mortality was similar between those who retired at 60 and those who retired at 65 (1.06, 0.92 to 1.22). Mortality did not differ for the first five years after retirement at 60 compared with continuing work at 60 (1.04, 0.82 to 1.31). Conclusions: Retiring early at 55 or 60 was not associated with better survival than retiring at 65 in a cohort of past employees of the petrochemical industry. Mortality was higher in employees who retired at 55 than in those who continued working.

AB - Objective: To assess whether early retirement is associated with better survival. Design: Long term prospective cohort study. Setting: Petroleum and petrochemical industry, United States. Subjects: Past employees of Shell Oil who retired at ages 55, 60, and 65 between 1 January 1973 and 31 December 2003. Main outcome measure: Hazard ratio of death adjusted for sex, year of entry to study, and socioeconomic status. Results: Subjects who retired early at 55 and who were still alive at 65 had a significantly higher mortality than those who retired at 65 (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.73). Mortality was also significantly higher for subjects in the first 10 years after retirement at 55 compared with those who continued working (1.89, 1.58 to 2.27). After adjustment, mortality was similar between those who retired at 60 and those who retired at 65 (1.06, 0.92 to 1.22). Mortality did not differ for the first five years after retirement at 60 compared with continuing work at 60 (1.04, 0.82 to 1.31). Conclusions: Retiring early at 55 or 60 was not associated with better survival than retiring at 65 in a cohort of past employees of the petrochemical industry. Mortality was higher in employees who retired at 55 than in those who continued working.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27644572586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=27644572586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmj.38586.448704.E0

DO - 10.1136/bmj.38586.448704.E0

M3 - Article

C2 - 16243848

AN - SCOPUS:27644572586

VL - 331

SP - 995

EP - 997

JO - British Medical Journal

JF - British Medical Journal

SN - 0959-8146

IS - 7523

ER -