Sehr schön, wir freuen uns darauf! :)

@joross.bsky.social @besthenning.bsky.social @nadiasteiber.bsky.social

@georgkanitsar.bsky.social @mo-muehlboeck.bsky.social @schnizzl.bsky.social @annettescherp.bsky.social @klauspforr.bsky.social @jpschupp.bsky.social @berndweiss.bsky.social @glen-study.bsky.social @mhalla.bsky.social @saraalice.bsky.social @tobgummer.bsky.social @carinacornesse.bsky.social

Thanks, I agree!

Thank you!

I gratefully acknowledge the funding provided by the European Research Council for the project LETHE as well as the support by ÖAW and WIC for the research group Health and Longevity. They are who made the publication, especially as open access, possible! (11/11)

Summing up (thanks for bearing with me!): MEHM-data are widely available and using GSEM to combine them into a single, interval-scaled indicator of health is possible and results in a less biases health estimate than SRH. (10/11)

Anything above the red line(s) are significant 'biases'. We see that education and age biases were not significant for men using MEHM(+) but for SRH. Nominally, this is also true for women. Also generally for income and optimism. Great! (9/11)

That's great - but a little unidimensional. To dig a little deeper, I chose an approach I already used for a different paper: controlling as much health information as possible, then analyzing the residuals to identify biases:

twitter.com/PatLazarevic... (8/11)

Great, but are these indicators any good?

At least they seem to reduce age biases. Using the same subjective question, younger people tend to underestimate their 'objective' health, older people overestimate. MEHM(+) reduces this, making the responses more comparable. (7/11)

It does! I extracted an indicator from MEHM and MEHM+. MEHM +also includes pain and multimorbidity, which are also important for rating one's health: twitter.com/PatLazarevic...

GSEM is flexible for adding more variables if you have them! (6/11)

Great, but are these indicators any good?
At least they seem to reduce age biases. Using the same subjective question, younger people tend to underestimate their 'objective' health, older people overestimate. MEHM(+) reduces this, making the responses more comparable. (7/11)

Using DEAS-data of Germans aged 40-85 (by Deutsches Zentrum für Altersfragen), I wanted to combine the MEHM into 1 indicator. Cronbach's α was great across age groups (esp. for a short scale!).
Next step: combining them using generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) - does it work? (5/11)