15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      Are you tired of sifting through news that doesn't interest you?
      Personalize your Karger newsletter today and get only the news that matters to you!

      Sign up

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Impact of Low Vision on Employment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: We investigated the influence of self-reported corrected eyesight on several variables describing the perception by employees and self-employed persons of their employment. Methods: Our study was based on data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). SHARE is a multidisciplinary, cross-national database of microdata on health, socioeconomic status, social and family networks, collected on 31,115 individuals in 11 European countries and in Israel. With the help of ordered logistic regressions and binary logistic regressions, we analyzed the influence of perceived visual impairment – corrected by 19 covariates capturing socioeconomic and health- related factors – on 10 variables describing the respondents’ employment situation. Results: Based on data covering 10,340 working individuals, the results of the logistic and ordered regressions indicate that respondents with lower levels of self-reported general eyesight were significantly less satisfied with their jobs, felt they had less freedom to decide, less opportunity to develop new skills, less support in difficult situations, less recognition for their work, and an inadequate salary. Respondents with a lower eyesight level more frequently reported that they feared their health might limit their ability to work before regular retirement age and more often indicated that they were seeking early retirement. Conclusions: Analysis of this dataset from 12 countries demonstrates the strong impact of self-reported visual impairment on individual employment, and therefore on job satisfaction, productivity, and well-being.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The economic burden of major adult visual disorders in the United States.

          To estimate the societal economic burden and the governmental budgetary impact of the following visual disorders among US adults aged 40 years and older: visual impairment, blindness, refractive error, age-related macular degeneration, cataracts, diabetic retinopathy, and primary open-angle glaucoma. We estimated 3 components of economic burden: direct medical costs, other direct costs, and productivity losses. We used private insurance and Medicare claims data to estimate direct medical costs; epidemiologic evidence from multiple published sources to estimate other direct costs, such as nursing home costs; and data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation to estimate productivity losses. We used budgetary documents and our direct medical and other direct cost estimates to approximate the governmental budgetary impact. We estimated that the annual total financial burden of major adult visual disorders is $35.4 billion ($16.2 billion in direct medical costs, $11.1 billion in other direct costs, and $8 billion in productivity losses) and that the annual governmental budgetary impact is $13.7 billion. Major visual disorders among Americans older than 40 years result in substantial economic costs for the US economy. Well-designed public health programs may have the ability to reduce this burden in the future.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What is the concordance between the medical record and patient self-report as data sources for ambulatory care?

              The validity of quality of care assessments relies upon data quality, yet little is known about the relative completeness and validity of data sources for evaluating the quality of care. We evaluated concordance between ambulatory medical record and patient survey data. Levels of concordance, variations by type of item, sources of disagreement between data sources, and implications for quality of care assessment efforts are discussed. This was an observational study that included 1270 patients sampled from 39 West Coast medical organizations with at least 1 of the following: diabetes, ischemic heart disease, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or low back pain. Items from both data sources were grouped into 4 conceptual domains: diagnosis, clinical services delivered, counseling and referral, and medication use. We present total agreement, kappa, sensitivity, and specificity at the item and domain-levels and for all items combined. We found good concordance between survey and medical records overall, but there was substantial variation within and across domains. The worst concordance was in the counseling and referrals domain, the best in the medication use domain. Patients were able to report with good sensitivity on memorable items. Quality ratings are likely to vary in differing directions, depending on the data source used. The most appropriate data source for analyses of components of and overall quality of care must be considered in light of study objectives and resources. We recommend data collection from multiple sources to most accurately portray the patient and provider experience of medical care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                OPH
                Ophthalmologica
                10.1159/issn.0030-3755
                Ophthalmologica
                S. Karger AG
                0030-3755
                1423-0267
                2010
                October 2010
                01 July 2010
                : 224
                : 6
                : 381-388
                Affiliations
                aResearch Institute for Labour Economics and Labour Law, University of St. Gallen, bInstitute of Ophthalmology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, and cUniversity of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; dInstitute for Consumer and Household Economics, University of Hohenheim-Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
                Author notes
                *Daniel Mojon, MD, Institute of Ophthalmology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, CH–9007 St. Gallen (Switzerland), Tel. +41 71 494 28 24, Fax +41 71 494 28 82, E-Mail daniel.mojon@kssg.ch
                Article
                316688 Ophthalmologica 2010;224:381–388
                10.1159/000316688
                20606492
                055de92e-d8db-4585-9cb1-03aab1c8173a
                © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 29 September 2009
                : 02 September 2010
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, References: 36, Pages: 8
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Vision sciences,Ophthalmology & Optometry,Pathology
                Visual impairment,Retirement,Salary,Job satisfaction,Employment

                Comments

                Comment on this article