Skip to main content
Download PDF

Association of psychological resilience with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in older adults: a cohort study

BMC Public Health volume 24, Article number: 1989 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Psychological resilience has been associated with increased longevity in the oldest old; however, its significance in the broader older adult population has not been thoroughly explored. There is a lack of understanding regarding its relationship with cause-specific mortality in older adults. This study aims to address these gaps by investigating the association between psychological resilience and both overall mortality and cause-specific mortality in individuals aged 65 and older.

Methods

We enrolled 4,935 participants aged 65 and older in the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey, with baseline assessments conducted in 2014 and follow-up surveys in 2018. To evaluate the associations between psychological resilience and mortality, we used Cox proportional hazards models. Additionally, we employed restricted cubic spline plots to illustrate the dose-response relationships between these variables.

Results

During a mean (Standard Deviation) follow-up of 3.2 years (1.2), 1726 participants died. Higher psychological resilience was independently associated with lower all-cause mortality risk (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67–0.82) and cause-specific mortality from cardiovascular disease (HR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.59–0.93), respiratory diseases (HR 0.63, 95% CI:0.45–0.87), and other causes (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60–0.78), excluding cancer-related mortality. Similar effects were evident when examining the psychological resilience score. The dose-response analysis further indicated a gradual decrease in mortality risk corresponding to higher psychological resilience scores. Interaction analyses revealed that psychological resilience has a more pronounced effect on mortality from other causes among economically independent older adults (P-interaction = 0.02).

Conclusions

Enhanced psychological resilience is independently associated with reduced all-cause and some cause-specific mortality in older adults. These findings underscore the importance of addressing psychological factors in the promotion of healthy aging and longevity.

Peer Review reports

Background

The global demographic shift towards an aging population emerges as one of the most significant trends of the 21st century. As of 2019, the worldwide population of older adults was approximately 700 million [1]. Projections indicate that this number will double by 2050, with the population of individuals aged 80 and above expected to triple during the same period [1]. This demographic transition presents various opportunities and challenges for societies worldwide. One of the primary challenges is the escalating burden of chronic diseases and age-related health conditions, which significantly heighten the mortality risk among older adults. Confronting this demographic reality underscores the necessity to investigate the multifaceted determinants of mortality in older adults, informing strategies aimed at promoting healthy aging and extending life expectancy.

The relationship between psychological resilience and mortality risk has been an area of growing interest, holding significant implications for public health interventions targeting the well-being and longevity of aging populations. Psychological resilience is defined as an individual’s ability to adapt and rebound from adversity, stress, and challenging life events [2, 3]. Previous two studies in China explored the relationship between psychological resilience and longevity among centenarians and older adults aged ≥ 80 years [4, 5], respectively, illuminating the inverse association between higher psychological resilience and all-cause mortality, emphasizing the potential role of psychological factors in promoting longevity. The association between psychological resilience and mortality risk is grounded in several theoretical frameworks and mechanisms. Psychological resilience may mitigate the detrimental effects of stress on health. Resilient individuals often exhibit better stress management skills, leading to lower levels of stress hormones such as cortisol [6]. By buffering the physiological stress response, resilience can reduce the risk of these stress-related diseases. Resilient individuals are more likely to engage in health-promoting behaviors such as regular physical activity, a balanced diet, and adherence to medical advice [7]. These behaviors are critical in preventing and managing chronic diseases, thus potentially lowering mortality rates [8]. Psychological resilience is often associated with stronger social support networks, which provide emotional and practical assistance during health crises [9]. Resilient individuals tend to exhibit better immune responses, including the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, which can lower the risk of infections and improve disease management [10]. While previous research has established an inverse relationship between psychological resilience and all-cause mortality [4, 5], the extent to which this relationship varies by specific causes of death remains unclear. By distinguishing between different causes of mortality, we can identify particular health conditions that are more influenced by psychological resilience, thereby offering a nuanced understanding of its protective effects. In addition, previous studies predominantly focused on this specific age group. The broader applicability of the finding to the general older adult population remains a research gap that warrants exploration.

This study aims to bridge existing gaps in the literature by conducting a comprehensive cohort study that investigates the association between psychological resilience and both all-cause and cause-specific mortality in older adults, providing valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying healthy aging and longevity in this growing segment of the population.

Methods

Study design and participants

The study employed a prospective cohort design utilizing data from the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS), an extensive ongoing investigation primarily focused on older adults across various provinces in China. The CLHLS was initiated in 1998 and follow-up surveys were conducted in 2000, 2002, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2018. At its inception, the survey covered half of the counties or municipalities in 22 out of China’s 31 provinces. In the 2014 wave, it expanded its coverage to all 23 provinces, including Chengmai City in Hainan Province. The dataset includes individual-level information on demographics, health indicators, socioeconomic characteristics, and social and behavioral risk factors. It upholds high-quality data integrity, as confirmed by systematic evaluations ensuring randomness in attrition, credibility in measurement scales, and accuracy in reporting ages. A comprehensive description of CLHLS can be found elsewhere [11, 12].

For this study, baseline data were extracted from the 2014 wave of CLHLS because only the 2018 wave collected data on cause-specific deaths. The 2014 wave encompassed 7,192 individuals, achieving a follow-up response rate of 79.0% during the 2018 wave. To maintain focus on older adults, exclusion criteria were applied, which excluded participants younger than 65 years old (n = 85), those lost to follow-up (n = 1,511), individuals with missing psychological resilience data (n = 658), and cases with incorrect death dates (n = 3). Ultimately, 4,935 participants were included for analysis. Detailed information on the inclusion and exclusion criteria is provided in Supplementary Fig. 1. This study was approved by the Biomedical Ethics Committee of Peking University (IRB00001052-13074).

Assessment of psychological resilience

Psychological resilience was assessed using a five-item scale adapted from previous research [13,14,15]. The scale was designed to capture various dimensions of resilience pertinent to older adults, including optimism, coping strategies, emotional well-being, and decision-making autonomy. The specific items included in the scale were: “Feel the older you get, the more useless you are”, “Look on the bright side of things”, “Feel fearful or anxious”, “Feel lonely and isolated”, and “Make own decisions concerning personal affairs.” Participants rated their responses on a five-point scale ranging from “Always” to “Never”. Individual item scores were summed to generate a total resilience score, ranging from 5 to 25, with higher scores indicating greater psychological resilience (Supplementary Table 1). These items have been validated in previous studies involving older populations, demonstrating their relevance and sensitivity in measuring psychological resilience [13,14,15]. To categorize participants, psychological resilience was dichotomized into low (below the median) and high (above the median) levels based on the median score. Dichotomizing the psychological resilience score simplifies statistical analysis and facilitates comparisons between groups with differing resilience levels. Clinically, it aids in identifying individuals with low resilience for targeted interventions. This method aligns with previous research practice, enhancing comparability across study [13]. Using the median score as the cut-off ensures balanced group sizes and does not assume a specific score distribution, thereby improving statistical power in comparative analyses.

Outcome assessment

The classification of causes of mortality was conducted following the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10). The primary outcomes of interest were mortality from all causes and specific causes, including cardiovascular diseases (CVD) (ICD-10 codes I00-I99), respiratory diseases (ICD-10 codes J00–99), cancer (ICD-10 codes C00-C97), and other causes. Information regarding reported deaths was obtained from the next of kin of study participants. Survival time was calculated from the date of the first interview until either the date of death or the last follow-up assessment.

Covariates assessment

We incorporated a total of 23 covariates to comprehensively account for baseline sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle behaviors, and health status to control for potential confounders. The covariates were assessed only at baseline. The sociodemographic segment encompassed various facets, including age, gender (male or female), education level (0 years, 1–6 years, or > 6 years), residential setting (rural area or urban area), marital status (married or other statuses - divorced, widowed, or never married), living arrangements (living with family, living alone, or living in institution), and economic status (dependent or independent). Lifestyle behaviors were examined across multiple dimensions, encompassing smoking habits (never, current, or former), alcohol consumption (never, current, or former), regularity of exercise (never, current, or former), as well as the frequency of vegetable intake (daily, quite often, occasionally, rarely, or none), fruit intake (daily, quite often, occasionally, rarely, or none), meat consumption (daily, weekly, monthly, occasionally, rarely, or none), fish consumption (daily, weekly, monthly, occasionally, rarely, or none), and egg consumption (daily, weekly, monthly, occasionally, rarely, or none). The health characteristics section comprised body mass index (BMI), sleep time (< 6 h, 6 to 9 h, or ≥ 9 h), self-reported doctor-diagnosed conditions, including hypertension (yes or no), heart disease (yes or no), cerebrovascular disease (yes or no), diabetes mellitus (yes or no), respiratory diseases (encompassing pneumonia, bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma) (yes or no), and cancer (yes or no). BMI was categorized as underweight (< 18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5–23.9 kg/m2), overweight (24–27.9 kg/m2), or obese (≥ 28 kg/m2) [11]. The selection of covariates was guided by their established or potential influence on the outcomes under study, reflecting both theoretical considerations and empirical evidence from prior research [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. The rationale for including these nutritional variables is grounded in their significant role in influencing overall health status, disease prevention, and longevity [25, 26].

Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics of the study population were summarized as means and standard deviations (SDs) for continuous variables and as percentages for categorical variables. Missing data were addressed using Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations with predicted mean matching to ensure robust handling of the data gaps. The decision to use five imputations was based on Rubin’s rule, which suggests that a small number of imputations (typically between 3 and 10) is often sufficient to achieve stable and reliable estimates [27]. This approach enhances the robustness of our analysis by reducing the bias and increasing the efficiency of our statistical estimates. Detailed information on the missing variables is provided in Supplementary Table 2. The use of five imputations was chosen to balance computational efficiency with the need for accurate imputation, as it has been shown that increasing the number of imputations beyond five often yields diminishing returns in terms of statistical power and precision [28].

We tested the proportional hazards assumption using the Schoenfeld residual test, finding no evidence of violation of this assumption. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was utilized to construct survival curves for psychological resilience, with differences between groups assessed via log-rank testing. We calculated tolerance values and variance inflation factors (VIF) for each covariate. Our criteria for acceptable multicollinearity were tolerance values greater than 0.1 and VIF values less than 10. All covariates met these criteria, indicating the absence of significant multicollinearity. Cox proportional hazard models were applied to examine the association of psychological resilience with all-cause and cause-specific mortality, reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Model 1 was adjusted for baseline age and sex. Model 2 was further adjusted for a comprehensive set of potential confounders, including marital status, education level, residence, living arrangement, economic status, smoking status, alcohol consumption, regular exercise, sleep time, BMI, and prevalent medical conditions (hypertension, heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, respiratory disease, and cancer). Model 3 extended the adjustment variables to encompass dietary factors such as intake frequency of fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, and eggs, in addition to the variables in Model 2. The crude incidence rate (IR) of all-cause and cause-specific mortality was estimated per 1000 person-years. Additionally, a restricted cubic spline analysis was conducted to assess the dose-response relationship between changes in psychological resilience scores and the risk of mortality. This approach offers several advantages over linear or categorical analyses. Firstly, it allows for the assessment of potential non-linear relationships between variables, which may better capture complex associations present in the data. Secondly, it provides flexibility in modeling the shape of the dose-response curve, thus enhancing the accuracy of risk estimation. We set the reference values at the 50th percentile for psychological resilience scores (19 scores), using four knots at specific percentiles of their distributions (5th, 35th, 65th, and 95th). These knots were selected to ensure sufficient flexibility in capturing potential non-linear relationships while maintaining statistical robustness [29]. Moreover, we performed interaction and subgroup analyses by sex, age, marital status, residence, living arrangement, economic status, and BMI within a multivariable-adjusted model.

To ensure robustness, sensitivity analyses were conducted. Firstly, complete case analyses were performed, excluding participants with incomplete covariate data. Secondly, individuals with prevalent major chronic diseases (including heart disease, diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular disease, respiratory disease, or cancer) at baseline were excluded to explore potential reverse causality. Thirdly, to mitigate the potential impact of short-term follow-up, we excluded deaths occurring within the first year. This decision was made considering that the effects of psychological resilience on mortality typically unfold over a chronic timeframe. Finally, we employed propensity score matching (PSM) to ensure a balanced distribution of baseline characteristics among groups. Matching on a 1:1 ratio based on the propensity score was carried out using a nearest neighbor-matching algorithm, with a maximum caliper set at 0.05 of the propensity score. Adequate balance between groups was considered achieved when the standardized mean difference (SMD) was less than 0.1 [30].

All statistical analyses were executed using R statistical software version 4.2.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) with a significance threshold set at a two-tailed P value < 0.05.

Results

Characteristics of study participants

A total of 4935 older adults (52.0% female) with a mean age of 84.27 (10.02) years were included. Table 1 outlines the demographic and lifestyle characteristics of the study population. Participants reporting high levels of psychological resilience (51.7%) were typically younger, more often male, urban residents, married, living with family, literate, economically independent, smokers, alcohol consumers, engaged in regular exercise, possessed a higher BMI, experienced longer sleep duration, and reported sufficient intake of vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, and eggs, compared to those with lower levels of psychological resilience. Moreover, this group showed a lower incidence of cerebrovascular diseases.

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the participants
Full size table

After implementing PSM, our analysis retained 3368 participants. The SMDs of the covariates were consistently below 0.1, as illustrated in Supplementary Fig. 2. Furthermore, examination of baseline variables in Supplementary Table 3 revealed a high degree of balance between the two groups.

Association of psychological resilience with all-cause and cause-specific mortality

Over a median follow-up of 3.5 years (interquartile range: 2.7 to 4.2, totaling 16,016.75 person-years), a total of 1,726 participants (35.0%) experienced mortality. Among these deaths, 354 (20.5%) were attributed to CVD, 190 (11.0%) to respiratory diseases, 104 (6.0%) to cancer, and 1,078 (62.5%) to other causes.

Kaplan-Meier curves revealed significant survival differences linked to psychological resilience levels (log-rank test: p < .001) (Fig. 1). Specifically, those with low psychological resilience showed markedly lower survival rates. In comparison to those with low psychological resilience, individuals exhibiting high psychological resilience demonstrated a substantially reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.67–0.82) (Table 2). Cause-specific analyses revealed significant associations between high psychological resilience and reduced mortality from CVD (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59–0.93), respiratory diseases (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45–0.87), and other causes (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60–0.78), but not from cancer (Table 2).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Kaplan-Meier survival curves for all-cause mortality according to psychological resilience. The median survival duration is represented using a vertical dashed line

Full size image
Table 2 Hazard ratios for all-cause and cause-specific mortality according to psychological resilience
Full size table

For each incremental unit increase in psychological resilience score, there was a corresponding reduction in the HRs for various causes of mortality. Specifically, higher psychological resilience scores were associated with decreased risks for all-cause mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92–0.95), CVD mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90–0.97), respiratory disease mortality (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86–0.96), and mortality from other causes (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.90–0.94) (Table 2).

Furthermore, by employing the restricted cubic spline method, we identified a progressive reduction in the risks of all-cause mortality, CVD mortality, respiratory disease mortality, and mortality from other causes as scores in psychological resilience increased (Fig. 2 and Supplemental Fig. 3).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Dose-response association between psychological resilience and risk of all-cause mortality. Notes: Solid red lines are multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios, with shaded areas showing 95% confidence intervals derived from restricted cubic spline regressions with four knots. Multivariate models were adjusted for baseline age, sex, marital status, education, residence, living arrangement, economic status, smoking status, drinking status, regular exercise, sleep time, body mass index, hypertension, heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, respiratory disease, cancer, intake of fruit, intake of vegetable, intake of meat, intake of fish, and intake of egg

Full size image

Subgroup analyses

We conducted stratified analyses to examine the relationships between psychological resilience and all-cause as well as cause-specific mortality concerning potential risk factors, utilizing a fully adjusted model (Fig. 3 and Supplemental Fig. 4). We observed a notably stronger impact of psychological resilience on other-cause mortality among economically independent older adults compared to their economically dependent counterparts (P-value for interaction = 0.02). However, none of the other variables examined, including age, sex, marital status, residence, living arrangement, and BMI, significantly modified the relationships between psychological resilience and different causes of mortality.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Association of psychological resilience with all-cause mortality stratified by participant characteristics. HR hazard ratio; CI confidence interval. Notes: Each stratification controlled for all factors (baseline age, sex, marital status, education, residence, living arrangement, economic status, smoking status, drinking status, regular exercise, sleep time, body mass index, hypertension, heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, respiratory disease, cancer, intake of fruit, intake of vegetable, intake of meat, intake of fish, and intake of egg) except the stratification factor itself

Full size image

Sensitivity analyses

To validate our findings, we conducted sensitivity analyses (Supplementary Table 4). Even after excluding participants with missing covariate values, the relationships between psychological resilience and both all-cause and cause-specific mortality remained consistent. Furthermore, excluding participants with pre-existing conditions such as heart disease, diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular disease, respiratory disease, and cancer did not significantly alter the study’s conclusions. Similarly, excluding participants who died within one year of follow-up did not produce noteworthy changes in the outcomes. Lastly, the results obtained from PSM were consistent with those from our primary analysis.

Discussion

The findings of this cohort study provide significant insights into the association of psychological resilience with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in older adults. The independent associations between higher psychological resilience and decreased risks of all-cause mortality, CVD mortality, respiratory disease mortality, and mortality from other causes, excluding cancer-related mortality, underscore the potential importance of psychological factors in promoting healthy aging.

Previous studies in China have investigated the relationship between psychological resilience and longevity among centenarians and elderly individuals over 80 years old, revealing a negative correlation between high psychological resilience and all-cause mortality [4, 5]. These studies highlighted the potential role of psychological factors in promoting longevity but primarily focused on this specific age group. In our study, we extended the investigation to elderly individuals aged over 65 years. We found that psychological resilience was negatively associated with all-cause mortality. Subgroup analysis based on age revealed that this negative association was held for both those aged 80 years and above and those aged below 80 years. These findings replicate and expand upon previous research, underscoring the importance of psychological resilience in promoting longevity across a broader age range. In addition, our study goes beyond examining cause-specific mortality, revealing independent associations with lower mortality from CVD, respiratory diseases, and other causes. The observed distinctions in cause-specific mortality further contribute to this nuanced understanding, revealing varying associations with different causes of death. Nevertheless, there was a lack of a clear association between psychological resilience and cancer-related mortality. This discovery contrasts with an earlier study that implied possible connections between resilience and cancer outcomes [31], necessitating further investigation into potential moderating factors or mechanisms influencing these findings. Subsequent research could explore whether certain psychosocial variables or specific types of cancer within the broader category of cancer mortality show varied associations with psychological resilience.

In addition, we investigated the intriguing phenomenon of a notably stronger impact of psychological resilience on other-cause mortality among economically independent older adults in comparison to their economically dependent counterparts. Our findings clarify that economic status moderated the association of psychological resilience specifically with other-cause mortality, not with mortality in general. This distinction is crucial as it highlights that the protective effects of psychological resilience are more pronounced in non-specific causes of death among those who are financially independent. This phenomenon can be attributed to the increased autonomy and decision-making capabilities that come with financial self-sufficiency. Economic independence fosters a sense of control and purpose, thereby reinforcing psychological well-being [32,33,34] as a protective factor against mortality. Additionally, self-reliant individuals are more likely to adopt health-promoting behaviors and employ adaptive coping strategies [35, 36], which further enhances their resilience. In contrast, older adults who are economically dependent may face additional stressors related to financial instability [37], potentially reducing the impact of psychological resilience on mortality. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing targeted interventions aimed at bolstering resilience among vulnerable populations. By focusing on economically dependent individuals, who may not experience the full protective effects of psychological resilience, we can devise strategies to enhance their psychological well-being and ultimately promote healthy aging and longevity.

The potential mechanisms through which psychological resilience influences mortality are diverse and multifaceted. Our results show a significant association between higher psychological resilience and reduced CVD mortality. This finding aligns with previous research suggesting that psychological resilience can mitigate the adverse effects of stress and inflammation, which are critical factors in the development and progression of CVD [10]. Resilient individuals often have better stress management skills, leading to lower levels of stress hormones such as cortisol [38], which in turn reduces the risk of hypertension, atherosclerosis, and other cardiovascular conditions [39, 40]. Additionally, resilient individuals are more likely to engage in heart-healthy behaviors, such as regular exercise, a balanced diet, and adherence to medical advice [7]. These behaviors play a crucial role in preventing CVD and improving outcomes for those already diagnosed with the disease [41]. The association between higher psychological resilience and lower respiratory disease mortality highlights another critical pathway through which resilience can influence health outcomes. Chronic respiratory conditions, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, are exacerbated by stress and poor mental health [42]. Resilient individuals typically experience lower levels of stress and are better equipped to cope with chronic illnesses, which can lead to better disease management and improved survival rates. Psychological resilience may influence respiratory health through immunomodulation, as resilience has been linked to enhanced immune function, including the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines [10, 43]. This immunomodulatory effect may contribute to a reduced risk of respiratory infections and subsequently lower mortality from respiratory diseases. Moreover, psychological resilience has been linked to better adherence to treatment regimens and preventive measures, such as vaccinations [44] and avoiding smoking [45, 46], which are essential for managing respiratory diseases and preventing severe complications. Our study also found a significant association between higher psychological resilience and reduced mortality from other causes. This broad category encompasses various health conditions, many of which can be influenced by the psychosocial and behavioral factors associated with resilience. For instance, resilient individuals often have stronger social support networks [47], which can provide emotional and practical assistance during health crises, leading to better health outcomes and survival rates. Interestingly, our findings indicate that psychological resilience is associated with lower all-cause and cause-specific mortality, except for cancer-related mortality. This discrepancy might be explained by the unique nature of cancer’s etiology and progression. Unlike cardiovascular diseases or external causes where psychological factors might directly influence lifestyle choices and stress responses, cancer progression could be more heavily influenced by genetic factors, biological processes, and environmental exposures that resilience does not significantly alter. Moreover, the impact of resilience on health behaviors, while beneficial for general well-being, might not be sufficient to counteract the complex pathophysiological mechanisms specific to cancer development and progression. Further research is needed to explore these differential impacts and understand the underlying biological and psychological interactions.

Strengths and limitations

The strengths of this study lie in its longitudinal design, large sample size, and comprehensive assessment of various causes of mortality, enabling a nuanced understanding of the relationship between psychological resilience and mortality risks among older adults. However, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the study’s reliance on self-reported measures of psychological resilience introduces potential recall bias and subjective interpretation. Future research could benefit from objective measures or longitudinal assessments to provide a more nuanced understanding of these constructs and their impact on mortality. Second, the study’s observational nature precludes establishing causality, warranting caution in inferring direct causal relationships between psychological resilience and mortality outcomes. Longitudinal interventional studies exploring the effects of targeted interventions aimed at enhancing psychological resilience among older adults could provide further insights into the causal pathways linking these factors to mortality outcomes. Third, residual confounding factors, such as underlying health conditions or unmeasured socioeconomic variables, could have influenced the observed associations. Fourth, the cohort’s homogeneity in terms of demographic characteristics and geographic location might limit the generalizability of our findings to more diverse populations. Finally, while our study treated psychological resilience as a time-invariant variable, its dynamic nature warrants acknowledgment. Future research should explore the evolving aspect of resilience over time to better understand its association with mortality in older adults. Integrating longitudinal designs or dynamic measures of psychological resilience could offer deeper insights into its impact on health outcomes.

Conclusion

Our cohort study provides robust evidence supporting the independent associations between higher psychological resilience and decreased risks of all-cause, CVD, respiratory disease, and other cause mortality in older adults. These findings underscore the potential importance of psychological factors in promoting healthy aging and advocate for the integration of psychological resilience assessments in comprehensive geriatric care. Future research should delve into the mechanisms underlying these associations, paving the way for targeted interventions to enhance psychological resilience and, consequently, improve overall mortality outcomes in the aging population.

Data availability

The dataset supporting the conclusions of this article is available in the (Peking University Open Research Data Platform) repository, (unique persistent identifier and hyperlink to dataset in https://opendata.pku.edu.cn/dataset.xhtml? persistentId=doi:10.18170/DVN/WBO7LK).

Abbreviations

CLHLS:

Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey

BMI:

Body mass index

HR:

Hazard ratio

CI:

Confidence interval

ICD-10:

International Statistical Classification of Diseases,10th revision

CVD:

Cardiovascular disease

SD:

Standard deviation

PSM:

Propensity score matching

SMD:

Standardized mean difference

References

  1. United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs Population Division. World population ageing 2019. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WorldPopulationAgeing2019-Highlights.pdf. (Accessed August 30, 2022).

  2. Feldman R. What is resilience: an affiliative neuroscience approach. World Psychiatry: Official J World Psychiatric Association (WPA). 2020;19(2):132–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Choi KW, Stein MB, Dunn EC, Koenen KC, Smoller JW. Genomics and psychological resilience: a research agenda. Mol Psychiatry. 2019;24(12):1770–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Gu D, Feng Q. Psychological resilience of Chinese centenarians and its associations with Survival and Health: a fuzzy set analysis. Journals Gerontol Ser B Psychol Sci Social Sci. 2018;73(5):880–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cai J, Gao Y, Hu T, Zhou L, Jiang H. Impact of lifestyle and psychological resilience on survival among the oldest-old in China: a cohort study. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1329885.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. de Kloet ER, Joëls M. The cortisol switch between vulnerability and resilience. Mol Psychiatry. 2024;29(1):20–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hayman KJ, Kerse N, Consedine NS. Resilience in context: the special case of advanced age. Aging Ment Health. 2017;21(6):577–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen L, Gong Y, Yuan L. Health behaviour and its determinants in elderly patients with chronic diseases: evidence from Jiangsu Province, China. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22(1):297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ihm J, Lee C-J. Communication networks and individual resilience for Individual Well-being during a time of Crisis. Health Commun. 2023;38(14):3178–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Majnarić LT, Bosnić Z, Guljaš S, Vučić D, Kurevija T, Volarić M, Martinović I, Wittlinger T. Low psychological resilience in older individuals: an Association with increased inflammation, oxidative stress and the Presence of Chronic Medical conditions. Int J Mol Sci 2021, 22(16).

  11. Lv X, Li W, Ma Y, Chen H, Zeng Y, Yu X, Hofman A, Wang H. Cognitive decline and mortality among community-dwelling Chinese older people. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Cao N, Zeng X, Wang P. Decomposing the change in the cognitive function gap between older men and women over time in China: the Chinese longitudinal healthy longevity survey. J Glob Health. 2023;13:04143.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Lou Y, Irakoze S, Huang S, You Q, Wang S, Xu M, Gan Y, Lu Z, Jiang Q, Cao S. Association of social participation and psychological resilience with adverse cognitive outcomes among older Chinese adults: a national longitudinal study. J Affect Disord. 2023;327:54–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zeng Y, Feng Q, Gu D, Vaupel JW. Demographics, phenotypic health characteristics and genetic analysis of centenarians in China. Mech Ageing Dev. 2017;165(Pt B):86–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yang Y, Wen M. Psychological resilience and the onset of activity of Daily Living Disability among older adults in China: a Nationwide Longitudinal Analysis. Journals Gerontol Ser B Psychol Sci Social Sci. 2015;70(3):470–80.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lacombe J, Armstrong MEG, Wright FL, Foster C. The impact of physical activity and an additional behavioural risk factor on cardiovascular disease, cancer and all-cause mortality: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):900.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Pekkanen J, Manton KG, Stallard E, Nissinen A, Karvonen MJ. Risk factor dynamics, mortality and life expectancy differences between eastern and western Finland: the Finnish cohorts of the Seven Countries Study. Int J Epidemiol. 1992;21(2):406–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marais GAB, Gaillard J-M, Vieira C, Plotton I, Sanlaville D, Gueyffier F, Lemaitre J-F. Sex gap in aging and longevity: can sex chromosomes play a role? Biol Sex Differ. 2018;9(1):33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Meara ER, Richards S, Cutler DM. The gap gets bigger: changes in mortality and life expectancy, by education, 1981–2000. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(2):350–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bulanda JR, Brown JS, Yamashita T. Marital quality, marital dissolution, and mortality risk during the later life course. Soc Sci Med. 2016;165:119–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet. 2012;380(9838):219–29.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Itani O, Jike M, Watanabe N, Kaneita Y. Short sleep duration and health outcomes: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Sleep Med. 2017;32:246–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Loef M, Walach H. The combined effects of healthy lifestyle behaviors on all cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2012;55(3):163–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Strong K, Mathers C, Leeder S, Beaglehole R. Preventing chronic diseases: how many lives can we save? Lancet. 2005;366(9496):1578–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Micha R, Peñalvo JL, Cudhea F, Imamura F, Rehm CD, Mozaffarian D. Association between Dietary Factors and Mortality from Heart Disease, Stroke, and type 2 diabetes in the United States. JAMA. 2017;317(9):912–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang X, Ouyang Y, Liu J, Zhu M, Zhao G, Bao W, Hu FB. Fruit and vegetable consumption and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. BMJ. 2014;349:g4490.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. R DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Wiley, New York1987.

    Google Scholar 

  28. White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med. 2011;30(4):377–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rao SJ. Regression modeling strategies: with applications to Linear models, logistic regression, and Survival Analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 2003;98(461):257–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009;28(25):3083–107.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kennedy B, Fang F, Valdimarsdóttir U, Udumyan R, Montgomery S, Fall K. Stress resilience and cancer risk: a nationwide cohort study. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2017;71(10):947–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Reyes M-F, Satorres E, Meléndez JC. Resilience and socioeconomic status as predictors of life satisfaction and Psychological Well-being in Colombian older adults. J Appl Gerontol. 2020;39(3):269–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Cheng YH, Chi I, Boey KW, Ko LSF, Chou KL. Self-rated economic condition and the health of elderly persons in Hong Kong. Soc Sci Med. 2002;55(8):1415–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Xue Y, Lu J, Zheng X, Zhang J, Lin H, Qin Z, Zhang C. The relationship between socioeconomic status and depression among the older adults: the mediating role of health promoting lifestyle. J Affect Disord. 2021;285:22–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pomerleau J, Pederson LL, Ostbye T, Speechley M, Speechley KN. Health behaviours and socio-economic status in Ontario, Canada. Eur J Epidemiol. 1997;13(6):613–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Simsek H, Doganay S, Budak R, Ucku R. Relationship of socioeconomic status with health behaviors and self-perceived health in the elderly: a community-based study, Turkey. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2014;14(4):960–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim J, Luke N. Men’s economic dependency, gender ideology, and stress at midlife. J Marriage Fam. 2020;82(3):1026–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gaffey AE, Bergeman CS, Clark LA, Wirth MM. Aging and the HPA axis: stress and resilience in older adults. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;68:928–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Malan L, Schutte CE, Alkerwi Aa, Stranges S, Malan NT. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis dysregulation and double product increases potentiate ischemic heart disease risk in a black male cohort: the SABPA study. Hypertens Res. 2017;40(6):590–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rosmond R, Björntorp P. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity as a predictor of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and stroke. J Intern Med. 2000;247(2):188–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Artinian NT, Fletcher GF, Mozaffarian D, Kris-Etherton P, Van Horn L, Lichtenstein AH, Kumanyika S, Kraus WE, Fleg JL, Redeker NS, et al. Interventions to promote physical activity and dietary lifestyle changes for cardiovascular risk factor reduction in adults: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010;122(4):406–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Mathews AM. The functional and psychosocial consequences of COPD. Respir Care. 2023;68(7):914–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Dantzer R, Cohen S, Russo SJ, Dinan TG. Resilience and immunity. Brain Behav Immun. 2018;74:28–42.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Rosli N, Johar ER, Rosli N, Abdul Hamid NF. Psychological impact of COVID-19: assessing the COVID-19-related anxiety, individual’s resilience and conspiracy beliefs on attitudes to COVID-19 vaccination. Front Psychol. 2022;13:906914.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Chang E-M, Chen L-S, Li Y-T, Chen C-T. Associations between Self-Management behaviors and psychological resilience in patients with COPD. Respir Care. 2023;68(4):511–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Tsourtos G, Ward PR, Miller ER, Hill K, Barton C, Wilson CJ, Woodman R. Does Resilience Moderate the relationship between stress and smoking status? Subst Use Misuse. 2019;54(3):412–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Liao Z, Zhou H, He Z. The mediating role of psychological resilience between social participation and life satisfaction among older adults in China. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22(1):948.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) which collected and reported data and made the data publicly available to researchers. The funder had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, or preparation of this manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by grants from the Jiujiang City key research and development plan project (S2022ZDYFN351).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jiujiang CityKey Laboratory of Cell Therapy, Jiujiang NO.1 People’s Hospital, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, 332000, China

    Xiang Wang, Wei Jie, Xionghong Huang, Feng Yang, Yueting Qian, Ting Yang & Miao Dai

  2. Department of Cardiology, Jiujiang NO.1 People’s Hospital, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, 332000, China

    Xiang Wang

  3. Department of Geriatrics, Jiujiang NO.1 People’s Hospital, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, 332000, China

    Wei Jie, Xionghong Huang, Feng Yang, Yueting Qian, Ting Yang & Miao Dai

  4. Chronic Disease Management Center, Jiujiang NO.1 People’s Hospital, Jiujiang, Jiangxi, 332000, China

    Miao Dai

Authors
  1. Xiang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wei Jie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xionghong Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Feng Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yueting Qian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ting Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Miao Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MD conceptualized and designed the study, and critically revised the manuscript. XW collected and interpreted the data, performed all statistical analyses, prepared and reviewed figures and tables, and wrote the original draft. WJ, XH, QH, FY, YQ, and TY collected the data and provided revisions to the manuscript. All authors gave their final approval and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miao Dai.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was performed according to the Helsinki Declaration. All participants or their proxies gave informed consent to participate in the study and consented to the use of their data. Informed consent to participate was taken from legal guardians of illiterate participants. The Biomedical Ethics Committee of Peking University approved this study (IRB00001052-13074).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, X., Jie, W., Huang, X. et al. Association of psychological resilience with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in older adults: a cohort study. BMC Public Health 24, 1989 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19558-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19558-8

Keywords

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us