ArticlePloS one2026
The importance of baseline health in linking life purpose to longevity.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The well-established inverse relation between purpose in life and mortality risk is widely interpreted in the literature as evidence that higher purpose causes greater longevity. This study assesses the role of baseline health in linking purpose and longevity. Based on a prospective cohort sample of 5,953 US adults aged ≥ 50 drawn from the Health and Retirement Study (2006-2018), we replicate a recent high-quality study that documents the correlation between purpose and longevity and then examine the sensitivity of the results to varying the amount of baseline health measurement error and limiting the sample to individuals with more homogeneous levels of baseline health. The relation between life purpose and longevity strongly attenuates when using more robust measures of baseline health and excluding individuals who are already seriously ill. For instance, in a model that uses the coarse measures of baseline health typically used in this literature, individuals with low purpose exhibit a hazard ratio for the subsequent 4-year period of 2.59 (95% CI = 1.43, 4.68). Once adjusting for more robust objective measures of baseline health, the hazard ratio falls to 1.77 (95% CI = 0.97, 3.22). After adjusting for objective measures of baseline health and excluding already ill individuals, the associated hazard ratio falls to 1.20 (95% CI = 0.66, 2.20) for survival over years 5-8 and 0.75 (95% CI = 0.42, 1.32) for survival over years 9-12. The results suggest that baseline health confounding or mediation explains much of the apparent relation between life purpose and longevity, and that the strong associations reported in the literature may largely reflect inadequate measurement of baseline health rather than a causal effect of purpose on longevity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.