ABSTRACT
Background and objective There has been an increasing interest in using life expectancy metrics, such as years of life lost (YLL), to explore epidemiological associations. YLL is easier to understand for both healthcare professionals and the lay people and has become a common measure for evaluating public health priorities. As the literature presents a range of approaches to estimate it, this review aims to: (1) summarise the key methods; (2) show how to implement them using current software; (3) apply them in a real-world example.
Methods We investigated simpler nonparametric as well as parametric, model-based methods to estimate of YLL, including: (1) Years of potential life lost (YPLL); (2) Global Burden of Disease (GBD) approach; (3) Chiang’s life tables; (4) Epi-demographic approach; and (5) Flexible Royston-Parmar parametric survival model. We used data from the UK Biobank with baseline measures collected in 2006-2010 and linkage to mortality records. We selected 36 chronic conditions: participants with two or more conditions were categorised as having multimorbidity.
Results For the YPLL and GBD method, the analytical procedures allow only to quantify the average YLL within each group (with and without multimorbidity) and, from them, their difference. Conversely, for the Chiang’s life tables, the epi-demographic approach, and the Royston-Parmar survival model, both the remaining life expectancy within each group and the YLL could be estimated. In 499,992 UK Biobank participants (white ethnicity, 94%; women, 55%) with a median (IQR) age of 58 (50-63) years, 98,605 (20%) had multimorbidity and 11,871 deaths occurred during the follow-up. The YLLs comparing subjects with vs without multimorbidity varied significantly according to the technique and the modelling approach used: from a longer life expectancy in subjects with multimorbidity using the YPLL and the GBD method to a shorter one using the other three methods (i.e., at 65 years, the YLL were 1.8, 1.3, and 4.6 years using Chiang’s, epi-demographic, and Royston-Parmar approach, respectively).
Conclusions When comparing the burden of a disease on life expectancy across studies caution is needed as methods may estimate different quantities. While deciding among different methods to estimate YLL, researchers should consider such differences in relation to the purpose of the research and the type of available data.
SUMMARY BOX
SUMMARY BOX
The concept of years of life lost (YLL) is easier to understand compared to traditional estimates from survival analysis, such as hazard ratios, but very few studies report it.
A range of different methods of estimating YLL are reviewed: from basic methods – such as life tables – to most recent and advanced methods using statistical modelling.
Using the example of multimorbidity, the estimated numbers of YLL differs between methods, as each method focused on estimating different quantities.
This review will help promote a better understanding and use of life expectancy and YLL metrics in a wide range of studies in health care research.
Competing Interest Statement
KK is the National Lead for multimorbidity for National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration. MJD is Convenor of the NIHR Diet and Activity Research Translation Collaboration. All other authors have declared no competing interests.
Funding Statement
YC acknowledges funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands (ARC EM).The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All participants gave written informed consent prior data collection. UK Biobank has full ethical approval from the NHS National Research Ethics Service (16/NW/0274). UK Biobank study reference 14614.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from UK Biobank project site, subject to registration and application process. Further details can be found at https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
- CI
- Confidence intervals
- GBD
- Global Burden of Disease
- HRs
- Hazard ratios
- ONS
- Office for National Statistics
- QoF
- Quality and outcomes framework
- STROBE
- Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology
- UK
- United Kingdom
- WHO
- World Health Organization
- YLL
- Years of life lost
- YPLL
- Years of potential life lost
