Skip to main content
. 2016 Nov-Dec;59:39–50. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2016.07.001

Table 2.

Comparison of UKHLS participants with complete versus missing cognitive data.

Participants with complete cognitive data (N = 40,730) Participants with one or more missing cognitive measure (N = 8,528)
Gender (n (%))
 Male 18,160 (44.6) 4,418 (51.8)
 Female 22,570 (55.4) 4,110 (48.2)
Age (mean (SD)) 46.9 (18.1) 48.0 (20.6)
Self-rated health (n (%))⁎⁎
 Excellent 7,185 (17.6) 1,523 (17.9)
 Very good 14,474 (35.5) 2,342 (27.6)
 Good 11,126 (27.3) 2,044 (24.1)
 Fair 5,817 (14.3) 1,525 (18.0)
 Poor 2120 (5.2) 1,059 (12.5)
Self-rated memory (n (%))⁎⁎
 Excellent 1,867 (4.6) 193 (4.2)
 Very good 9,188 (22.6) 726 (16.0)
 Good 15,564 (38.2) 1,480 (32.6)
 Fair 10,709 (26.3) 1,322 (29.1)
 Poor 3,401 (8.4) 823 (18.1)
Highest qualification (n (%))⁎⁎
 No qualifications 8,597 (21.4) 3,058 (38.3)
 School level 17,280 (43.0) 3,087 (38.6)
 Degree/professional or higher 14,325 (35.6) 1,844 (23.1)
Cognitive test z-score (mean (SD))
 Word recall 0.09 (0.93) − 1.06 (1.21)
 Verbal fluency 0.10 (0.93) − 0.89 (1.19)
 Subtraction 0.07 (0.91) − 0.84 (1.52)
 Number sequence 0.03 (0.97) − 0.73 (1.38)
 Numerical problem solving 0.11 (0.90) − 1.10 (1.25)

Raw numbers, i.e. unweighted.

⁎⁎

Numbers do not add up to total due to missing values of descriptive variables.