This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Introduction Education and lifestyle are key factors determining health and mortality of the population. The aim of this study is to assess the associations of education and lifestyle factors (smoking, overweight and physical inactivity) with the overall mortality of the Lithuanian population aged 20-64 years in 2002-2014. Methods The data for the retrospective study were obtained from the Lithuanian State Data Agency and the Lithuanian Adult Lifestyle Survey. The population attributable fraction was calculated using the Miettinen (1974) formula. Results The study suggested 2002-2014, the proportion of deaths among males that could have been prevented by having university education was from 49.08% to 44.31%, while among females – from 37.07% to 29.40%. Among the lifestyle factors, smoking had the greatest significance for overall mortality in males (in 2002-2014, smoking caused from 39.21% to 27.06% of male deaths), and in females – insufficient physical activity (respectively from 17.76% to 10.38% of female deaths). The significance of the analyzed lifestyle factors decreased during 2002-2014, except for the proportion of deaths caused by smoking among females, which increased from 6.24% to 8.16%. Conclusions Higher education and healthier lifestyle were associated with lower mortality of the Lithuanian population in 2002-2014. Smoking remained the most important risk factor for males, while physical activity was particularly significant for female’s health. Although the study covers the period of 2002-2014, its results remain relevant today, as they reveal long-term trends in health inequalities by education and lifestyle. The results indicate that investments in education and promotion of healthy lifestyles can have considerable impact on reducing mortality in Lithuania. Key messages • Higher education and healthier lifestyles were associated with lower mortality in Lithuania. • Smoking was the main risk factor for male mortality, while physical inactivity was particularly important for women.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mesceriakova et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: