The “Hispanic mortality paradox” revisited: Meta-analysis and meta-regression of life-course differentials in Latin American and Caribbean immigrants' mortality

- First meta-analysis of mortality among Latin American and Caribbean immigrants.
- Overall, immigrants enjoy a mortality advantage when compared to the native-born.
- Immigrant children and youth suffer from an immigrant mortality disadvantage.

The literature on immigrant health has repeatedly reported the paradoxical finding, where immigrants from Latin American countries to OECD countries appear to enjoy better health and greater longevity, compared with the local population in the host country. However, no previous meta-analysis has examined this effect focusing specifically on immigrants from Latin America (rather than Hispanic ethnicity) and we still do not know enough about the factors that may moderate the relationship between immigration and mortality. We conducted meta-analyses and meta-regressions to examine 123 all-cause mortality risk estimates and 54 cardiovascular mortality risk estimates from 28 publications, providing data on almost 800 million people. The overall results showed that the mean rate ratio (RR) for immigrants vs. controls was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.84-1.01) for all-cause mortality and 0.73 (CI, 0.67-0.80) for cardiovascular mortality. While the overall results suggest no immigrant mortality advantage, studies that used only native born persons as controls did find a significant all-cause mortality advantage (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97). Furthermore, we found that the relative risk of mortality largely depends on life course stages. While the mortality advantage is apparent for working-age immigrants, it is not significant for older-age immigrants and the effect is reversed for children and adolescents.