Health, Income, and Inequality

Social Science & Medicine, 1997

Several methods are available to measure social inequalities in health. This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches, in particular the odds ratio, the slope and alpha. These methods are illustrated using data from subjects in the 1958 British birth cohort. The inequality measures are compared using health status at ages 23 and 33. Six health indicators are examined, including self-rated health, limiting long-standing illness, psychological health, respiratory symptoms, asthma and obesity. Two social indicators are compared, namely class at birth and educational qualifications. Conclusions do not differ substantially using the three methods for measuring inequality. However, consistent differences were evident between the measures of social position, with greater inequalities apparent for educational qualifications. Choice of social indicator therefore appears to be of primary importance in measuring health inequality.

In this paper we review the available summary measures for the magnitude of socio-economic inequalities in health. Measures which have been used differ in a number of important respects, including (1) the measurement of "relative" or "absolute" differences; (2) the measurement of an "effect" of lower socio-economic status, or of the "total impact" of socio-economic inequalities in-health upon the health status of the population; (3) simple versus sophisticated measurement techniques. Based on this analysis of summary measures which have previously been applied, eight different classes of summary measures can be distinguished. Because measures of "total impact" can be further subdivided on the basis of their underlying assumptions, we finally arrive at 12 types of summary measure. Each of these has its merits, and choice of a particular type of summary measure will depend partly on technical considerations, partly on one's perspec...

Journal of Health Economics, 2009

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

This series presents research findings based either directly on data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) or using SOEP data as part of an internationally comparable data set (e.g. CNEF, ECHP, LIS, LWS, CHER/PACO). SOEP is a truly multidisciplinary household panel study covering a wide range of social and behavioral sciences: economics, sociology, psychology, survey methodology, econometrics and applied statistics, educational science, political science, public health, behavioral genetics, demography, geography, and sport science.

2008

American Journal of Public Health, 2002

Objectives. In this study we examined the relationship between indicators of socioeconomic status (SES) and mortality for a representative sample of individuals. Methods. The sample included 3734 individuals aged 45 and older interviewed in 1984 in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. In the current study, mortality was tracked between 1984 and 1994 and is related to SES indicators of education, occupation, income, and wealth. Results. Wealth and recent family income were the indicators that were most strongly associated with subsequent mortality. These associations persisted after we controlled for the other SES indicators and were stronger for women than for men and for nonelderly than for elderly individuals. Conclusions. We found that the economic indicators of SES were usually as strongly associated with mortality as, if not more strongly associated with mortality than, the more conventional indicators of completed schooling and occupation. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1151–1157)

According to the human capital theory, health is a determinant of the economic development and should play a role in the fight against poverty. On the other side, the economic growth, by supplying better sanitation, water quality and hygiene, better education and income, may improve population's health. Economists, in investigating the relations between development and health, asked for valid and relevant health status measurement. But, on the other hand, the health concept is complex as health includes several dimensions, and researchers face a battery of health indicators. The purpose of this study is to discuss, specifically for economic research, the particularity of each health indicator, the potential bias of their measurement, their advantages, disadvantages, and interest. As health indicators are too numerous, a selection was done and the analysis concerns the most frequent indicators, but also those which should be more used into the economic research perspective. Discu...

Milbank Quarterly, 2004

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

We suggest an alternative way to construct a family of indices of socioeconomic inequality of health. Our indices belong to the broad category of linear indices. In contrast to rank-dependent indices, which are defined in terms of the ranks of the socioeconomic variable and the levels of the health variable, our indices are based on the levels of both the socioeconomic and the health variable. We also indicate how the indices can be modified in order to introduce sensitivity to inequality in the socioeconomic distribution and to inequality in the health distribution. As an empirical illustration, we make a comparative study of the relation between income and well-being in 16 European countries using data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Wave 4.

International Journal of Epidemiology, 2007

Self-rated health (SRH) is considered a valid measure of health status as it has been shown to predict mortality in several studies. We examine whether SRH predicts mortality equally well in different socioeconomic groups.