Literature DB >> 12759920

A note on the decomposition of the health concentration index.

Philip M Clarke1, Ulf-G Gerdtham, Luke B Connelly.   

Abstract

In recent work, the concentration index has been widely used as a measure of income-related health inequality. The purpose of this note is to illustrate two different methods for decomposing the overall health concentration index using data collected from a Short Form (SF-36) survey of the general Australian population conducted in 1995. For simplicity, we focus on the physical functioning scale of the SF-36. Firstly we examine decomposition 'by component' by separating the concentration index for the physical functioning scale into the ten items on which it is based. The results show that the items contribute differently to the overall inequality measure, i.e. two of the items contributed 13% and 5%, respectively, to the overall measure. Second, to illustrate the 'by subgroup' method we decompose the concentration index by employment status. This involves separating the population into two groups: individuals currently in employment; and individuals not currently employed. We find that the inequality between these groups is about five times greater than the inequality within each group. These methods provide insights into the nature of inequality that can be used to inform policy design to reduce income related health inequalities. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12759920     DOI: 10.1002/hec.767

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  11 in total

1.  A framework for measuring health inequity.

Authors:  Yukiko Asada
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  Is health inequality across individuals of moral concern?

Authors:  Yukiko Asada
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2006-03

3.  The impact of missing data in the estimation of concentration index: a potential source of bias.

Authors:  Hai Zhong
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2009-07-15

4.  The contribution of educational inequalities to lifespan variation.

Authors:  Alyson A van Raalte; Anton E Kunst; Olle Lundberg; Mall Leinsalu; Pekka Martikainen; Barbara Artnik; Patrick Deboosere; Irina Stirbu; Bogdan Wojtyniak; Johan P Mackenbach
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2012-02-16

5.  A modified Kakwani measure for health inequality.

Authors:  Mototsugu Fukushige; Noriko Ishikawa; Satoko Maekawa
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2012-05-06

Review 6.  Using inequality measures to incorporate environmental justice into regulatory analyses.

Authors:  Sam Harper; Eric Ruder; Henry A Roman; Amelia Geggel; Onyemaechi Nweke; Devon Payne-Sturges; Jonathan I Levy
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Assessment of the health of Americans: the average health-related quality of life and its inequality across individuals and groups.

Authors:  Yukiko Asada
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2005-07-13

8.  Decomposition of sources of income-related health inequality applied on SF-36 summary scores: a Danish health survey.

Authors:  Jens Gundgaard; Jørgen Lauridsen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2006-08-22       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Socioeconomic Inequality of Non-Communicable Risk Factors among People Living in Kurdistan Province, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Authors:  Ghobad Moradi; Kazem Mohammad; Reza Majdzadeh; Hossein Malekafzali Ardakani; Kourosh Holakouie Naieni
Journal:  Int J Prev Med       Date:  2013-06

10.  Changes and inequalities in early birth registration and childhood care and education in Vietnam: findings from the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, 2006 and 2011.

Authors:  Kim Bao Giang; Juhwan Oh; Vu Duy Kien; Luu Ngoc Hoat; Sugy Choi; Chul Ou Lee; Hoang Van Minh
Journal:  Glob Health Action       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 2.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.