| Literature DB >> 31635191 |
Changjian Pan1, Qiuyan Fan2, Jing Yang3, Dasong Deng4.
Abstract
Based on data from the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS), this paper calculates the health distribution of the elderly using the Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB) score, and then estimates health inequality among the elderly in rural China using the Wagstaff index (WI) and Erreygers index (EI). Following this, it compares health inequalities among the elderly in different age groups, and finally, uses the Shapley and recentered influence function-index-ordinary least squares (RIF-I-OLS) model to decompose the effect of four factors on health inequality among the elderly in rural China. The QWB score distribution shows that the health of the elderly in rural China improved with social economic development and medical reform from 2002 to 2014. However, at the same time, we were surprised to find that the health level of the 65-74 years old group has been declining steadily since 2008. This phenomenon implies that the incidence of chronic diseases is moving towards the younger elderly. The WI and EI show that there is indeed pro-rich health inequality among the rural elderly, the health inequality of the younger age groups is more serious than that of the older age groups, and the former incidence of health inequality is higher. Health inequality in the age group of 65-74 years old is higher than that in other groups, and the trend of change fluctuated downward from 2002 to 2014. Health inequality in the age group of 75-84 years old is lower than that in the group of 65-74 years old, but higher than that in the other age groups. The results of Shapley decomposition show that demographic characteristics, socioeconomic status (SES), health care access, and quality of later life contributed 0.0054, 0.0130, 0.0442, and 0.0218 to the health inequality index of the elderly, which accounted for 6.40%, 15.39%, 52.41%, and 25.80% of health inequality index. From the results of RIF-I-OLS decomposition, this paper has analyzed detailed factors' marginal effects on health inequality from four dimensions, which indicates that the health inequality among the elderly in rural China was mainly caused by the disparity of income, medical expenses, and living arrangement.Entities:
Keywords: elderly in rural China; health inequality; influencing factors
Year: 2019 PMID: 31635191 PMCID: PMC6843958 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16204018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Core research framework.
Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) data set sample content structure (2002–2014).
| Year | Sample of Survey Year | Continuous Survey Sample | Survey Year Rural Sample | Rural Sample for Continuous Survey |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | 16,064 | — | 8670 | — |
| 2005 | 15,638 | 8175 (2002–2005) | 8658 | 4337 |
| 2008 | 16,954 | 4191 (2002–2008) | 10,293 | 1897 |
| 2011 | 9765 | 2513 (2002–2011) | 5145 | 737 |
| 2014 | 7192 | 1681 (2002–2014) | 3980 | 332 |
Note: According to the introduction of CLHLS data.
Quality of Well-Being (QWB) scale items weights and corresponding number of the CLHLS questionnaire.
| Content | Weight | Questionnaire No. | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| 4 | Did not drive a car, health related; did not ride in a car as usual for age (younger than 15 yr), health related, and/or did not use public transportation, health related; or had or would have used more help than usual for age to use public transportation, health related. | −0.062 | E4, E14 |
|
| |||
| 3 | In wheelchair, moved or controlled movement of wheelchair without help from someone else; or had trouble or did not try to lift, stoop, bend over, or use stairs or inclines, health related; and/or limped, used a cane, crutches, or walker, health related; and/or had any other physical limitation in walking, or did not try to walk as far or as fast as others the same age are able, health related. | −0.060 | G9, G11, |
|
| |||
| 4 | Limited in other (e.g., recreational) role activity, health related. | −0.061 | E6–E8 |
| 3 | Limited in major (primary) role activity, health related. | −0.061 | E2–E3 |
| 2 | Performed no major role activity, health related, but did perform self-care activities. | −0.061 | E3 |
| 1 | Performed no major role activity, health related, and did not perform, or had more help than usual in performance of one or more self-care activities, health related. | −0.106 | E1–E3, E6, E9–E10 |
|
| |||
| 5 | Trouble learning, remembering, or thinking clearly. | −0.340 | C54–C55, G15O1 |
| 6 | Any combination of one or more hands, feet, arms, or legs either missing, deformed (crooked), paralyzed (unable to move), or broken—includes wearing artificial limbs or braces. | −0.333 | C55 |
| 8 | Pain, burning, bleeding, itching, or other difficulty with rectum, bowel movements, or urination (passing water). | −0.292 | E5, G15B1, G15S1 |
| 12 | Spells of feeling upset, being depressed, or of crying. | −0.257 | B23–B24, B26 |
| 18 | Pain in ear, tooth, jaw, throat, lips, tongue; several missing or crooked permanent teeth—includes wearing bridges or false teeth; stuffy, runny nose; or any trouble hearing-includes wearing a hearing aid. | −0.170 | C55, G22, H1 |
Note: Compilation of results with reference to Kaplan and Anderson’s research [15].
Descriptive statistics of the main variables.
| Variables | Description | Mean ± SD or |
|---|---|---|
| Health Status | QWB Score | 0.6276 ± 0.1500 |
|
| ||
|
| Male | 7923 (40.96) |
| Female | 11,418 (59.04) | |
|
| Age group1 (65–74) | 2149 (11.11) |
| Age group2 (75–84) | 3255 (16.83) | |
| Age group3 (85–94) | 6980 (36.09) | |
| Age group4 (95+) a | 6957 (35.97) | |
|
| Married | 4728 (24.45) |
| Divorced, separated, widowed, or single | 14,613 (75.55) | |
|
| ||
|
| Gini coefficient of province | 0.3677 ± 0.0749 |
|
| Years of education | 1.3810 ± 2.6982 |
|
| Eastern China a | 8001 (41.37) |
| Central China | 6313 (32.64) | |
| Western China | 5027 (25.99) | |
|
| ||
|
| Yes | 17,037 (88.09) |
| No | 2304 (11.91) | |
|
| Number of medical institution beds per 1000 people | 1.0190 ± 0.4847 |
|
| Total medical expenses last year (yuan) | 1,343.0770 ± 4,827.2570 |
|
| Medical insurance | 3294 (17.03) |
| Other | 16,047 (82.97) | |
|
| ||
|
| Living in nursing homes | 346 (1.79) |
| Not living in nursing homes | 18,995 (98.21) | |
|
| Yes | 996 (5.15) |
| No | 18,345 (94.85) | |
|
| Yes | 3513 (18.16) |
| No | 15,828 (81.84) | |
Note: a represents the reference group; Gini coefficients of province were embedded from macro data to data sets according to the province no.; Consumer Price Index (CPI) is deducted last year’s total medical expenses.
QWB scores distribution of the elderly in different age groups from 2002 to 2014.
| 2002 | 2005 | 2008 | 2011 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 65–74 years old | 0.7730 | 0.7772 | 0.7832 | 0.7810 | 0.7770 |
| 75–84 years old | 0.7128 | 0.7157 | 0.7197 | 0.7233 | 0.7276 |
| 85–94 years old | 0.6357 | 0.6478 | 0.6396 | 0.6433 | 0.6600 |
| Above 95 years old | 0.5639 | 0.5747 | 0.5627 | 0.5725 | 0.5868 |
Distribution of Wagstaff index (WI) and Erreygers index (EI) in different age groups from 2002 to 2014.
| 2002 | 2005 | 2008 | 2011 | 2014 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WI | EI | WI | EI | WI | EI | WI | EI | WI | EI | |
| 65–74 years old | 0.0870 | 0.0826 | 0.0595 | 0.0567 | 0.1060 | 0.1030 | 0.0734 | 0.0716 | 0.0379 | 0.0360 |
| 75–84 years old | 0.0557 | 0.0534 | 0.0818 | 0.0790 | 0.0474 | 0.0455 | 0.0063 | 0.0061 | 0.0784 | 0.0763 |
| 85–94 years old | 0.0517 | 0.0516 | 0.0322 | 0.0322 | 0.0352 | 0.0351 | 0.0031 | 0.0031 | 0.0035 | 0.0035 |
| Above 95 years old | 0.0379 | 0.0377 | 0.0575 | 0.0574 | 0.0124 | 0.0123 | 0.0232 | 0.0231 | 0.0279 | 0.0276 |
Figure 2The mean of Wagstaff index (WI) and Erreygers index (EI) of the elderly in different age groups from 2002 to 2014.
Shapley decomposition and recentered influence function-index-ordinary least squares (RIF-I-OLS) decomposition of health inequality among the elderly in rural China.
| Dimensions | Variables | Shapley Decomposition | RIF-I-OLS Decomposition | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Health (QWB) | Contribution | RifWI | RifEI | ||
|
| Male | 0.0083 | 0.0054 | −0.0058 | −0.0064 |
| (0.4263) | (−0.8537) | (−1.0205) | |||
| Age group1 (65–74) | 0.0293 | 0.0664 *** | 0.0545 *** | ||
| (0.8888) | (4.9352) | (4.3412) | |||
| Age group2 (75–84) | −0.1525 *** | 0.0263 *** | 0.0198 ** | ||
| (-5.6868) | (2.6841) | (2.1718) | |||
| Age group3 (85–94) | −0.0962 *** | 0.0084 | 0.0057 | ||
| (−4.6733) | (1.2847) | (0.9398) | |||
| Married | −0.0264 | 0.0176 ** | 0.0156 * | ||
| (−1.1330) | (2.0328) | (1.9386) | |||
|
| Gini coefficient | −1.2790 *** | 0.0130 | 0.5882 *** | 0.5440 *** |
| (−4.0629) | (5.1053) | (5.0656) | |||
| Years of education | 0.0130 *** | 0.0041 *** | 0.0037 *** | ||
| (3.5411) | (2.8928) | (2.8011) | |||
| Central China | −0.1482 *** | 0.0091 | 0.0084 | ||
| (−7.0585) | (1.2016) | (1.1894) | |||
| Western China | −0.1238 *** | −0.0338 *** | −0.0323 *** | ||
| (−4.6590) | (−3.4009) | (−3.4806) | |||
|
| Timely medical treatment | 0.4802 *** | 0.0442 | −0.0286 *** | −0.0284 *** |
| (16.6442) | (-3.1046) | (−3.2866) | |||
| Medical facilities | 0.0679 *** | −0.0131 * | −0.0116 * | ||
| (3.0847) | (−1.7954) | (−1.7222) | |||
| Medical expenses | −4.3496 *** | −0.5795 *** | −0.5206 *** | ||
| (−9.0786) | (−5.6915) | (−5.5188) | |||
| Insurance payment | 0.0438 * | 0.0167 * | 0.0153 * | ||
| (1.9154) | (1.7990) | (1.7748) | |||
|
| Living in nursing homes | −0.0826 | 0.0218 | −0.1111 *** | −0.1031 *** |
| (−1.0760) | (−3.4715) | (−3.4544) | |||
| Pension | 0.0745 * | 0.0612 *** | 0.0575 *** | ||
| (1.9425) | (3.8966) | (3.9514) | |||
| Physical exercise | 0.3221 *** | 0.0257 *** | 0.0216 *** | ||
| (15.4757) | (3.1152) | (2.8047) | |||
| Constant | 3.5439 *** | — | −0.1451 *** | −0.1295 *** | |
| (26.8070) | — | (−3.0643) | (−2.9365) | ||
| Time fixed effect | Controlled | — | Controlled | Controlled | |
|
| — | — | 0.0844 | — | — |
Note: Age group4 (95+) and eastern China are the reference groups; *, **, and *** indicate significant levels of 0.1, 0.05, and 0.01, respectively, with the values in parentheses being standard errors of robustness.