No abstract

Prior research has suggested that gender differences in physicians' salaries can be accounted for by the tendency of women to enter primary care fields and work fewer hours. However, in examining starting salaries by gender of physicians leaving residency programs in New York State during 1999-2008, we found a significant gender gap that cannot be explained by specialty choice, practice setting, work hours, or other characteristics. The unexplained trend toward diverging salaries appears to be a recent development that is growing over time. In 2008, male physicians newly trained in New York State made on average $16,819 more than newly trained female physicians, compared to a $3,600 difference in 1999.

No abstract

Individuals with age-related eye disease (ARED) need to use eye care services for detection, assessment, and care at regular intervals. OBJECTIVE To explore the association between socioeconomic position (SEP) and use of eye care services among US adults with self-reported ARED during 2002 and 2008. DESIGN Data were from the National Health Interview Survey 2002 and 2008. We used multiple logistic regression to estimate predictive margins, controlling for other factors, and we used the slope index of inequality to measure the relationship between SEP and use of eye care services across the entire distributions of poverty-income ratio (PIR) and educational attainment. SETTING A cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of adults, with prevalence estimates weighted to represent the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population. PARTICIPANTS The sample included US participants in the 2002 (n = 3586) and the 2008 (n = 3104) National Health Interview Survey who were at least 40 years old and reported any ARED (age-related macular degeneration, cataract, diabetic retinopathy, or glaucoma). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Use of eye care services; SEP was measured by the PIR and educational attainment. RESULTSIn 2002, persons with ARED and a PIR of less than 1.50 were significantly less likely than those with a PIR of at least 5 to report visiting an eye care provider (62.7% vs 80.1%; P < .001) or undergoing a dilated eye examination in the past 12 months (64.3% vs 80.4%; P < .001), after adjustment for other factors. Similarly, persons with less than a high school education were less likely than those with at least a college education to report a visit to an eye care provider (62.9% vs 80.8%; P < .001) or dilated eye examination (64.8% vs 81.4%; P < .001). In 2002, the slope index of inequality showed statistically significant differences for eye care provider visits across the levels of education (24.4; P = .006), and in 2008, it showed a significant difference for eye care provider visits across the levels of educational attainment (25.2; P = .049) and PIR (21.8; P = .01).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Significant differences in the use of eye care services by SEP persist among US adults with eye diseases.

Background Visual impairment is a common health-related disability in the U.S. The association between clinical measurements of age-related eye diseases and visual impairment in data from a national survey has not been reported. Purpose To examine common eye conditions and other correlates associated with visual impairment in the U.S. Methods Data from the 2005–2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of 5222 Americans aged ≥40 years were analyzed in 2012 for visual impairment (presenting distance visual acuity worse than 20/40 in the better-seeing eye), and visual impairment not due to refractive error (distance visual acuity worse than 20/40 after refraction). Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) were assessed from retinal fundus images; glaucoma was assessed from two successive frequency-doubling tests and a cup-to-disc ratio measurement. Results Prevalence of visual impairment and of visual impairment not due to refractive error was 7.5% (95% CI=6.9%, 8.1%) and 2.0% (1.7%, 2.3%), respectively. The prevalence of visual impairment not due to refractive error was significantly higher among people with AMD (2.2%) compared to those without AMD (0.8%), or with DR (3.5%) compared to those without DR (1.2%). Independent predictive factors of visual impairment not due to refractive error were AMD (OR=4.52, 95% CI=2.50, 8.17); increasing age (OR=1.09 per year, 95% CI=1.06, 1.13); and less than a high school education (OR=2.99, 95% CI=1.18, 7.55). Conclusions Visual impairment is a public health problem in the U.S. Visual impairment in two thirds of adults could be eliminated with refractive correction. Screening of the older population may identify adults at increased risk of visual impairment due to eye diseases.