Income-related inequalities in health: some international comparisons

Doorslaer, Eddy van; Wagstaff, Adam; Bleichrodt, Han; Calonge, Samuel; Gerdtham, Ulf G.; Gerfin, Michael; Geurts, J. J. M.; Gross, Lorna; Häkkinen, Unto; Leu, Robert E.; O’Donnell, Owen; Propper, Carol; Puffer, Frank W.; Rodrı́guez, Marisol; Sundberg, Gun; Winkelhake, Olaf

doi:10.1016/s0167-6296(96)00532-2

Cited by 548 publications

(410 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

377

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…25 For example, low income men are likely to present with later stage cancers. 8 Neighborhood-level inequities include unequal access to and quality of primary and secondary healthcare services 32 and may affect the relationship between prostate cancer screening and affordability of private health insurance. 8,33 Opportunistic screening through PSA testing became commonplace in the US at the end of the 1980's and in Sweden in the early 1990's.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…34 In Sweden, medical care is provided to all permanent residents, and primary healthcare clinics and hospitals are equally distributed and located centrally in all types of neighborhoods. 32 However, the actual number of health professionals working in primary healthcare clinics can vary considerably by neighborhood type. This is due to difficulties in recruiting and retaining healthcare personnel in high-deprivation neighborhoods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neighborhood deprivation and prostate cancer mortality: a multilevel analysis from Sweden

Sundquist

2011

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

in patients aged 25-74 years (a total of 73 159 patients). Multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed with individual-level characteristics at the first level and level of neighborhood deprivation at the second level. RESULTS:The age-standardized prostate cancer mortality rate was 1.5 times higher in men living in high-deprivation neighborhoods than in those living in the most affluent neighborhoods. Mortality rates were also associated with certain individual-level characteristics, that is, age, marital status, family income, educational attainment, immigration status, urban/rural status, mobility and comorbidity. For example, there was a strong relationship between prostate cancer mortality and being unmarried, having a low income or educational attainment, and hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the full model, the risk of prostate cancer mortality was 25% higher in men living in the most deprived neighborhoods than in those living in the most affluent neighborhoods.CONCLUSIONS: High level of neighborhood deprivation independently predicts prostate cancer mortality. This raises important clinical and public health concerns. Both individual-and neighborhood-level approaches are important in healthcare policies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neighborhood deprivation and prostate cancer mortality: a multilevel analysis from Sweden

Sundquist

2011

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large amount of literature shows a positive correlation between socioeconomic status and health in adulthood (Adler et al, 1994;Deaton and Paxson, 1998;Deaton and Paxson, 1999;Van Doorslaer et al, 1997;Wilkinson and Marmot, 2003). Recent research initiated by Case et al (2002) investigates whether the gradient in general health observed in adulthood has antecedents in childhood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Family income and child health in the UK

Apouey

Geoffard

2013

Journal of Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies examining the relationship between family income and child health in the UK have produced mixed findings. We re-examine the income gradient in child general health and its evolution with child age in this country, using a very large sample of British children. We find that there is no correlation between income and child general health at ages 0-1, that the gradient emerges around age 2 and remains constant from ages 2 to 17. In addition, we show that the gradient is likely to represent a causal effect of income on child health. Furthermore, we suggest that the gradient in general health reflects a greater prevalence of chronic conditions among low-income children and a greater severity of these conditions. Taken together, these results suggest that income does matter for child health in the UK and may play a role in the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic status.JEL classification: I1

show abstract

“…A large body of empirical work in developed and developing countries has focused on measuring and explaining socioeconomic inequalities in various dimensions of health (e.g., Acheson 1998; Schalick and others 2000; van Doorslaer, Wagstaff, and Bleichrod 1997;. 1 Some research has also focused on socioeconomic inequalities in the distribution of health services or public spending on health care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sometimes more equal than others: how health inequalities depend on the choice of welfare indicator

Lindelöw

2005

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large body of empirical work in recent years has focused on measuring and explaining socioeconomic inequalities in health outcomes and health service use. In any effort to address these questions, analysts must confront the issue of how to measure socioeconomic status. In developing countries, socioeconomic status has typically been measured by per capita consumption or an asset index. Currently, there is only limited information on how the choice of welfare indicators affects the analysis of health inequalities and the incidence of public spending. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the potential sensitivity of the analysis of health-related inequalities to how socioeconomic status is measured. Using data from Mozambique, the paper focuses on five key health service indicators and tests whether measured inequality (concentration index) in the five health service variables is different depending on the choice of welfare indicator. The paper shows that, at least in some contexts, the choice of welfare indicator can have a large and significant impact on measured inequality in utilization of health service and on the perceived incidence of public spending. Consequently, we can reach very different conclusions about the "same" issue depending on how we define socioeconomic status. The results call for more clarity and care in the analysis of health-related inequalities and for explicit recognition of the potential sensitivity of findings to the choice of welfare measure. The results also point to the need for more careful research on how different dimensions of socioeconomic status are related, and on the pathways by which these dimensions affect health-related variables.1

show abstract

Income-related inequalities in health: some international comparisons

Cited by 548 publications

References 20 publications

Neighborhood deprivation and prostate cancer mortality: a multilevel analysis from Sweden

Neighborhood deprivation and prostate cancer mortality: a multilevel analysis from Sweden

Family income and child health in the UK

Sometimes more equal than others: how health inequalities depend on the choice of welfare indicator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About