The problem introduced by grouping income data when measuring socioeconomic inequalities in health (and health care) has been highlighted in a recent study. We reexamine this issue and show there is a tendency to underestimate the concentration index at an increasing rate when lowering the number of income categories. This bias results from a form of measurement error and we propose two correction methods. Firstly, the use of instrumental variables (IV) can reduce the error within income categories. Secondly, through a simple formula for correction that is based only on the number of groups. We compare the performance of these methods using data from 15 European countries and the United States. We find that the simple correction formula reduces the impact of grouping and always outperforms the IV approach. Use of this correction can substantially improve comparisons of the concentration index both across countries and across time.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number
599.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C2 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: