IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Comparing measures of health inequality

  • Manor, Orly
  • Matthews, Sharon
  • Power, Chris
Registered author(s):

    Several methods are available to measure social inequalities in health. This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches, in particular the odds ratio, the slope and alpha. These methods are illustrated using data from subjects in the 1958 British birth cohort. The inequality measures are compared using health status at ages 23 and 33. Six health indicators are examined, including self-rated health, limiting long-standing illness, psychological health, respiratory symptoms, asthma and obesity. Two social indicators are compared, namely class at birth and educational qualifications. Conclusions do not differ substantially using the three methods for measuring inequality. However, consistent differences were evident between the measures of social position, with greater inequalities apparent for educational qualifications. Choice of social indicator therefore appears to be of primary importance in measuring health inequality.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VBF-3SWY7R9-D/2/c70a09f2b1a87960b838c7282454c5bc
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 45 (1997)
    Issue (Month): 5 (September)
    Pages: 761-771

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:45:y:1997:i:5:p:761-771
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description

    Order Information: Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
    Web: http://www.elsevier.com/orderme/journalorderform.cws_home/315/journalorderform1/orderooc/id=654&ref=654_01_ooc_1&version=01

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:45:y:1997:i:5:p:761-771. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.