IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The journals are full of great studies but can we believe the statistics? Revisiting the Mass Privatisation – Mortality Debate


  • Gerry, Christopher J.


Cross-national statistical analyses based on country-level panel data are increasingly popular in social epidemiology. To provide reliable results on the societal determinants of health, analysts must give very careful consideration to conceptual and methodological issues: aggregate (historical) data are typically compatible with multiple alternative stories of the data-generating process. Studies in this field which fail to relate their empirical approach to the true underlying data-generating process are likely to produce misleading results if, for example, they misspecify their models by failing to explore the statistical properties of the longitudinal aspect of their data or by ignoring endogeneity issues. We illustrate the importance of this extra need for care with reference to a recent debate on whether discussing the role of rapid mass privatisation can explain post-communist mortality fluctuations. We demonstrate that the finding that rapid mass privatisation was a “crucial determinant” of male mortality fluctuations in the post-communist world is rejected once better consideration is given to the way in which the data are generated.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerry, Christopher J., 2012. "The journals are full of great studies but can we believe the statistics? Revisiting the Mass Privatisation – Mortality Debate," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 14-22.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:75:y:2012:i:1:p:14-22 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.027

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    2. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
    3. Elizabeth Brainerd & David M. Cutler, 2005. "Autopsy on an Empire: Understanding Mortality in Russia and the Former Soviet Union," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 107-130, Winter.
    4. G. S. Maddala, 1999. "On the Use of Panel Data Methods with Cross-Country Data," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 55-56, pages 429-448.
    5. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    6. John S. Earle & Scott Gehlbach, 2010. ""Mass Privatisation and the Post-Communist Mortality Crisis": Is There Really a Relationship?," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles 10-162, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    7. Shandra, John M. & Nobles, Jenna & London, Bruce & Williamson, J.B.John B., 2004. "Dependency, democracy, and infant mortality: a quantitative, cross-national analysis of less developed countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 321-333, July.
    8. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    9. Shkolnikov, Vladimir M. & Cornia, Giovanni A. & Leon, David A. & Mesle, France, 1998. "Causes of the Russian mortality crisis: Evidence and interpretations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 1995-2011, November.
    10. Gravelle, Hugh & Wildman, John & Sutton, Matthew, 2002. "Income, income inequality and health: what can we learn from aggregate data?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 577-589, February.
    11. Stephen Bond, 2002. "Dynamic panel data models: a guide to microdata methods and practice," CeMMAP working papers CWP09/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. World Bank, 2005. "Dying Too Young : Addressing Premature Mortality and Ill Health Due to Non-Communicable Diseases and Injuries in the Russian Federation," World Bank Other Operational Studies 8439, The World Bank.
    13. Powell-Jackson, Timothy & Basu, Sanjay & Balabanova, Dina & McKee, Martin & Stuckler, David, 2011. "Democracy and growth in divided societies: A health-inequality trap?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 33-41, July.
    14. Choi, In, 2001. "Unit root tests for panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 249-272, April.
    15. Cockerham, William C., 2000. "Health lifestyles in Russia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(9), pages 1313-1324, November.
    16. Nickell, Stephen J, 1981. "Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1417-1426, November.
    17. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    18. Edward E. Leamer, 2010. "Tantalus on the Road to Asymptopia," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 31-46, Spring.
    19. repec:adr:anecst:y:1999:i:55-56:p:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:adr:anecst:y:1999:i:55-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Christopher J. Gerry & Georgios Papadopoulos, 2015. "Sample attrition in the RLMS, 2001–10," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 23(2), pages 425-468, April.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:75:y:2012:i:1:p:14-22. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.