Cut-point Shift and Index Shift in Self-reported Health
There is a concern that ordered responses on health questions may differ acrosspopulations or even across subgroups of a population. This reporting heterogeneity mayinvalidate group comparisons and measures of health inequality. This paper proposes a test fordifferential reporting in ordered response models which allows us to distinguish betweencut-point shift and index shift. The method is illustrated using Canadian National PopulationHealth Survey data. The McMaster Health Utility Index (HUI) is used as a more objective healthmeasure than the simple 5-point scale of self-assessed health. We find clear evidence of indexshifting and cut-point shifting for age and gender, but not for income, education or language.
|Date of creation:||09 Jun 2003|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Gustav Mahlerplein 117, 1082 MS Amsterdam|
Phone: +31 (0)20 598 4580
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- van Doorslaer, Eddy & Gerdtham, Ulf-G., 2003. "Does inequality in self-assessed health predict inequality in survival by income? Evidence from Swedish data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 1621-1629, November.
- Shmueli, Amir, 2003. "Socio-economic and demographic variation in health and in its measures: the issue of reporting heterogeneity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 125-134, July.
- van Doorslaer, Eddy & Wagstaff, Adam & Bleichrodt, Han & Calonge, Samuel & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Gerfin, Michael & Geurts, Jose & Gross, Lorna & Hakkinen, Unto & Leu, Robert E., 1997. "Income-related inequalities in health: some international comparisons," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 93-112, February.
- Groot, Wim, 2000. "Adaptation and scale of reference bias in self-assessments of quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 403-420, May.
- Crossley, Thomas F. & Kennedy, Steven, 2002. "The reliability of self-assessed health status," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 643-658, July.
- van der Klaauw, Bas & Koning, Ruud H, 2003.
"Testing the Normality Assumption in the Sample Selection Model with an Application to Travel Demand,"
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics,
American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 31-42, January.
- Klaauw, B. van der & Koning, R.H., 2000. "Testing the normality assumption in the sample selection model with an application to travel demand," Research Report 00F37, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
- Doorslaer, Eddy van & Jones, Andrew M., 2003. "Inequalities in self-reported health: validation of a new approach to measurement," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 61-87, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20030042. 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: (Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900)
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.