Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Decomposition of concentration indices yields useful information regarding the relative importance of various determinants of inequitable health outcomes. But the two estimation approaches to decomposition in current use are not suit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dear Keith BG, Carmichael Gordon A, Lim Lynette LY, Yiengprugsawan Vasoontara, Sleigh Adrian C
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-03-01
Series:BMC Research Notes
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1756-0500/3/57
id doaj-ff57d5b6886745b0b5fb016f51ed1ad5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ff57d5b6886745b0b5fb016f51ed1ad52020-11-25T02:14:12ZengBMCBMC Research Notes1756-05002010-03-01315710.1186/1756-0500-3-57Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference groupDear Keith BGCarmichael Gordon ALim Lynette LYYiengprugsawan VasoontaraSleigh Adrian C<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Decomposition of concentration indices yields useful information regarding the relative importance of various determinants of inequitable health outcomes. But the two estimation approaches to decomposition in current use are not suitable for binary outcomes.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>The paper compares three estimation approaches for decomposition of inequality concentration indices: Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), probit, and the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) binomial distribution and identity link. Data are from the Thai Health and Welfare Survey 2003. The OLS estimates do not take into account the binary nature of the outcome and the probit estimates depend on the choice of reference groups, whereas the GLM binomial identity approach has neither of these problems.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The GLM with binomial distribution and identity link allows the inequality decomposition model to hold, and produces valid estimates of determinants that do not vary according to choice of reference groups. This GLM approach is readily available in standard statistical packages.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1756-0500/3/57
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dear Keith BG
Carmichael Gordon A
Lim Lynette LY
Yiengprugsawan Vasoontara
Sleigh Adrian C
spellingShingle Dear Keith BG
Carmichael Gordon A
Lim Lynette LY
Yiengprugsawan Vasoontara
Sleigh Adrian C
Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
BMC Research Notes
author_facet Dear Keith BG
Carmichael Gordon A
Lim Lynette LY
Yiengprugsawan Vasoontara
Sleigh Adrian C
author_sort Dear Keith BG
title Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
title_short Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
title_full Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
title_fullStr Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
title_full_unstemmed Decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
title_sort decomposing socioeconomic inequality for binary health outcomes: an improved estimation that does not vary by choice of reference group
publisher BMC
series BMC Research Notes
issn 1756-0500
publishDate 2010-03-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Decomposition of concentration indices yields useful information regarding the relative importance of various determinants of inequitable health outcomes. But the two estimation approaches to decomposition in current use are not suitable for binary outcomes.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>The paper compares three estimation approaches for decomposition of inequality concentration indices: Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), probit, and the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) binomial distribution and identity link. Data are from the Thai Health and Welfare Survey 2003. The OLS estimates do not take into account the binary nature of the outcome and the probit estimates depend on the choice of reference groups, whereas the GLM binomial identity approach has neither of these problems.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The GLM with binomial distribution and identity link allows the inequality decomposition model to hold, and produces valid estimates of determinants that do not vary according to choice of reference groups. This GLM approach is readily available in standard statistical packages.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1756-0500/3/57
work_keys_str_mv AT dearkeithbg decomposingsocioeconomicinequalityforbinaryhealthoutcomesanimprovedestimationthatdoesnotvarybychoiceofreferencegroup
AT carmichaelgordona decomposingsocioeconomicinequalityforbinaryhealthoutcomesanimprovedestimationthatdoesnotvarybychoiceofreferencegroup
AT limlynettely decomposingsocioeconomicinequalityforbinaryhealthoutcomesanimprovedestimationthatdoesnotvarybychoiceofreferencegroup
AT yiengprugsawanvasoontara decomposingsocioeconomicinequalityforbinaryhealthoutcomesanimprovedestimationthatdoesnotvarybychoiceofreferencegroup
AT sleighadrianc decomposingsocioeconomicinequalityforbinaryhealthoutcomesanimprovedestimationthatdoesnotvarybychoiceofreferencegroup
_version_ 1724901120833224704