...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Epidemiology: Official Journal of the International Epidemiological Association >Comparing health inequalities across time and place--rate ratios and rate differences lead to different conclusions: analysis of cross-sectional data from 22 countries 1991-2001.
【24h】

Comparing health inequalities across time and place--rate ratios and rate differences lead to different conclusions: analysis of cross-sectional data from 22 countries 1991-2001.

机译:比较时间和地点之间的健康不平等-比率和比率差异得出不同的结论:对1991-2001年22个国家的横截面数据进行分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Socio-economic inequalities in health within countries are a key public health issue. It is important that we can effectively make international comparisons of the level of inequalities and assess trends over time. We investigate how the results of such comparisons can differ depending on whether inequality is quantified using the rate ratio or rate difference. METHODS: We examine levels and trends in inequality in under-five mortality using data from 22 low/lower-middle income countries [Africa (11), Latin America/Caribbean (5), Asia (6)], each with two Demographic and Health Surveys between 1991 and 2001. Within-country inequalities are quantified using the rate ratio and rate difference. RESULTS: Ranking countries by their level of inequality at one point in time differed, sometimes substantially, according to whether the rate ratio or difference was used (Spearman's rank correlation = 0.49). Similarly, ranking countries according to the magnitude and direction of change in inequality over time depended on the measure used. Importantly from a policy perspective, in five countries the direction of change was in the opposite direction (increase vs decline in inequality) when using the ratio compared with the difference measure. CONCLUSIONS: The results of comparisons of the magnitude of health inequalities between countries and over time depend upon whether the rate ratio or rate difference is used. When statements are made comparing the size of inequalities it should be made completely clear whether these are measured on an absolute or relative scale. If the substantive conclusions differ according to the measure used this should be clearly stated. In this situation emphasis should only be given to results based on one summary measure if this can be clearly and explicitly justified in the context.
机译:背景:国家内部卫生方面的社会经济不平等是关键的公共卫生问题。重要的是,我们可以有效地对不平等程度进行国际比较,并评估一段时间内的趋势。我们调查这种比较的结果如何不同,这取决于是否使用比率或比率差来量化不平等。方法:我们使用来自22个低/中低收入国家[非洲(11),拉丁美洲/加勒比(5),亚洲(6)]的数据检查了5岁以下儿童不平等的水平和趋势,每个国家都有两个人口统计和1991年至2001年的健康调查。国家内部的不平等程度是通过比率和比率差异来量化的。结果:根据使用比率或差异的比率,在一时间点按国家的不平等程度对国家进行排名存在差异,有时差异很大(Spearman等级相关系数= 0.49)。同样,根据不平等程度随时间变化的程度和方向对国家进行排名取决于所使用的度量。从政策角度来看,重要的是,在五个国家中,使用比率与差异衡量法相比,变化的方向是相反的(不平等程度的增加与减少)。结论:各国之间以及随着时间的推移,卫生不平等程度的比较结果取决于是否使用比率或比率差异。当发表陈述比较不平等的规模时,应该完全清楚这些不平等是绝对的还是相对的。如果根据使用的方法得出的实质性结论有所不同,则应明确说明。在这种情况下,只有在可以在上下文中清楚明确地证明其合理性的情况下,才应只强调基于一种汇总度量的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号