IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v57y2003i9p1621-1629.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does inequality in self-assessed health predict inequality in survival by income? Evidence from Swedish data

Author

Listed:
  • van Doorslaer, Eddy
  • Gerdtham, Ulf-G.

Abstract

This paper empirically addresses two questions using a large, individual-level Swedish data set which links mortality data to health survey data. The first question is whether there is an effect of an individual's self-assessed health (SAH) on his subsequent survival probability and if this effect differs by socioeconomic factors. Our results indicate that the effect of SAH on mortality risk declines with age--probably because of adjustment towards 'milder' overall health evaluations at higher ages--but does not seem to differ by indicators of socioeconomic status (SES) like income or education. This finding suggests that there is no systematic adjustment of SAH by SES and therefore that any measured income-related inequality in SAH is unlikely to be biased by reporting error. The second question is: how much of the income-related inequality in mortality can be explained by income-related inequality in SAH? Using a decomposition method, we find that inequality in SAH accounts for only about 10% of mortality inequality if interactions are not allowed for, but its contribution is increased to about 28% if account is taken of the reporting tendencies by age. In other words, omitting the interaction between age and SAH leads to a substantial underestimation of the partial contribution of SAH inequality by income. These results suggest that the often observed inequalities in SAH by income do have predictive power for the--less often observed--inequalities in survival by income.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:57:y:2003:i:9:p:1621-1629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00559-2
    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.

    Corrections

    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:57:y:2003:i:9:p:1621-1629. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.