Self-reported health: Reliability and consequences for health inequality measurement

Health Economics

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 645-652

  Clarke, Philip M ^a,b   Ryan, Chris ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b PRINCE OF WALES HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Australia; Concentraion index; Inequality; Measurement error; Self reported health

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INCOME; INTERVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL STATUS; SOCIOECONOMICS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; SELF DISCLOSURE; SOCIAL CLASS;

EID: 33745309862     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: 10991050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1089     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Van Doorslaer E, Wagstaff A, Bliechrodt H et al. Income-related inequalities in health: some international comparisons. J Health Econ 1997; 16: 93-112.
2. Gravelle H, Sutton M. Income related inequalities in self assessed health in Britain: 1979-1995. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003; 57: 125-129.
3. Van Doorslaer E, Gerdtham U-G. Does inequality in self-assessed health predict inequality in survival by income? Evidence from Swedish data. Soc Sci Med 2003; 57: 1621-1629.
4. Ware JE, Brook RH, Davies-Avery A et al. Conceptualization and measurement of health status for adults in the health insurance study. Report R-1987/1-HEW Rand Corporation, 1980.
5. Wagstaff A, van Doorslaer E. Measuring inequalities in the presents of multiple-category morbidity indicators. Health Econ 1994; 3: 281-291.
6. Van Doorslaer E, Jones A. Inequality in self-reported health: validation of a new approach to measurement. J Health Econ 2003; 22: 61-87.
7. Crossley TF, Kennedy S. The reliability of self-assessed health status. J Health Econ 2002; 21: 643-658.
8. Cousins SO. Validity and reliability of self-reported health of persons aged 70 and older. Health Care Women Int 1997; 2: 165-174.
9. Andresen EM, Catlin TK, Wyrwich KW, Jackson-Thompson J. Retest reliability of surveillance questions on health related quality of life. J Epidemol Community Health 2003; 57: 339-343.
10. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1995 National Health Survey: Users' Guide. Cat. No. 4363.0.
11. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974; 185: 1124-1131.
12. Wooden M, Watson N. The household, income and labour dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey: an introduction to the proposed survey design and plan. HILDA Project Discussion Paper Series No. 01/00, December 2000.
13. Hochstim JR. A critical comparison of three strategies of collecting data from households. J Am Stat Assoc 1967; 62: 976-989.
14. McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JJ. Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Med Care 1994; 32: 551-567.
15. Tourangeau R, Smith TW. Asking sensitive questions: the impact of data collection mode, questions format and question context. Public Opin Quart 1996; 60: 275-304.
16. Clausen A. Response validity: vote report. Public Opin Quart 1968; 32: 588-606.
17. Krosnick JA. Survey research. Annu Rev Psychol 1999; 50: 537-567.
18. Van Doorslaer E, Koolman X. Explaining the differences in income-related health inequalities across European countries. Health Econ 2004; 13: 609-628.
19. Kakwani N, Wagstaff A, van Doorslaer E. Socio-economic inequalities in health: measurement, computation, and statistical inference. J Econometrics 1997; 77: 87-104.
20. Wooldridge JM. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2002.