Implicit Value Judgments in the Measurement of Health Inequalities

Abstract

Context: Quantitative estimates of the magnitude, direction, and rate of change of health inequalities play a crucial role in creating and assessing policies aimed at eliminating the disproportionate burden of disease in disadvantaged populations. It is generally assumed that the measurement of health inequalities is a value-neutral process, providing objective data that are then interpreted using normative judgments about whether a particular distribution of health is just, fair, or socially acceptable. Methods:We discuss five examples in which normative judgments play a role in the measurement process itself, through either the selection of one measurement strategy to the exclusion of others or the selection of the type, significance, or weight assigned to the variables being measured. Findings:Overall, we find that many commonly used measures of inequality are value laden and that the normative judgments implicit in these measures have important consequences for interpreting and responding to health inequalities. Conclusions:Because values implicit in the generation of health inequality measures may lead to radically different interpretations of the same underlying data, we urge researchers to explicitly consider and transparently discuss the normative judgments underlying their measures. We also urge policymakers and other consumers of health inequalities data to pay close attention to the measures on which they base their assessments of current and future health policies.

Health Equity Indicators for the English NHS: a longitudinal whole-population study at the small-area level

“…However, this is an absolute measure and so needs to be supplemented with at least one relative measure, as absolute and relative inequality often move in different directions when the mean is changing. 195 Ideally, we also recommend presenting a further battery of inequality indices including (1) a relative attainment index as well as a relative shortfall index, and (2) a range of extreme group measures including the absolute and relative gap between the top and bottom fifths, between the bottom and middle fifths, and between the top and middle fifths. It is worth checking relative attainment as well as relative shortfall, as they can also move in different directions when the mean is changing, for instance inequality in mortality (a shortfall concept) may be falling while inequality in survival (an attainment concept) is rising.…”

Changing Inequalities in Cervical Cancer: Modeling the Impact of Vaccine Uptake, Vaccine Herd Effects, and Cervical Cancer Screening in the Post-Vaccination Era

“…Because absolute and relative measures of inequality may give different results when measuring changes in inequality over time (58,59), we used both an absolute and relative indicator of inequality, as is recommended (59). We measured absolute SCC inequality using incidence rate differences and relative SCC inequality using incidence rate ratios, with frequently screened women as the reference category for both measures.…”

Una epidemiología social para América Latina: una necesidad más allá de la reflexión sobre las inequidades en salud

“…e implica un cuestionamiento más profundo: "¿qué debería ser?" (3) .En contraste, la investigación etiológica no se ampara en el mundo real, por el contrario, yuxtapone el mundo real frente a un mundo hipotético, focalizándose en entender la relación entre una exposición y un desenlace determinados. En ese marco, la relación causal es el cambio esperado en el desenlace después de una intervención sobre la exposición.…”