↓ Skip to main content

Measuring health inequality among children in developing countries: does the choice of the indicator of economic status matter?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
199 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Measuring health inequality among children in developing countries: does the choice of the indicator of economic status matter?
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2003
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-2-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanja AJ Houweling, Anton E Kunst, Johan P Mackenbach

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, poor-rich inequalities in health in developing countries receive a lot of attention from both researchers and policy makers. Since measuring economic status in developing countries is often problematic, different indicators of wealth are used in different studies. Until now, there is a lack of evidence on the extent to which the use of different measures of economic status affects the observed magnitude of health inequalities. METHODS: This paper provides this empirical evidence for 10 developing countries, using the Demographic and Health Surveys data-set. We compared the World Bank asset index to three alternative wealth indices, all based on household assets. Under-5 mortality and measles immunisation coverage were the health outcomes studied. Poor-rich inequalities in under-5 mortality and measles immunisation coverage were measured using the Relative Index of Inequality. RESULTS: Comparing the World Bank index to the alternative indices, we found that (1) the relative position of households in the national wealth hierarchy varied to an important extent with the asset index used, (2) observed poor-rich inequalities in under-5 mortality and immunisation coverage often changed, in some cases to an important extent, and that (3) the size and direction of this change varied per country, index, and health indicator. CONCLUSION: Researchers and policy makers should be aware that the choice of the measure of economic status influences the observed magnitude of health inequalities, and that differences in health inequalities between countries or time periods, may be an artefact of different wealth measures used.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
India 2 3%
South Africa 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Thailand 1 2%
Bangladesh 1 2%
Unknown 50 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 18 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 12 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2014.
All research outputs
#2,433,970
of 9,727,818 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#371
of 826 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,119
of 208,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#14
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,727,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 826 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 208,236 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.