Considering mean and inequality health outcomes together: The population health performance index

5Citations
Citations of this article
26Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The purpose was to develop and test a population health measure that combines mean health outcomes and inequalities into a single GDP-like metric to help policymakers measure population health performance on both dimensions in one metric. Methods: The Population Health Performance Index is a weighted average of a mean index and an inequality index according to the user's inequality aversion. We deploy this methodology for two combinations of health outcome and disparity domain: infant mortality by race and unhealthy days by education. Results: The PHPI is bounded between 0 and 1, and is comprised of a weighted average of two separate indices: a mean index and an inequality index, with 1 representing the ideal state of no ill health and no inequality and 0 representing the worst state in the U.S. PHPI values across states (neutral 50:50 weighting) vary between 0.60 (Massachusetts) to 0.17 (Delaware) for infant mortality by race and between 0.65 (North Dakota) to 0.00 (West Virginia) for unhealthy days by education. For some states, the choice of inequality aversion significantly impacts their PHPI value and state rank. Conclusions: Mean and inequality health outcomes can be combined into a single Population Health Performance Index for use by public and private policy makers, like the GDP is used as a summary metric to measure economic output. The index can allow for varying degrees of inequality aversion, an individual's or jurisdiction's value choice that can substantially impact the value of this new summary population health metric.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kindig, D., Lardinois, N., Asada, Y., & Mullahy, J. (2018). Considering mean and inequality health outcomes together: The population health performance index. International Journal for Equity in Health, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-018-0731-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free