Health Equity Metrics

J. Garay, D. Chiriboga, N. Kelley, A. Garay
{"title":"Health Equity Metrics","authors":"J. Garay, D. Chiriboga, N. Kelley, A. Garay","doi":"10.1093/ACREFORE/9780190632366.013.62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is one common health objective among all nations, as stated in the constitution of the World Health Organization in 1947: progress towards the best feasible level of health for all people. This goal captures the concept of health equity: fair distribution of unequal health. However, 70 years later, this common global objective has never been measured. Most of the available literature focuses on measuring health inequalities, not inequities, and compare health indicators (mainly access to health services) among population subgroups.\n A method is hereby proposed to identify standards for the best feasible levels of health through criteria of healthy, replicable, and sustainable (HRS) models. Once the HRS model countries were identified, adjusted mortality rates were applied to age- and sex-specific populations from 1950 to 2015, by calculating the net difference between the observed and expected mortality, using the HRS countries as the standard. This difference in mortality represents the net burden of health inequity (NBHiE), measured in avoidable deaths. This burden is due to global health inequity, that is, unfair inequality, due to social injustice. We then calculated the relative burden of health inequity (RBHiE), which is the proportion of NBHiE compared with all deaths. The analysis identified some 17 million avoidable deaths annually, representing around one-third of all deaths during the 2010–2015 period. This avoidable death toll (NBHiE) and proportion (RBHiE) have not changed much since the 1970s. Younger age groups and women are affected the most. When data were analyzed using smaller sample units (such as provinces, states, counties, or municipalities) in some countries, the sensitivity was increased and could detect higher levels of burden of health inequity.\n Most of the burden of health inequity takes place in countries with levels of income per capita below the average of the HRS countries, which we call the “dignity threshold.” Based on this threshold, a distribution of the world’s resources compatible with the universal right to health—the “equity curve”—is estimated. The equity curve would hypothetically be between this dignity threshold and a symmetric upper threshold around the world’s average per capita GDP. Such excess income prevents equitable distribution is correlated with a carbon footprint leading to >1.5º global warming (thus undermining the health of coming generations), and does not translate to better health or well-being. This upper threshold is defined as the “excess accumulation threshold.”\n The international redistribution required to enable all nations to have at least an average per capita income above the dignity threshold would be around 8% of the global GDP, much higher than the present levels of international cooperation. At subnational levels, the burden of health inequity can be the most sensitive barometer of socioeconomic justice between territories and their populations, informing and directing fiscal and territorial equity schemes and enabling all people within and between nations to enjoy the universal right to health.\n HRS models can also inspire lifestyles, and political and economic frameworks of ethical well-being, without undermining the rights of others in present and future generations.","PeriodicalId":342682,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ACREFORE/9780190632366.013.62","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is one common health objective among all nations, as stated in the constitution of the World Health Organization in 1947: progress towards the best feasible level of health for all people. This goal captures the concept of health equity: fair distribution of unequal health. However, 70 years later, this common global objective has never been measured. Most of the available literature focuses on measuring health inequalities, not inequities, and compare health indicators (mainly access to health services) among population subgroups. A method is hereby proposed to identify standards for the best feasible levels of health through criteria of healthy, replicable, and sustainable (HRS) models. Once the HRS model countries were identified, adjusted mortality rates were applied to age- and sex-specific populations from 1950 to 2015, by calculating the net difference between the observed and expected mortality, using the HRS countries as the standard. This difference in mortality represents the net burden of health inequity (NBHiE), measured in avoidable deaths. This burden is due to global health inequity, that is, unfair inequality, due to social injustice. We then calculated the relative burden of health inequity (RBHiE), which is the proportion of NBHiE compared with all deaths. The analysis identified some 17 million avoidable deaths annually, representing around one-third of all deaths during the 2010–2015 period. This avoidable death toll (NBHiE) and proportion (RBHiE) have not changed much since the 1970s. Younger age groups and women are affected the most. When data were analyzed using smaller sample units (such as provinces, states, counties, or municipalities) in some countries, the sensitivity was increased and could detect higher levels of burden of health inequity. Most of the burden of health inequity takes place in countries with levels of income per capita below the average of the HRS countries, which we call the “dignity threshold.” Based on this threshold, a distribution of the world’s resources compatible with the universal right to health—the “equity curve”—is estimated. The equity curve would hypothetically be between this dignity threshold and a symmetric upper threshold around the world’s average per capita GDP. Such excess income prevents equitable distribution is correlated with a carbon footprint leading to >1.5º global warming (thus undermining the health of coming generations), and does not translate to better health or well-being. This upper threshold is defined as the “excess accumulation threshold.” The international redistribution required to enable all nations to have at least an average per capita income above the dignity threshold would be around 8% of the global GDP, much higher than the present levels of international cooperation. At subnational levels, the burden of health inequity can be the most sensitive barometer of socioeconomic justice between territories and their populations, informing and directing fiscal and territorial equity schemes and enabling all people within and between nations to enjoy the universal right to health. HRS models can also inspire lifestyles, and political and economic frameworks of ethical well-being, without undermining the rights of others in present and future generations.
卫生公平指标
正如1947年《世界卫生组织组织法》所述,所有国家都有一个共同的卫生目标:朝着所有人的最佳可行健康水平取得进展。这一目标体现了卫生公平的概念:公平分配不平等的卫生。然而,70年后,这一共同的全球目标从未得到衡量。大多数现有文献侧重于衡量健康不平等,而不是不平等,并比较人口亚群体之间的健康指标(主要是获得卫生服务的机会)。本文提出了一种方法,通过健康、可复制和可持续(HRS)模型的标准来确定最佳可行健康水平的标准。一旦确定了HRS模型国家,就以HRS国家为标准,通过计算观察到的死亡率与预期死亡率之间的净差,将调整后的死亡率应用于1950年至2015年的年龄和性别特定人群。这种死亡率差异代表以可避免的死亡来衡量的健康不平等净负担。这一负担是由于全球卫生不平等造成的,即由于社会不公正造成的不公平不平等。然后,我们计算了健康不平等的相对负担(RBHiE),即NBHiE与所有死亡的比例。该分析确定每年约有1700万例可避免的死亡,约占2010-2015年期间所有死亡人数的三分之一。这种可避免的死亡人数和比例自20世纪70年代以来没有太大变化。年轻的年龄组和妇女受影响最大。当在一些国家使用较小的样本单位(如省、州、县或市)分析数据时,灵敏度提高了,可以发现更高水平的卫生不平等负担。卫生不平等的负担大多发生在人均收入水平低于HRS国家平均水平的国家,我们称之为“尊严门槛”。根据这一阈值,估算出与普遍健康权相适应的世界资源分配——“公平曲线”。假设公平曲线介于这个尊严阈值和围绕世界人均GDP的对称上限之间。这种阻碍公平分配的超额收入与导致全球变暖>1.5ºc的碳足迹相关(从而损害子孙后代的健康),并且不会转化为更好的健康或福祉。这个上限被定义为“超额积累阈值”。要使所有国家的人均收入至少超过尊严门槛,国际再分配需要占全球GDP的8%左右,远高于目前的国际合作水平。在国家以下各级,卫生不平等负担可以成为领土及其人口之间社会经济正义的最敏感晴雨表,为财政和领土公平计划提供信息和指导,并使国家内部和国家之间的所有人都能享有普遍健康权。人力资源管理模式还可以启发人们的生活方式以及道德福祉的政治和经济框架,而不会损害今世后代其他人的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信