The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
December 2010 (Volume 88)
Quarterly Article
Yukiko Asada
Nov 5, 2024
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Context: In a recent article in this journal, Sam Harper and his colleagues (2010) call for increased awareness and open dialogue of moral judgments underlying health inequality measures. They recommend that analysts use relative inequality measures when concerned only about health inequality but use absolute inequality measures when also concerned about other issues, such as the overall level of population health and the level of health for each group in the population. Methods: Using a simple, hypothetical example, this commentary shows that the relationships among inequality, the absolute level for each group, and the overall level in the population are more complex than suggested by the analysis by Harper and his colleagues. Findings: First, analysts must make the choice of absolute or relative inequality measures, separately, for single- and multiple-population cases. Second, in the single-population cases, analysts can use both relative and absolute inequality measures when concerned only about health inequality independent of other considerations. Third, in almost all real-world multiple-population cases, when using either the absolute or relative inequality measure, the assessment of health inequality is influenced by the absolute level of health for each group. Conclusions: The choice between absolute and relative inequality measures is not about the independent normative significance of inequality, as Harper and his colleagues suggest. In choosing between absolute and relative measures, future work needs to integrate an empirical examination of values, a moral assessment of values, and a technical understanding of inequality measures.
Author(s): Yukiko Asada
Keywords: health inequalities; measurement; ethics; health policy
Read on Wiley Online Library
Read on JSTOR
Volume 88, Issue 4 (pages 616–622) DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00614.x Published in 2010