Educational inequalities in mortality amenable to healthcare. A comparison of European healthcare systems.
Adult
Aged
Alcohol Drinking
/ epidemiology
Educational Status
Europe
/ epidemiology
Female
Health Expenditures
/ statistics & numerical data
Healthcare Disparities
Humans
Insurance, Health
Male
Middle Aged
Mortality
National Health Programs
/ statistics & numerical data
Primary Prevention
Social Welfare
State Medicine
/ statistics & numerical data
Tobacco Use
/ epidemiology
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
20
12
2019
accepted:
19
05
2020
entrez:
3
7
2020
pubmed:
3
7
2020
medline:
9
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Educational inequalities in health and mortality in European countries have often been studied in the context of welfare regimes or political systems. We argue that the healthcare system is the national level feature most directly linkable to mortality amenable to healthcare. In this article, we ask to what extent the strength of educational differences in mortality amenable to healthcare vary among European countries and between European healthcare system types. This study uses data on mortality amenable to healthcare for 21 European populations, covering ages 35-79 and spanning from 1998 to 2006. ISCED education categories are used to calculate relative (RII) and absolute inequalities (SII) between the highest and lowest educated. The healthcare system typology is based on the latest available classification. Meta-analysis and ANOVA tests are used to see if and how they can explain between-country differences in inequalities and whether any healthcare system types have higher inequalities. All countries and healthcare system types exhibited relative and absolute educational inequalities in mortality amenable to healthcare. The low-supply and low performance mixed healthcare system type had the highest inequality point estimate for the male (RII = 3.57; SII = 414) and female (RII = 3.18; SII = 209) population, while the regulation-oriented public healthcare systems had the overall lowest (male RII = 1.78; male SII = 123; female RII = 1.86; female SII = 78.5). Due to data limitations, results were not robust enough to make substantial claims about typology differences. This article aims at discussing possible mechanisms connecting healthcare systems, social position, and health. Results indicate that factors located within the healthcare system are relevant for health inequalities, as inequalities in mortality amenable to medical care are present in all healthcare systems. Future research should aim at examining the role of specific characteristics of healthcare systems in more detail.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Educational inequalities in health and mortality in European countries have often been studied in the context of welfare regimes or political systems. We argue that the healthcare system is the national level feature most directly linkable to mortality amenable to healthcare. In this article, we ask to what extent the strength of educational differences in mortality amenable to healthcare vary among European countries and between European healthcare system types.
METHODS
This study uses data on mortality amenable to healthcare for 21 European populations, covering ages 35-79 and spanning from 1998 to 2006. ISCED education categories are used to calculate relative (RII) and absolute inequalities (SII) between the highest and lowest educated. The healthcare system typology is based on the latest available classification. Meta-analysis and ANOVA tests are used to see if and how they can explain between-country differences in inequalities and whether any healthcare system types have higher inequalities.
RESULTS
All countries and healthcare system types exhibited relative and absolute educational inequalities in mortality amenable to healthcare. The low-supply and low performance mixed healthcare system type had the highest inequality point estimate for the male (RII = 3.57; SII = 414) and female (RII = 3.18; SII = 209) population, while the regulation-oriented public healthcare systems had the overall lowest (male RII = 1.78; male SII = 123; female RII = 1.86; female SII = 78.5). Due to data limitations, results were not robust enough to make substantial claims about typology differences.
CONCLUSIONS
This article aims at discussing possible mechanisms connecting healthcare systems, social position, and health. Results indicate that factors located within the healthcare system are relevant for health inequalities, as inequalities in mortality amenable to medical care are present in all healthcare systems. Future research should aim at examining the role of specific characteristics of healthcare systems in more detail.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32614848
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234135
pii: PONE-D-19-34940
pmc: PMC7332057
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0234135Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/K02325X/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Int J Health Serv. 2009;39(2):321-41
pubmed: 19492628
BMC Public Health. 2013 Dec 27;13:1234
pubmed: 24369852
Int J Cancer. 2016 Mar 15;138(6):1350-60
pubmed: 26421593
Can J Public Health. 2009 May-Jun;100(3):180-3
pubmed: 19507718
Eur J Public Health. 2004 Sep;14(3):311-3
pubmed: 15369040
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 May;66(5):397-409
pubmed: 22080814
Sociol Health Illn. 2017 Sep;39(7):1117-1133
pubmed: 28369947
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Sep;63(5):1344-51
pubmed: 16698158
Scand J Soc Med. 1993 Sep;21(3):176-87
pubmed: 8235504
JAMA. 2005 Dec 14;294(22):2879-88
pubmed: 16352796
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011 Sep;65(9):740-5
pubmed: 21690243
Annu Rev Sociol. 2013 Jul;39:127-146
pubmed: 28769148
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Feb;127:51-62
pubmed: 24932917
Soc Sci Med. 1997 Mar;44(6):757-71
pubmed: 9080560
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jun 5;358(23):2468-81
pubmed: 18525043
Soc Sci Med. 2016 Jun;158:43-51
pubmed: 27107711
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 04;9(11):e110952
pubmed: 25369287
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2007 Feb;31(1):5-12
pubmed: 17333601
Int J Epidemiol. 2008 Oct;37(5):1105-8
pubmed: 18467378
Ann Fam Med. 2018 Mar;16(2):127-131
pubmed: 29531103
Health Policy. 2019 Jul;123(7):611-620
pubmed: 31133444
J Public Health Policy. 2014 May;35(2):171-84
pubmed: 24621843
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010 Oct;64(10):913-20
pubmed: 19833607
BMJ. 2001 Jan 27;322(7280):226-31
pubmed: 11159626
Health Policy. 2015 Jul;119(7):889-98
pubmed: 25981708
Soc Sci Med. 2010 Sep;71(5):841-50
pubmed: 20646808
Health Aff (Millwood). 2008 Jan-Feb;27(1):58-71
pubmed: 18180480
Eur J Public Health. 2017 Feb 1;27(suppl_1):73-81
pubmed: 28355650
Lancet. 2005 Feb 5-11;365(9458):493-500
pubmed: 15705459
Health Econ. 2018 Mar;27(3):e77-e89
pubmed: 29210134
Public Health. 2015 Jun;129(6):621-8
pubmed: 25862252
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Sep;57(5):895-904
pubmed: 12850114
Health Promot Int. 2001 Sep;16(3):289-97
pubmed: 11509466
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2001;25(1):12-20
pubmed: 11297294
Am J Public Health. 1994 Jun;84(6):932-7
pubmed: 8203689
Health Policy. 2011 Nov;103(1):47-52
pubmed: 21917350
Scand J Public Health. 2018 Feb;46(1):74-82
pubmed: 28653566
BMC Public Health. 2012 May 11;12:346
pubmed: 22578154
BMC Res Notes. 2012 Jan 20;5:52
pubmed: 22264277
Eur J Public Health. 2009 Oct;19(5):452-3
pubmed: 19587229
Lancet. 1997 Jun 7;349(9066):1655-9
pubmed: 9186383
Sociol Health Illn. 2008 May;30(4):565-82
pubmed: 18298629
Int J Public Health. 2010 Jun;55(3):217-20
pubmed: 19763393