Measurement of Health Program Equity Made Easier: Validation of a Simplified Asset Index Using Program Data From Honduras and Senegal.

Equitable access to programs and health services is essential to achieving national and international health goals, but it is rarely assessed because of perceived measurement challenges. One of these challenges concerns the complexities of collecting the data needed to construct asset or wealth indices, which can involve asking as many as 40 survey questions, many with multiple responses. To determine whether the number of variables and questions could be reduced to a level low enough for more routine inclusion in evaluations and research without compromising programmatic conclusions, we used data from a program evaluation in Honduras that compared a pro-poor intervention with government clinic performance as well as data from a results-based financing project in Senegal. In both, the full Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) asset questionnaires had been used as part of the evaluations. Using the full DHS results as the "gold standard," we examined the effect of retaining successively smaller numbers of variables on the classification of the program clients in wealth quintiles. Principal components analysis was used to identify those variables in each country that demonstrated minimal absolute factor loading values for 8 different thresholds, ranging from 0.05 to 0.70. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess correlation. We found that the 111 asset variables and 41 questions in the Honduras DHS could be reduced to 9 variables, captured by only 8 survey questions (kappa statistic, 0.634), without substantially altering the wealth quintile distributions for either the pro-poor program or the government clinics or changing the resulting policy conclusions. In Senegal, the 103 asset variables and 36 questions could be reduced to 32 variables and 20 questions (kappa statistic, 0.882) while maintaining a consistent mix of users in each of the 2 lowest quintiles. Less than 60% of the asset variables in the 2 countries' full DHS asset indices overlapped, and in none of the 8 simplified asset index iterations did this proportion exceed 50%. We conclude that substantially reducing the number of variables and questions used to assess equity is feasible, producing valid results and providing a less burdensome way for program implementers or researchers to evaluate whether their interventions are pro-poor. Developing a standardized, simplified asset questionnaire that could be used across countries may prove difficult, however, given that the variables that contribute the most to the asset index are largely country-specific.

Where is the gap?: the contribution of disparities within developing countries to global inequalities in under-five mortality.

BACKGROUND: Global health equity strategists have previously focused much on differences across countries. At first glance, the global health gap appears to result primarily from disparities between the developing and developed regions. We examine how much of this disparity could be attributed to within-country disparities in developing nations. METHODS: We used data from Demographic and Health Surveys conducted between 1995 and 2010 in 67 developing countries. Using a population attributable risk approach, we computed the proportion of global under-five mortality gap and the absolute number of under-five deaths that would be reduced if the under-five mortality rate in each of these 67 countries was lowered to the level of the top 10% economic group in each country. As a sensitivity check, we also conducted comparable calculations using top 5% and the top 20% economic group. RESULTS: In 2007, approximately 6.6 million under-five deaths were observed in the 67 countries used in the analysis. This could be reduced to only 600,000 deaths if these countries had the same under-five mortality rate as developed countries. If the under-five mortality rate was lowered to the rate among the top 10% economic group in each of these countries, under-five deaths would be reduced to 3.7 million. This corresponds to a 48% reduction in the global mortality gap and 2.9 million under-five deaths averted. Using cutoff points of top 5% and top 20% economic groups showed reduction of 37% and 56% respectively in the global mortality gap. With these cutoff points, respectively 2.3 and 3.4 million under-five deaths would be averted. CONCLUSION: Under-five mortality disparities within developing countries account for roughly half of the global gap between developed and developing countries. Thus, within-country inequities deserve as much consideration as do inequalities between the world's developing and developed regions.

What difference do the new WHO child growth standards make for the prevalence and socioeconomic distribution of undernutrition?

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has recently established revised child growth standards. OBJECTIVE: To assess how the use of these new standards affects the estimated prevalence and socioeconomic distribution of stunting and underweight among children in a large number of low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We analyzed Demographic and Health Survey data for stunting and underweight in 41 low- and middle-income countries employing these new standards and compared the results with those produced by analyses of the same data using the old growth references. RESULTS: For all 41 countries, the prevalence of stunting increases with the adoption of the new standards, by 5.4 percentage points on average (95% CI: 5.1, 5.7). The prevalence of underweight decreases in all but two of the countries, by an average of 2.9 percentage points (95% CI: 2.7, 3.2). The impact of using the new standards on socioeconomic inequalities is mixed. For stunting, inequalities tend to rise in absolute terms but tend to decline in relative terms. The impact on underweight is inconsistent across countries. Poor children suffer most from undernutrition, but even among the better-off children in developing countries, undernutrition rates are high enough to deserve attention. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the adoption of the new WHO standards in itself is unlikely to affect policies dramatically. They do confirm, however, that different strategies are likely to be required in these countries to effectively address undernutrition among children at different socioeconomic levels.

Making health systems more equitable.

Health systems are consistently inequitable, providing more and higher quality services to the well-off, who need them less, than to the poor, who are unable to obtain them. In the absence of a concerted effort to ensure that health systems reach disadvantaged groups more effectively, such inequities are likely to continue. Yet this situation need not be accepted as inevitable, for there are many promising measures that might be pursued: establishment of goals for improved coverage in the poor, rather than in entire populations, and use of those goals to direct planning toward the needs of the disadvantaged; use of one or more of the several techniques that seem to have been effective in at least some of the settings where they have been tried; and empowerment of poor clients to have a more central role in health system design and operation.