Office of the Associate Director for Policy, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Health Econ. 2012 Nov;21(11):1375-81. doi: 10.1002/hec.1796. Epub 2011 Sep 28.
Although the concentration index (CI) and the health achievement index (HAI) have been extensively used, previous studies have relied on bootstrapping to compute the variance of the HAI, whereas competing variance estimators exist for the CI. This paper provides methods of statistical inference for the HAI and compares the available variance estimators for both the CI and the HAI using Monte Carlo simulation. Results for both the CI and the HAI suggest that analytical methods and bootstrapping are well behaved. The convenient regression method gives standard errors close to the other methods, provided the CI is not too large (< 0.2), but otherwise tends to understate the standard errors. In our simulation setting, the improvement from the Newey-West correction over the convenient regression method has mixed evidence when the CI ≤ 0.1 and is modest when the CI > 0.1. Published 2011. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
尽管集中指数(CI)和健康成就指数(HAI)已经被广泛应用,但之前的研究依赖于自举法来计算 HAI 的方差,而 CI 则存在其他竞争方差估计方法。本文提供了 HAI 的统计推断方法,并使用蒙特卡罗模拟比较了 CI 和 HAI 的可用方差估计方法。CI 和 HAI 的结果均表明,分析方法和自举法表现良好。方便回归法给出的标准误差接近其他方法,只要 CI 不太大(<0.2),但在 CI 较大时(>0.1)往往会低估标准误差。在我们的模拟环境中,当 CI≤0.1 时,Newey-West 校正法相对于方便回归法的改进效果好坏参半,而当 CI>0.1 时则效果适度。2011 年发表。本文是美国政府的一项工作,在美国属于公有领域。