Using the 1996 Community Tracking Study household survey, the authors examined whether income inequality and primary care, measured at the state level, predict individual morbidity as measured by self-rated health status, while adjusting for potentially confounding individual variables. Their results indicate that distributions of income and primary care within states are significantly associated with individuals' self-rated health; that there is a gradient effect of income inequality on self-rated health; and that individuals living in states with a higher ratio of primary care physician to population are more likely to report good health than those living in states with a lower such ratio. From a policy perspective, improvement in individuals' health is likely to require a multi-pronged approach that addresses individual socioeconomic determinants of health, social and economic policies that affect income distribution, and a strengthening of the primary care aspects of health services.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
StarfieldB.Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology. Oxford University Press, New York, 1998.
2.
Institute of Medicine. Defining Primary Care: An Interim Report. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1994.
3.
ShiL., Balancing primary versus specialty care. J. R. Soc. Med.88: 428–432, 1995.
4.
PolitzerR. M., Primary care physician supply and the medically underserved. JAMA266: 104–109, 1991.
5.
StarfieldB.Primary Care: Concept, Evaluation, and Policy. Oxford University Press, New York, 1992.
6.
BindmanA. B., Primary care and receipt of preventive services. J. Gen. Intern. Med.11: 269–276, 1996.
7.
RoosN.Who should do the surgery? Tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy in one Canadian province. Inquiry, 16: 73–83, 1979.
8.
ShiL., The relation between primary care and life chances. J. Health Care Poor Underserved3: 321–335, 1992.
9.
StarfieldB., Primary care: Is it essential?Lancet344: 1129–1133, 1994.
10.
ShiL., Primary care, specialty care, and life chances. Int. J. Health Serv. 24: 431–458, 1994.
11.
GreenfieldS., Outcomes of patients with hypertension and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus treated by different systems and specialities: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA274: 1436, 1995.
12.
GreenL. A., Science and the future of primary care. J. Fam. Pract.42: 119, 1996.
13.
GrumbachK., Separating fad from fact: Family medicine, primary care, and the role of health services research. J. Fam. Pract.43: 30, 1996.
14.
DonaldsonM. S.VanselowN. A., The nature of primary care. J. Fam. Pract.42: 113, 1996.
15.
LohrK. N., Use of medical care in the Rand Health Insurance Experiment: Diagnosis and service specific analyses in a randomized controlled trial. Med. Care24: S1–S87, 1986.
16.
GoldbergG. A.NewhouseJ. P., Effects of cost sharing on physiological health, health practices, and worry. Health Serv. Res.22: 279–306, 1987.
17.
Newhouse, J. P., and the Health Insurance Group. Free for All? Lessons from the Rand Health Insurance Experiment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1993.
18.
StarfieldB.Effectiveness of Medical Care: Validating Clinical Wisdom. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1985.
19.
SheaS., Predisposing factors for severe, uncontrolled hypertension in an inner-city minority population. N. Engl. J. Med.327: 776–781, 1992.
20.
FranksP.FiscellaK., Primary care physicians and specialists as personal physicians: Health care expenditures and mortality experience. J. Fam. Pract.47: 105–109, 1998.
21.
StarfieldB., Primary care and health. JAMA266: 2268–2271, 1991.
22.
FarmerF. L.StokesC. S.FisherR. H., Poverty, primary care and age-specific mortality. J. Rural Health7: 153–169, 1991.
23.
U.S. Department of Commerce and the Census Bureau. Statistical Abstracts of the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1988–1992.
24.
ParchmanM.CullerS., Primary care physicians and avoidable hospitalization. J. Fam. Pract.39: 123–128, 1994.
25.
WeinerJ.StarfieldB., Measurement of the primary care roles of office-based physicians. Am. J. Public Health73: 666–671, 1983.
26.
RosenblattR., The generalist role of specialty physicians: Is there a hidden system of primary care?JAMA279: 1364–1370, 1998.
27.
ShiL., Income inequality, primary care, and health indicators. J. Fam. Pract.48: 275–284, 1999.
28.
ShiL.StarfieldB.Primary care, income inequality, and racial mortality in U.S. metropolitan areas. Paper submitted for publication.
29.
SusserM.SusserE., Choosing a future for epidemiology. I: Eras and paradigms. Am. J. Public Health86: 668–673, 1996.
30.
SusserM.SusserE., Choosing a future for epidemiology. II: From black box to Chinese boxes and eco-epidemiology. Am. J. Public Health86: 674–677, 1996.
31.
KoopmanJ. S.LynchJ. W., Individual causal models and population system models in epidemiology. Am. J. Public Health89: 1170–1174, 1999.
32.
KennedyB. P., Income distribution, socioeconomic status, and self-rated health in the United States: Multilevel analysis. BMJ317: 917–921, 1998.
33.
IdlerE. L.BenyaminiY., Self-rated health and mortality: A review of twenty-seven community studies. J. Health Soc. Behav.38: 21–37, 1997.
34.
IdlerE. L.KaslS., Self-ratings of health: Do they also predict change in functional ability?J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci.50B: S344–353, 1995.
35.
FarmerM. M.FerraroK. F., Distress and perceived health: Mechanisms of health decline. J. Health Soc. Behav.39: 298–311, 1997.
36.
KaplanG. A., Income inequality and mortality in the United States. BMJ312: 999–1003, 1996.
37.
LynchJ. W., Income inequality and mortality in metropolitan areas of the United States. Am. J. Public Health88: 1074–1080, 1998.
CunninghamP. J., Pressures on safety net access: The level of managed care penetration and uninsurance rate in a community. Health Serv. Res.34: 255–270, 1999.
41.
Office of Resource and Planning, Bureau of Health Professions. User Documentation for the Area Resource File (ARF). February 1998 Release. Health Resources and Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, 1998.
42.
KemperP., The design of the Community Tracking Study. Inquiry33: 195–206, 1996.
43.
MetcalfC. E.Site Definition and Sample Design for the Community Tracking Study. Technical Publication No. 1. Center for Studying Health System Change, Washington, D.C., 1996.
SenA., Mortality as an indicator of economic success or failure. Econ. J.108: 1–25, 1998.
46.
EvansR. G.BarerM. L.MarmorT. R.Why Are Some People Healthy and Others Not? The Determinants of Health of Populations. Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1994.
47.
SUDAAN [software]. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
48.
ShahB. V.BarnwellG.BielerF. S.SUDAAN User's Manual, Release 7.0. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
49.
LantzP. M., Socioeconomic factors, health behaviors, and mortality: Results from a nationally representative prospective study of US adults. JAMA279(21): 1703–1708, 1998.
50.
BunkerJ., Frazier, H., and Mosteller, F. Improving health: Measuring the effects of medical care. Milbank Q. 72: 225–228, 1994.
51.
StarfieldB.ShiL., Determinants of health: Testing of a conceptual model. In Socioeconomic Status and Health in Industrial Nations: Social, Psychological, and Biological Pathways, edited by AdlerN. E., pp. 344–346. New York Academy of Sciences, New York, 1999.
52.
KawachiI., Social capital, income inequality, and mortality. Am. J. Public Health87: 1491–1498, 1997.
53.
KawachiI.KennedyB. P.GlassR., Social capital and self-rated health: A contextual analysis. Am. J. Public Health89: 1187–1193, 1999.
54.
DyeT. R.Politics in States and Communities, Ed. 7. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1991.
55.
BanfieldE. C.The Unheavenly City: The Nature and Future of Our Urban Crisis. Free Press, Glencoe, Ill., 1961.
