Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 672

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Can patient self-management help explain the SES health gradient?

Open access
Goldman, Dana P., Smith, James P.·2002·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

There are large differences in health outcomes by socioeconomic status (SES) that cannot be explained fully by traditional arguments, such as access to care or poor health behaviors. We consider a different explanation—better self-management of disease by the more educated. We examine differences by education in treatment adherence among patients with two illnesses, diabetes and HIV, and then assess the subsequent impact of differential adherence on health status. One unique component of this research is that for diabetes we combine two different surveys—one cohort study and one randomized clinical trial—that are usually used exclusively by either biomedical or/and social scientists separately. For both illnesses, we find significant effects of adherence that are much stronger among patients with high SES. After controlling for other factors, more educated HIV+ patients are more likely to adhere to therapy, and this adherence made them experience improvements in their self-reported general health. Similarly, among diabetics, the less educated were much more likely to switch treatment, which led to worsening general health. In the randomized trial setting, intensive treatment regimens that compensated for poor adherence led to better improvements in glycemic control for the less educated. Among two distinct chronic illnesses, the ability to maintain a better health regimen is an important independent determinant of subsequent health outcomes. This finding is robust across clinical trial and population-based settings. Because this ability varies by schooling, self-maintenance is an important reason for the steep SES gradient in health outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.162086599

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 672

Metadata

Authors
Goldman, D. P., & Smith, J. P.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2002-07-24
Volume
99
Issue
16
Pages
10929-10934
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1496799874
Cited by
672
References
2
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Can patient self-management help explain the SES health gradient? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.162086599
The paper
Goldman, D. P., & Smith, J. P. (2002). Can patient self-management help explain the SES health gradient? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.162086599

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.