Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 308

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implicit Value Judgments in the Measurement of Health Inequalities

Open access
HARPER, SAM, KING, NICHOLAS B., MEERSMAN, STEPHEN C., REICHMAN, MARSHA E., BREEN, NANCY, LYNCH, JOHN·2010·Milbank Quarterly

Abstract

CONTEXT: Quantitative estimates of the magnitude, direction, and rate of change of health inequalities play a crucial role in creating and assessing policies aimed at eliminating the disproportionate burden of disease in disadvantaged populations. It is generally assumed that the measurement of health inequalities is a value-neutral process, providing objective data that are then interpreted using normative judgments about whether a particular distribution of health is just, fair, or socially acceptable. METHODS: We discuss five examples in which normative judgments play a role in the measurement process itself, through either the selection of one measurement strategy to the exclusion of others or the selection of the type, significance, or weight assigned to the variables being measured. FINDINGS: Overall, we find that many commonly used measures of inequality are value laden and that the normative judgments implicit in these measures have important consequences for interpreting and responding to health inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: Because values implicit in the generation of health inequality measures may lead to radically different interpretations of the same underlying data, we urge researchers to explicitly consider and transparently discuss the normative judgments underlying their measures. We also urge policymakers and other consumers of health inequalities data to pay close attention to the measures on which they base their assessments of current and future health policies.

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 · 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00587.x

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 308

Metadata

Authors
HARPER, S., KING, N. B., MEERSMAN, S. C., REICHMAN, M. E., BREEN, N., & LYNCH, J.
Venue
Milbank Quarterly
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-03
Volume
88
Issue
1
Pages
4-29
ISSN
  • 0887-378X (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-0009
OpenAlex
W2168736985
Cited by
308
References
3
FWCI
17.51
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: Implicit Value Judgments in the Measurement of Health Inequalities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00587.x
The paper
HARPER, S., KING, N. B., MEERSMAN, S. C., REICHMAN, M. E., BREEN, N., & LYNCH, J. (2010). Implicit Value Judgments in the Measurement of Health Inequalities. Milbank Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00587.x

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.