« Disparities Dialogue | Main | Medicare Cost-Cutting Controversy »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Readers may also find this report on "variation" useful:


Interesting posting David thank you. How big does a population need to be for a rate to become/"qualify" as a burden? And can one assume that the answer varies across measures, i.e. is different for mortality than for disease prevalence ot incidence?

Dominique, thanks for reading the blog and taking the time to comment. I don't think there is some absolute cutoff where burden becomes important...it is just that with larger populations similar disparities have a greater impact on overall health (think rate X number of people in the group). I regret having to often use mortality rates as the indicator (because that data is often more available and valid for populations), but non mortality measures are also very important as you suggest. I don't however believe that rate vs burden considerations would differ between them.....I'd be interested in your or others views on this.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Recent Posts