Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17873219›Full record

ReviewJournal of epidemiology and community health2007

Income inequality measures.

Fernando G De Maio

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

120 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Proposal of a Vaccination Needs Index to Prioritise Municipal Interventions in Brazil.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Fernando G De MaioSimon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. fdemaio@sfu.ca

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Gini coefficient has been the most popular method for operationalising income inequality in the public health literature. However, a number of alternative methods exist, and they offer researchers the means to develop a more nuanced understanding of the distribution of income. Income inequality measures such as the generalised entropy index and the Atkinson index offer the ability to examine the effects of inequalities in different areas of the income spectrum, enabling more meaningful quantitative assessments of qualitatively different inequalities. This glossary provides a conceptual introduction to these and other income inequality measures.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalEntropyHumansIncomePovertyPublic Health Informatics

Identifiers

PMID17873219
PMCPMC2652960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.