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.

Can Patient Self-Management Help Explain the SES Health Gradient?

Contemporary research primarily in the West offers a strong case for the relationship between formal education and adult health; more education, measured either by level completed or years of schooling, is associated, often in a stepwise fashion, with lower levels of mortality, morbidity and disability. In this study, we attempt to provide a global assessment of that relationship as it pertains to adult disability, using sample data from 70 countries that participated in the World Health Survey. In each of five regions and some of the largest countries outside the West we find that an increase in formal education is associated with lower levels of disability in both younger and older adults. Using the regional education-based differentials and several estimates of growth in education levels, we project levels of disability to 2050 to estimate the health and human capital benefits obtained from investments in education. We find that considering education in the population projection consistently shows lower prevalence of disability in the future, and that scenarios with better education attainment lead to lower prevalence. It is apparent that the educational dividend identified in our projection scenario should be an important policy goal, which, if anything, should be more speedily advanced in those countries and regions that have the greatest need.

/pdf/the-effect-of-education-on-adult-mortality-and-disability-a-2g39rg6uor.pdf

The effect of education on adult mortality and disability: a global perspective

Education and mortality among older adults in China.

Individual and province inequalities in health among older people in China: evidence and policy implications.

While numerous studies assess the relationship between education and health, no consensus has been reached on whether education really improves health. We perform a meta‐analysis of 4866 estimates gleaned from 99 published studies that examine the health effects of education. We find that the current literature suffers from moderate publication bias towards the positive effects of education on health. After correcting for publication bias with an array of sophisticated methods, we find that the overall effect size is practically zero, indicating that education generates no discernible benefits to health. The heterogeneity analysis by Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) and Frequentist Model Averaging (FMA) reveals that the reported estimates can be largely explained by whether the econometric models control for endogeneity of education, the types of data and the differences in health measurements. Our results also suggest that education may not be an effective policy option for promoting population health.

Deborah Lowry

Papers

Socioeconomic Status and Health Differentials in China: Convergence Or Divergence at Older Ages?