Next Article in Journal
Protective Factors in the Inuit Population of Nunavut: A Comparative Study of People Who Died by Suicide, People Who Attempted Suicide, and People Who Never Attempted Suicide
Next Article in Special Issue
Challenges and Opportunities for Tribal Waters: Addressing Disparities in Safe Public Drinking Water on the Crow Reservation in Montana, USA
Previous Article in Journal
Few Sex Differences in Hospitalized Suicide Attempters Aged 70 and Above
Previous Article in Special Issue
Community Engaged Cumulative Risk Assessment of Exposure to Inorganic Well Water Contaminants, Crow Reservation, Montana
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparing Classic and Interval Analytical Hierarchy Process Methodologies for Measuring Area-Level Deprivation to Analyze Health Inequalities

by
Pablo Cabrera-Barona
1,2,* and
Omid Ghorbanzadeh
1
1
Department of Geoinformatics—Z_GIS, University of Salzburg, Schillerstraße 30, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
2
Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales, Av. Amazonas N37-271 y Villalengua, Quito 170507, Ecuador
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15(1), 140; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010140
Submission received: 7 December 2017 / Revised: 5 January 2018 / Accepted: 12 January 2018 / Published: 16 January 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Achieving Environmental Health Equity: Great Expectations)

Abstract

Deprivation indices are useful measures to study health inequalities. Different techniques are commonly applied to construct deprivation indices, including multi-criteria decision methods such as the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The multi-criteria deprivation index for the city of Quito is an index in which indicators are weighted by applying the AHP. In this research, a variation of this index is introduced that is calculated using interval AHP methodology. Both indices are compared by applying logistic generalized linear models and multilevel models, considering self-reported health as the dependent variable and deprivation and self-reported quality of life as the independent variables. The obtained results show that the multi-criteria deprivation index for the city of Quito is a meaningful measure to assess neighborhood effects on self-reported health and that the alternative deprivation index using the interval AHP methodology more thoroughly represents the local knowledge of experts and stakeholders. These differences could support decision makers in improving health planning and in tackling health inequalities in more deprived areas.
Keywords: deprivation; analytical hierarchy process; self-reported health; self-reported quality of life; inequality deprivation; analytical hierarchy process; self-reported health; self-reported quality of life; inequality

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cabrera-Barona, P.; Ghorbanzadeh, O. Comparing Classic and Interval Analytical Hierarchy Process Methodologies for Measuring Area-Level Deprivation to Analyze Health Inequalities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010140

AMA Style

Cabrera-Barona P, Ghorbanzadeh O. Comparing Classic and Interval Analytical Hierarchy Process Methodologies for Measuring Area-Level Deprivation to Analyze Health Inequalities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2018; 15(1):140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010140

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cabrera-Barona, Pablo, and Omid Ghorbanzadeh. 2018. "Comparing Classic and Interval Analytical Hierarchy Process Methodologies for Measuring Area-Level Deprivation to Analyze Health Inequalities" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15, no. 1: 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010140

APA Style

Cabrera-Barona, P., & Ghorbanzadeh, O. (2018). Comparing Classic and Interval Analytical Hierarchy Process Methodologies for Measuring Area-Level Deprivation to Analyze Health Inequalities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(1), 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010140

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop