Assessing the risk of endogeneity bias in health and mortality inequalities research using composite measures of multiple deprivation which include health-related indicators: A case study using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation and population health and mortality data.

Abstract

The inclusion of health-related indicators in composite measures of multiple deprivation introduces a risk of endogeneity bias when using the latter in health inequalities research. This bias may ultimately result in the inappropriate allocation of healthcare resources and maintenance of preventable health inequalities. Mitigation strategies to avoid this bias include removing the health-related indicators or using single constituent domains (such as income or employment class) in isolation. These strategies have not been widely validated. This study used population-level health and mortality data with a contemporary composite measure of multiple deprivation (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation; SIMD) to assess these mitigation strategies. The differences between deprivation methods (original, health excluded, and income domain) were negligible. The results of quantitative research on health inequalities are unlikely to be affected by endogeneity bias.