Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The use of the Tobit model for analyzing measures of health status

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Self-reported health status is often measured using psychometric or utility indices that provide a score intended to summarize an individual's health. Measurements of health status can be subject to a ceiling effect. Frequently, researchers want to examine relationships between determinants of health and measures of health status. Regression methods that ignore the presence of a ceiling effect, or of censoring in the health status measurements can produce biased coefficient estimates. The Tobit regression model is a frequently used tool for modeling censored variables in econometrics research. The authors carried out a Monte-Carlo simulation study to contrast the performance of the Tobit model for censored data with that of ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. It was demonstrated that in the presence of a ceiling effect, if the conditional distribution of the measure of health status had uniform variance, then the coefficient estimates from the Tobit model have superior performance compared with estimates from OLS regression. However, if the conditional distribution had non-uniform variance, then the Tobit model performed at least as poorly as the OLS model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. Methods of constructing health measures. In: Stewart Al, Ware JE (eds), Measuring Function and Well-Being. The Medical Outcomes Study Approach, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences ? I: Measurement strategies. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 345-354.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Furlong WJ. Health utilities index. In: Spilker B (ed), Quality of Life and Pharmaco-economics in Clinical Trials, 2nd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Press, 1996; 239–252.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beckett LA, Brock BD, Lemke JH, et al. Analysis of change in self-reported physical function among older persons in four population studies. Am J Epidemiol 1996; 143: 766–778.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gold M, Franks P, Erickson P. Assessing the health of nation: The predictive validity of a preference-based mea-sure and self-rated health. Medical Care 1996; 34: 163–177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bosch JL, van Wijck EEE, Baum PL, Donaldson MC, van den Dungen JJAM, Hunick MGM. The McMaster Health Utility Index (II) and the EuroQol-5D assessed in patients with peripheral arterial disease in the United States and the Netherlands. Medical Decision Making 1996; 16: 450 (abstract).

  7. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical Methods, 8th edn. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Saigal S, Feeny D, Furlong W, Rosenbaum P, Burrows E, Torrance G. Comparison of the health-related quality of life of extremely low birth weight children and a reference group of children at age eight years. J Pediatr 1994; 125: 418–425.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Revicki DA, Leidy NK, Brennan-Diemer F, Thomson C, Togias A. Development and preliminary validation of the multiattribute Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 693–702.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Raj SR, Simpson CS, Hopman WM, Singer MA. Health-related quality of life among final-year medical students. CMAJ 2000; 162: 509–510.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Badley EM, Howard M, Bombardier C. The Relative Im-pacts of Arthritis and Other Long-Term Health Problems in the Population: A Canadian Example. Toronto: Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Statistics Canada. NPHS Public Use Microdata Docu-mentation. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, et al. Multiattrib-ute utility function for a comprehensive health status clas-sification system. Health Utilities Index Mar 2. Medical Care 1996; 34: 702–722.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. The Ontario Health Survey 1990. User Guide Volume 1 Documentation. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Min-istry of Health, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Statistics Canada. General Social Survey (19); Public use Microdata File Documentation and User's Guide. Ottawa, Ontario: Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, 1992.

  16. Tobin J. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica 1958; 26: 24–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pindyck RS, Rubinfeld DL. Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, 4th edn. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1998: 325.

    Google Scholar 

  18. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6, 4th edn, Vol. 2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Statistical Sciences, Inc. S-Plus 5.1, Release 1. Seattle: StatSci, A division of MathSoft, Inc., 1999.

  20. Greene WH. On the asymptotic bias of the ordinary least squares estimator of the Tobit model. Econometrica 1981; 49: 505–513.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Maddala GS. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Vari-ables in Econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 178–182.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nelson FD. A test for misspecification in the censored normal model. Econometrica 1981; 49: 1317–1329.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Greene WH. Limdep Version 7.0 Users Manual Revised Edition. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software Inc., 1998.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, North York, Ontario

    Peter C Austin & Jacek A Kopec

  2. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Peter C Austin & Michael Escobar

Authors
  1. Peter C Austin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Escobar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacek A Kopec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Austin, P.C., Escobar, M. & Kopec, J.A. The use of the Tobit model for analyzing measures of health status. Qual Life Res 9, 901–910 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008938326604

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008938326604

Search

Navigation