Ekonomik İş Birliği ve Kalkınma Örgütü Üyesi Ülkelerinde Sağlık Statüsü ve Makroekonomik Göstergelerin Çok Boyutlu Ölçekleme ve TOPSIS ile Karşılaştırılması
Abstract
DOI: 10.5152/hsp.2019.569474
Amaç: Ülkelerin ekonomik ve sağlık durumu açısından
performansları incelendiğinde sağlık durumu göstergeleri açısından başarılı
olan ülkelerin genellikle ekonomik göstergeler
açısından göreceli olarak başarılı olduğu görülmektedir. Bu doğrultuda, bu çalışmanın
amacı, ülkelerin hem sağlık durumu hem de ekonomik göstergeleri açısından
birbirlerine göre konumlarını belirlemek, her iki gösterge grubu açısından ülkelerin
performans sıralamasını yapmak, sağlık ve ekonomi performans sıralaması arasındaki
ilişki ve değişimleri gözlemlemek ve aradaki ilişkiyi incelemektir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada ülkelerin
birbirlerine göre konumlarını belirlemek için Çok Boyutlu Ölçeklendirme (MDS) yöntemi,
sağlık durumu ve ekonomik göstergelere göre net performans sıralamasında ise
TOPSIS yöntemi kullanıldı. Araştırmada kullanılan veriler 2016 yılı veya en yakın
yatay verilerdir. Ekonomik veriler Uluslararası Para Fonu’ndan (IMF-2016)
alınmış ve Dünya Sağlık Örgütü ve OECD Sağlık Veri Bankası’ndan ise sağlık
göstergeleri elde edilmiştir.
Bulgular: TOPSIS yöntemi yardımı ile
Makroekonomik performans sıralamasında elde edilen sonuçlara göre, İrlanda 34
OECD ülkesi içinde en iyi performansa sahip ülke, Türkiye 34 OECD ülkesinde en
kötü performansa sahip ülke olarak bulunmuştur. Sağlık statüsü performans sıralamasına
göre ise Japonya, 34 OECD ülkesi arasında ilk ülke iken, Türkiye yine en son sırada
yer almıştır. Ayrıca ülkelerin makro-ekonomik göstergelerin TOPSIS başarı
puanları ile sağlık durumu göstergelerinin başarı puanları arasında orta
derecede istatistiksel olarak anlamlı pozitif yönlü bir ilişki gözlemlenmiştir.
Sonuç: Günümüzde özellikle toplumun yaşlanması
ile birlikte toplumların sağlık statüsünde çeşitli sorunlar ortaya çıkmaktadır.
Bu durum hem toplumun genel sağlık seviyesini hem de genel ekonomik yapısını
etkilemektedir. Bu nedenle sağlık statüsünün geliştirilmesi noktasında sağlık
hizmetlerinin, hem sağlık statüsünü geliştirme hem de ekonomik düzeyi iyileştirmede
rol oynayabileceğini söylenebilir.
Cite this article as: Özsarı H, Boz C.
Comparison of Health Status and Macroeconomic Indicators in Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development Countries Using Multidimensional
Scaling and TOPSIS. Journal of Health
Science and Profession 2019; 6(2): X
References
- 1. Goldsmith S. The status of health status indicators. Health Services Report. 1972 Mar;87(3):212-20. [Internet] Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1615939/pdf/healthservrep00037-0022.pdf Accessed: 01.07.2018. (PMID: 4554009).
- 2.World Health Organization.World health organization countries data. 2015. [Internet] Available from: http://www.who.int/countries/en/ Accessed: 15.06.2018
- 3.Marilyn M, Norma K, Keisher H, et al. Community health status ındicators project: the development of a national approach to community health. Prev Chronic Dis 2008; 5(3): 1-8. (PMID: 18558044)4. E Tokgöz. Health in Social Development. 1st edition, Dpt Publications, Ankara 1981, pp 499-00. (In Turkish).
- 5.M Şimşek. Context of Human Capital and Brain Drain Turkey: A Comparative Analysis. 1st edition, Ekin Bookstore, Bursa 2006 (In Turkish).
- 6.Sachs JD. Makroeconomic and health: investing in health for economic development, report of the commission on makroeconomic and health. World Health Organization 2001 Dec 20. [Internet] Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42463 Accessed: 27.08.2018
- 7.Bayraktutan Y, Pehlivanoğlu F. Efficiency analysis in health establishments: kocaeli example, Kocaeli University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 2012; 23(1): 127-62. (In Turkish).
- 8.S Kalaycı. SPSS Applied Multivariate Statistical Techniques. 6th edition, Asil Publishing, Ankara 2014. (In Turkish)9.Ersoz F. Analysis of health status and health expenditures of oecd countries and Turkey. Statisticians Journal 2008; (2): 95-04. (In Turkish).
- 10.Erol H, Özdemir A. Health reforms in Turkey and evaluation of health expenditure. Social Security Journal 2014; (4): 9-34. (In Turkish)
- 11.Shyjith K, Ilangkumaran M, Kumanan S, Multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 2008;14(4): 375-386. (DOI: 10.1108/13552510810909975).
- 12.Monjezi M, Dehghani H, Singh TN, Sayadi AR, Gholinejad A. Application of topsıs method for selecting the most appropriate blast design. Arabian Journal Of Geosciences 2010; 5(1): 95-101. (DOI:10.1007/12517-010-0133-2).
- 13.BF Yıldırım. Topsis, In Önder E. Yıldırım BF (Eds). Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods. 1st edition, Dora, Bursa, 2014, pp 133-153.
- 14.Intarnational Monetary Fund- IMF. World economic outlook database 2016 edition. 2016. [Internet]., Avaiable from: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/02/weodata/index Accessed: 15.06.2018
- 15.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development- OECD. OECD health data. 2016. [Internet]. Avaiable From: http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm Accessed: 16.06.2018
- 16.Onder E, Tas N, Hepsen A. Economic performance evaluation of fragile 5 countries after the great recession of 2008-2009 using analytic network process and topsıs methods. Journal Of Applied Finance And Banking 2015; 5(1):1-17. (In Turkish).
- 17.Frenk J. Health and the economy: a vital relationship. OECD. 2004 May 243. [Internet]. Avaiable From: http://oecdobserver.org/news/archivestory.php/aid/1241/Health_and_the_economy:_A_vital_relationship_.html Accessed: 27.08.2018
- 18.Babatunde MA. The relationship between health and economic growth ın nigeria. Africaportal 2012; 1(1):1-8.
Comparison of Health Status and Macroeconomic Indicators in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Countries Using Multidimensional Scaling and TOPSIS
Abstract
DOI: 10.5152/hsp.2019.569474
Objective: The relationship between health
level (status) and economic level is an important research area in health
economics literature, and countries with above-average health status indicators
that have healthy economic indicators as well are generally accepted. The aims
of the present study were to determine the position of countries based on their
health status and economic indicators, to rank the performance of countries
with respect to both groups of indicators, to observe the changes in and the
relationship between health and economic performance ranking, and to examine
the relationship between health and macroeconomic performance scores using
correlation analysis.
Materials and methods: Multidimensional
scaling was used to determine the countries’ position, and
the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution method
was used to rank the country’s
net performance according to health status and economic indicators. The study
uses horizontal data for 2016. Economic data were obtained from the
International Monetary Fund, and each of the country’s health status
indicators was obtained from the World Health Organization and Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Health Data Bank.
Results: Macroeconomic performance ranking
results showed that while Ireland performed best, Turkey performed worst among
OECD countries. Health status performance ranking results ranked Japan as first
and Turkey as last. Additionally, a positive, moderately significant
correlation between macroeconomic and health status indicators was obtained.
Conclusion: Currently, especially with
aging populations, various problems have arisen in the health status of
societies, affecting the general level of health in the society and economic
structure. Therefore, health services for the elderly can play a role in
improving health status and economic level.
Cite this article as: Özsarı H, Boz C.
Comparison of Health Status and Macroeconomic Indicators in Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development Countries Using Multidimensional
Scaling and TOPSIS. Journal of Health
Science and Profession 2019; 6(2): X
References
- 1. Goldsmith S. The status of health status indicators. Health Services Report. 1972 Mar;87(3):212-20. [Internet] Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1615939/pdf/healthservrep00037-0022.pdf Accessed: 01.07.2018. (PMID: 4554009).
- 2.World Health Organization.World health organization countries data. 2015. [Internet] Available from: http://www.who.int/countries/en/ Accessed: 15.06.2018
- 3.Marilyn M, Norma K, Keisher H, et al. Community health status ındicators project: the development of a national approach to community health. Prev Chronic Dis 2008; 5(3): 1-8. (PMID: 18558044)4. E Tokgöz. Health in Social Development. 1st edition, Dpt Publications, Ankara 1981, pp 499-00. (In Turkish).
- 5.M Şimşek. Context of Human Capital and Brain Drain Turkey: A Comparative Analysis. 1st edition, Ekin Bookstore, Bursa 2006 (In Turkish).
- 6.Sachs JD. Makroeconomic and health: investing in health for economic development, report of the commission on makroeconomic and health. World Health Organization 2001 Dec 20. [Internet] Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42463 Accessed: 27.08.2018
- 7.Bayraktutan Y, Pehlivanoğlu F. Efficiency analysis in health establishments: kocaeli example, Kocaeli University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 2012; 23(1): 127-62. (In Turkish).
- 8.S Kalaycı. SPSS Applied Multivariate Statistical Techniques. 6th edition, Asil Publishing, Ankara 2014. (In Turkish)9.Ersoz F. Analysis of health status and health expenditures of oecd countries and Turkey. Statisticians Journal 2008; (2): 95-04. (In Turkish).
- 10.Erol H, Özdemir A. Health reforms in Turkey and evaluation of health expenditure. Social Security Journal 2014; (4): 9-34. (In Turkish)
- 11.Shyjith K, Ilangkumaran M, Kumanan S, Multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 2008;14(4): 375-386. (DOI: 10.1108/13552510810909975).
- 12.Monjezi M, Dehghani H, Singh TN, Sayadi AR, Gholinejad A. Application of topsıs method for selecting the most appropriate blast design. Arabian Journal Of Geosciences 2010; 5(1): 95-101. (DOI:10.1007/12517-010-0133-2).
- 13.BF Yıldırım. Topsis, In Önder E. Yıldırım BF (Eds). Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods. 1st edition, Dora, Bursa, 2014, pp 133-153.
- 14.Intarnational Monetary Fund- IMF. World economic outlook database 2016 edition. 2016. [Internet]., Avaiable from: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/02/weodata/index Accessed: 15.06.2018
- 15.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development- OECD. OECD health data. 2016. [Internet]. Avaiable From: http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm Accessed: 16.06.2018
- 16.Onder E, Tas N, Hepsen A. Economic performance evaluation of fragile 5 countries after the great recession of 2008-2009 using analytic network process and topsıs methods. Journal Of Applied Finance And Banking 2015; 5(1):1-17. (In Turkish).
- 17.Frenk J. Health and the economy: a vital relationship. OECD. 2004 May 243. [Internet]. Avaiable From: http://oecdobserver.org/news/archivestory.php/aid/1241/Health_and_the_economy:_A_vital_relationship_.html Accessed: 27.08.2018
- 18.Babatunde MA. The relationship between health and economic growth ın nigeria. Africaportal 2012; 1(1):1-8.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Health Care Administration |
| Journal Section | RESEARCH ARTICLE |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | October 1, 2019 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2019 Volume: 6 Issue: 3 |
