Abstract
Despite the widespread use of self-rated health (SRH) in population health studies, the meaning of this holistic health judgment remains an open question. Gender differences in health, an issue of utmost importance in population research and policy, are often measured with SRH; the comparisons could be biased if men and women differ in how they form their health judgment. The aim of this study is to examine whether men and women differ in how health inputs predict their health rating across the adult life span. We use the 2002-2015 National Health Interview Survey data from US-born respondents aged 25-84. Ordered logistic models of SRH as a function of 24 health measures including medical conditions and symptoms, mental health, functioning, health care utilization, and health behaviors, all interacted with gender, test how the measures influence health ratings and the extent to which these influences differ by gender. Using a Bayesian approach, we then compare how closely a select health measure (K6 score) corresponds to SRH levels among men and women. We find little systematic gender difference in the structure of SRH: men and women use wide-ranging health-related frames of reference in a similar way when making health judgments, with some exceptions: mid-life and older men weigh physical functioning deficits and negative health behaviors more heavily than women. Women report worse SRH than men on average but this only holds through mid-adulthood and is reversed at older ages; moreover, the female disadvantage disappears when differences in socio-economic and health covariates are considered. Our findings suggest that the meaning of SRH is similar for women and men. Both groups use a broad range of health-related information in forming their health judgment. This conclusion strengthens the validity of SRH in measuring gender differences in health.