placestats

Out-of-pocket health spending vs. PISA maths

Fades after adjusting for income

Across 84 countries, Out-of-pocket health spending and PISA maths rise and fall together at r = -0.56 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to -0.06, which could easily be chance (q = 0.76, allowing for the many pairs tested, and allowing for countries in the same region being alike). So the first figure mostly shows richer countries differing from poorer ones, not a link between these two things. Caution: direction is not consistent across regions.

Comparing countries across the middle half of pisa maths, 389 to 480 PISA points, out-of-pocket health spending is better by 12.5% of health spending at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 1.62% of health spending.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.556p = 3.9e-8 · 84 countries
After adjusting for national income-0.064p = 0.565 · likely range [-0.28, +0.15]
p, allowing for regions0.591standard error 0.110 · 5 regions
Check for luck (q)0.764across 12,497 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Out-of-pocket health spending · % of health spendinglink with income -0.34 · moderate
PISA maths · PISA pointslink with income +0.79 · high

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Out-of-pocket health spending · % of health spending →PISA maths · PISA points →7.41%64.1%336575Albania: 48.3% of health spending, 368 PISA pointsUnited Arab Emirates: 9.67% of health spending, 431 PISA pointsArgentina: 24.5% of health spending, 378 PISA pointsAustralia: 15.8% of health spending, 487 PISA pointsAustria: 16.5% of health spending, 487 PISA pointsBelgium: 21.5% of health spending, 489 PISA pointsBulgaria: 35.5% of health spending, 417 PISA pointsBosnia and Herzegovina: 31% of health spending, 406 PISA pointsBelarus: 28.5% of health spending, 472 PISA pointsBrazil: 26.2% of health spending, 379 PISA pointsBrunei Darussalam: 7.41% of health spending, 442 PISA pointsCanada: 15.3% of health spending, 497 PISA pointsSwitzerland: 22% of health spending, 508 PISA pointsChile: 39.1% of health spending, 412 PISA pointsColombia: 14.7% of health spending, 383 PISA pointsCosta Rica: 24.1% of health spending, 385 PISA pointsCyprus: 17.9% of health spending, 418 PISA pointsCzechia: 14.1% of health spending, 487 PISA pointsGermany: 10.7% of health spending, 475 PISA pointsDenmark: 13.9% of health spending, 489 PISA pointsDominican Republic: 25.1% of health spending, 339 PISA pointsAlgeria: 45% of health spending, 360 PISA pointsSpain: 20.9% of health spending, 473 PISA pointsEstonia: 21.4% of health spending, 510 PISA pointsFinland: 14.1% of health spending, 484 PISA pointsFrance: 9.23% of health spending, 474 PISA pointsUnited Kingdom: 14.6% of health spending, 489 PISA pointsGeorgia: 58.8% of health spending, 390 PISA pointsGreece: 34.3% of health spending, 430 PISA pointsGuatemala: 57.2% of health spending, 344 PISA pointsCroatia: 9.38% of health spending, 463 PISA pointsHungary: 23.1% of health spending, 473 PISA pointsIndonesia: 31.1% of health spending, 366 PISA pointsIreland: 10.6% of health spending, 492 PISA pointsIceland: 14.9% of health spending, 459 PISA pointsIsrael: 20.5% of health spending, 458 PISA pointsItaly: 22.3% of health spending, 471 PISA pointsJamaica: 20.2% of health spending, 377 PISA pointsJordan: 34.5% of health spending, 361 PISA pointsJapan: 12.2% of health spending, 536 PISA pointsKazakhstan: 27.6% of health spending, 425 PISA pointsCambodia: 60.6% of health spending, 336 PISA pointsKorea, Rep.: 33.7% of health spending, 527 PISA pointsLebanon: 29.7% of health spending, 393 PISA pointsLithuania: 31.4% of health spending, 475 PISA pointsLuxembourg: 8.5% of health spending, 483 PISA pointsLatvia: 35.1% of health spending, 483 PISA pointsMorocco: 37.3% of health spending, 365 PISA pointsMoldova: 27.5% of health spending, 414 PISA pointsMexico: 41.2% of health spending, 395 PISA pointsNorth Macedonia: 39.6% of health spending, 389 PISA pointsMalta: 30.9% of health spending, 466 PISA pointsMontenegro: 26.3% of health spending, 406 PISA pointsMongolia: 48.8% of health spending, 425 PISA pointsMalaysia: 37.1% of health spending, 409 PISA pointsNetherlands: 11.8% of health spending, 493 PISA pointsNorway: 13.7% of health spending, 468 PISA pointsNew Zealand: 12.7% of health spending, 479 PISA pointsPanama: 40.5% of health spending, 357 PISA pointsPeru: 27% of health spending, 391 PISA pointsPhilippines: 44.4% of health spending, 355 PISA pointsPoland: 16.2% of health spending, 489 PISA pointsPortugal: 28.2% of health spending, 472 PISA pointsParaguay: 36.3% of health spending, 338 PISA pointsWest Bank and Gaza: 42.1% of health spending, 366 PISA pointsQatar: 7.43% of health spending, 414 PISA pointsRomania: 23% of health spending, 428 PISA pointsRussian Federation: 28.4% of health spending, 488 PISA pointsSaudi Arabia: 14.1% of health spending, 389 PISA pointsSingapore: 25.4% of health spending, 575 PISA pointsEl Salvador: 32.5% of health spending, 343 PISA pointsSerbia: 32.1% of health spending, 440 PISA pointsSlovak Republic: 20.2% of health spending, 464 PISA pointsSlovenia: 11.7% of health spending, 485 PISA pointsSweden: 13.4% of health spending, 482 PISA pointsThailand: 9.93% of health spending, 394 PISA pointsTrinidad and Tobago: 45.3% of health spending, 417 PISA pointsTunisia: 37.9% of health spending, 367 PISA pointsTurkiye: 19% of health spending, 453 PISA pointsUkraine: 45.3% of health spending, 441 PISA pointsUruguay: 17.1% of health spending, 409 PISA pointsUnited States: 10.9% of health spending, 465 PISA pointsUzbekistan: 64.1% of health spending, 364 PISA pointsViet Nam: 39.2% of health spending, 469 PISA pointsCOLDOMGTMJPNKHMKORLUXSGPTHAUZBVNM

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted-0.5563.9e-884
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted-0.5515.6e-884
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income-0.0640.56584
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income+0.0190.86484

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 84 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.492 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.106 (without SGP) to -0.020 (without PAN). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: PAN (+0.044).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • direction is not consistent across regions

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
East Asia & Pacific13+0.25
Europe & Central Asia43-0.37
Latin America & Caribbean15-0.17

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third28-0.07
Middle third28-0.26
Richest third28+0.52

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians55-0.16
Muslims17-0.39

By last european coloniser

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Spain14-0.25
United Kingdom14+0.21

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = -0.064 after dropping 0 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 20years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = -0.139, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose out-of-pocket health spending moved did not tend to see their pisa maths move with it.

Across countries (adjusted)-0.064for comparison
Within countries-0.011each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere-0.139q = 0.287 · 53 countries
Year-on-year changes—q = —
Read with care.
  • Almost all of this indicator's variation is between countries, not within them, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.

347 country-years (one country in one year), 53 countries, 2003–2022, about 7 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 5% for Out-of-pocket health spending, 8% for PISA maths. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.

Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.

With one measure years behind the other

0.30−0.3-60+9years PISA maths trails Out-of-pocket health spending →lag -6: r = -0.099 (n = 227)lag -5: r = -0.164 (n = 286)lag -4: r = -0.111 (n = 281)lag -3: r = -0.214 (n = 281)lag -2: r = -0.212 (n = 302)lag -1: r = -0.166 (n = 347)lag +0: r = -0.139 (n = 347)lag +1: r = -0.178 (n = 347)lag +2: r = -0.185 (n = 347)lag +3: r = -0.117 (n = 347)lag +4: r = -0.151 (n = 306)lag +5: r = -0.181 (n = 306)lag +6: r = -0.198 (n = 306)lag +7: r = -0.151 (n = 250)lag +8: r = -0.099 (n = 250)lag +9: r = -0.124 (n = 250)

Same year (lag 0): -0.139. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.

The largest value on this curve (-0.21 at lag -3) is higher than the same-year one by 0.07. That gap is not a finding. It is the largest of 16 closely related estimates, and picking the biggest of many tests always makes it look bigger. That is exactly why nothing on this site is ranked or chosen by lag.

The data


% of health spending
PISA points		Years
Uzbekistan UZB64.1%3642023, 2022
Cambodia KHM60.6%3362023, 2022
Georgia GEO58.8%3902023, 2022
Guatemala GTM57.2%3442023, 2022
Mongolia MNG48.8%4252023, 2022
Albania ALB48.3%3682023, 2022
Ukraine UKR45.3%4412021, 2022
Trinidad and Tobago TTO45.3%4172023, 2015
Algeria DZA45%3602023, 2015
Philippines PHL44.4%3552023, 2022
West Bank and Gaza PSE42.1%3662023, 2022
Mexico MEX41.2%3952023, 2022
Panama PAN40.5%3572023, 2022
North Macedonia MKD39.6%3892023, 2022
Viet Nam VNM39.2%4692023, 2022

World Bank, World Development Indicators
OECD databases as named on each indicator: PISA, Social Expenditure Database (SOCX), Income Distribution Database, Development Assistance Committee statistics, Family Database, Government at a Glance, Corporate Tax Statistics, employment and environment statistics

Sources

Out-of-pocket health spending

Out-of-pocket expenditure (% of current health expenditure)

World Health Organization Global Health Expenditure Database · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

The share of a country's health spending paid by patients themselves when they get care. Health spending as a share of GDP is already on the site and shows how much is spent. This shows who pays.

PISA maths

PISA mean mathematics score

OECD · via Our World in Data · CC BY 4.0 (OECD terms and conditions) · updated annual, except the snapshots noted per indicator

The average score of 15-year-olds on the same test in every country taking part. It is scaled so the OECD average in the starting year was 500, with a standard deviation (a typical gap between students) of 100. Held every three years. The 2021 round was held in 2022, and the OECD says it can still be compared with earlier rounds despite the pandemic. The three subjects are treated as measuring the same thing. Their links with each other are above 0.95, and that close match is a fact about the test, not about schooling.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2015–2024. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 5 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Out-of-pocket health spending and PISA maths

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Out-of-pocket health spending changes PISA maths, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Out-of-pocket health spending or PISA maths