Blakely Tony, Fawcett Jackie
Department of Public Health, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Otago, Wellington.
N Z Med J. 2005 Jan 28;118(1208):U1253.
Socioeconomic differences in mortality in New Zealand have traditionally been measured using occupational class from mortality data (based on usual or last occupation) as the numerator, and class from census data (current occupation on census night) as the denominator. Such analyses are prone to numerator-denominator bias. Record linkage of census and mortality data in the New Zealand Census-Mortality Study (NZCMS) allows analyses of 'linked' data that will avoid numerator-denominator bias, but may be prone to other biases.
To determine differences in the assignment of occupational class between census and mortality data; to investigate biases in the observed association of class with mortality using linked census-mortality data; and to compare the class-mortality association using unlinked versus linked census-mortality data.
Census records for males aged 25-64 years on census night 1991 were anonymously and probabilistically linked to 5,844 out of 8,145 eligible deaths occurring in the second and third years following census night.
(by objective) Only 47% of linked deaths had an occupation recorded on census data, compared to 84% on mortality data - a census to mortality ratio of 0.56. Relatively fewer deaths were identified as class 4 on census data (census to mortality ratio of 0.45) compared to other classes (ratios 0.55 to 0.64). Linkage bias: A lower likelihood of 25-44 year old deaths (but not 45-64 year olds) from lower socioeconomic classes being successfully linked to a census record meant that analyses using linked census-mortality data underestimated the class-mortality association. Bias due to exclusion of economically inactive: Analyses on linked-census data (using current occupational class) considerably underestimated the estimated association of usual occupational class with mortality. The strength of the association of class with mortality according to linked census-mortality data (and adjusted for the above two biases) and unlinked data were roughly comparable.
Differences in the recording of occupational class on census and mortality data in New Zealand mean measuring mortality differences by class is thwart with difficulty. If one assumes that biases for any particular method of analysis are similar over time, or one carefully adjusts where possible for bias, using occupational class to monitor trends in socioeconomic mortality gradients may be valid.
在新西兰,传统上衡量死亡率的社会经济差异时,是以死亡数据中的职业类别(基于通常或最后的职业)作为分子,以人口普查数据中的类别(普查当晚的当前职业)作为分母。此类分析容易出现分子分母偏差。新西兰人口普查 - 死亡率研究(NZCMS)中人口普查数据与死亡率数据的记录链接,使得对“链接”数据的分析能够避免分子分母偏差,但可能容易出现其他偏差。
确定人口普查数据与死亡率数据在职业类别分配上的差异;使用链接的人口普查 - 死亡率数据调查观察到的类别与死亡率之间关联中的偏差;并比较使用未链接与链接的人口普查 - 死亡率数据时类别与死亡率的关联。
1991年普查当晚25 - 64岁男性的人口普查记录被匿名且概率性地链接到普查当晚后第二和第三年发生的8145例符合条件的死亡中的5844例。
(按目的)在链接的死亡记录中,只有47%在人口普查数据中有职业记录,而在死亡率数据中这一比例为84%——人口普查与死亡率的比例为0.56。与其他类别(比例为0.55至0.64)相比,在人口普查数据中被确定为4类的死亡相对较少(人口普查与死亡率的比例为0.45)。链接偏差:社会经济地位较低阶层中25 - 44岁死亡者(但45 - 64岁者并非如此)成功链接到人口普查记录的可能性较低,这意味着使用链接的人口普查 - 死亡率数据进行的分析低估了类别与死亡率之间的关联。因排除经济不活跃者导致的偏差:对链接的人口普查数据(使用当前职业类别)进行的分析大大低估了通常职业类别与死亡率之间的估计关联。根据链接的人口普查 - 死亡率数据(并针对上述两种偏差进行调整)和未链接数据得出的类别与死亡率关联强度大致相当。
新西兰人口普查数据与死亡率数据在职业类别记录上的差异意味着按类别衡量死亡率差异存在困难。如果假设任何特定分析方法的偏差随时间相似,或者尽可能仔细地对偏差进行调整,那么使用职业类别来监测社会经济死亡率梯度的趋势可能是有效的。