Brisson C, Loomis D, Pearce N
Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina School of Public Health, Chapel Hill 27701.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1987 Dec;41(4):290-4. doi: 10.1136/jech.41.4.290.
Social class standardisation has been proposed as a method for separating the effects of occupation and "social" or "lifestyle" factors in epidemiological studies, by comparing workers in a particular occupation with other workers in the same social class. The validity of this method rests upon two assumptions: (1) that social factors have the same effect in all occupational groups in the same social class, and (2) that other workers in the same social class as the workers being studied are free of occupational risk factors for the disease of interest. These assumptions will not always be satisfied. In particular, the effect of occupation will be underestimated when the comparison group also has job-related exposures which cause the disease under study. Thus, although adjustment for social class may minimise bias due to social factors, it may introduce bias due to unmeasured occupational factors. This difficulty may be magnified when occupational category is used as the measure of social class. Because of this potential bias, adjustment for social class should be done only after careful consideration of the exposures and disease involved and should be based on an appropriate definition of social class. Both crude and standardised results should be presented when such adjustments are made.
社会阶层标准化已被提议作为一种在流行病学研究中区分职业影响与“社会”或“生活方式”因素影响的方法,即通过将某一特定职业的工人与同一社会阶层的其他工人进行比较。该方法的有效性基于两个假设:(1)社会因素在同一社会阶层的所有职业群体中具有相同的影响;(2)与被研究工人处于同一社会阶层的其他工人不存在所关注疾病的职业风险因素。这些假设并非总能得到满足。特别是,当对照组也存在与工作相关的暴露因素且这些因素会导致所研究的疾病时,职业影响就会被低估。因此,尽管对社会阶层进行调整可能会将社会因素导致的偏差降至最低,但可能会引入因未测量的职业因素导致的偏差。当将职业类别用作社会阶层的衡量标准时,这一困难可能会加剧。由于存在这种潜在偏差,仅在仔细考虑所涉及的暴露因素和疾病之后,并应基于对社会阶层的适当定义,才能对社会阶层进行调整。进行此类调整时,应同时呈现粗略结果和标准化结果。