Literature DB >> 17454926

Does survey non-response bias the association between occupational social class and health?

Pekka Martikainen1, Mikko Laaksonen, Kustaa Piha, Tea Lallukka.   

Abstract

AIMS: A non-response rate of 20-40%is typical in questionnaire studies. The authors evaluate non-response bias and its impact on analyses of social class inequalities in health.
METHODS: Set in the context of a health survey carried out among the employees of the City of Helsinki (non-response 33%) in 2000-02. Survey response and non-response records were linked with a personnel register to provide information on occupational social class and long sickness absence spells as an indicator of health status.
RESULTS: Women and employees in higher occupational social classes were more likely to respond. Non-respondents had about 20-30% higher sickness absence rates. Relative social class differences in sickness absence in the total population were similar to those among either respondents or non-respondents.
CONCLUSIONS: In working populations survey non-response does not seriously bias analyses of social class inequalities in sickness absence and possibly health inequalities more generally.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17454926     DOI: 10.1080/14034940600996563

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Public Health        ISSN: 1403-4948            Impact factor:   3.021


  57 in total

1.  Assessing non-response to a mailed health survey including self-collection of biological material.

Authors:  Anneli Uusküla; Mart Kals; Louise-Anne McNutt
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 3.367

2.  Job decision latitude as a potential modifier of the contribution of physical workload to poor functioning in middle-aged employees.

Authors:  Akseli Aittomäki; Eero Lahelma; Ossi Rahkonen; Päivi Leino-Arjas; Pekka Martikainen
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2008-03-08       Impact factor: 3.015

3.  Investigation of relative risk estimates from studies of the same population with contrasting response rates and designs.

Authors:  Nicole M Mealing; Emily Banks; Louisa R Jorm; David G Steel; Mark S Clements; Kris D Rogers
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Occupational class inequalities in health across employment sectors: the contribution of working conditions.

Authors:  Eero Lahelma; Mikko Laaksonen; Akseli Aittomäki
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 3.015

5.  Selection by socioeconomic factors into the Danish National Birth Cohort.

Authors:  Tine Neermann Jacobsen; Ellen Aagaard Nohr; Morten Frydenberg
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 8.082

6.  Unemployment risk 2 years and 4 years following gastric cancer diagnosis: a population-based study.

Authors:  Yakir Rottenberg; Jeremy M Jacobs; Navah Z Ratzon; Albert Grinshpun; Miri Cohen; Beatrice Uziely; Angela G E M de Boer
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 4.442

7.  Leisure-time physical activity in pregnancy and the birth weight distribution: where is the effect?

Authors:  Lanay M Mudd; Jim Pivarnik; Claudia B Holzman; Nigel Paneth; Karin Pfeiffer; Hwan Chung
Journal:  J Phys Act Health       Date:  2011-12-27

8.  Inequalities in utilisation of general practitioner and specialist services in 9 European countries.

Authors:  Irina Stirbu; Anton E Kunst; Andreas Mielck; Johan P Mackenbach
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Risk for unemployment at 10 years following cancer diagnosis among very long-term survivors: a population based study.

Authors:  Yakir Rottenberg; Angela G E M de Boer
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2020-02-14       Impact factor: 4.442

10.  Non-response to baseline, non-response to follow-up and mortality in the Whitehall II cohort.

Authors:  Jane E Ferrie; Mika Kivimäki; Archana Singh-Manoux; Alison Shortt; Pekka Martikainen; Jenny Head; Michael Marmot; David Gimeno; Roberto De Vogli; Marko Elovainio; Martin J Shipley
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 7.196

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.