Skip Navigation



IJE Advance Access published online on September 26, 2007

International Journal of Epidemiology, doi:10.1093/ije/dym191
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
36/6/1292    most recent
dym191v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lorant, V.
Right arrow Articles by Oyen, H. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lorant, V.
Right arrow Articles by Oyen, H. V.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association © The Author 2007; all rights reserved.

Survey error in measuring socio-economic risk factors of health status: a comparison of a survey and a census

Vincent Lorant1,*, Stefaan Demarest2, Pieter-Jan Miermans2 and Herman Van Oyen2

1Public Health School, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium.
2Epidemiology Unit, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Belgium.

*Corresponding author. Public Health School, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium. E-mail: vincent.lorant{at}uclouvain.be


   Abstract

Background Individuals of lower socio-economic status (SES) are less likely to participate in health surveys than individuals of a higher SES. It is, however, not known whether this difference in participation is associated with health status. This study sets out to assess whether a population health survey gives biased estimates of socio-economic inequalities in self-reported health.

Methods We compared two independent cross-national data collections, a national health interview survey (n = 10 164) and a census (n = 8 491 528), both carried out in Belgium in 2001 and posing the same health question. We computed the prevalence ratios of poor subjective health among socio-economic groups. To estimate the bias, a relative odds ratio (ROR) was computed as the ratio of the survey prevalence ratio to the census prevalence ratio.

Results Less-educated individuals had a lower risk of poor health status in the survey [Prevalence ratio = 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.48–1.86] than in the census (Prevalence ratio = 2.23) leading to an underestimation of the risk associated with low education (ROR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.66–0.83). Compared with better-off groups, those who were not working or who were less educated were generally less likely to participate in the survey when they had a poor health status.

Conclusions Overall, the health survey underestimated the effects of low SES on poor health status, due to selection bias. We conclude that strategies to improve participation among disadvantaged socio-economic groups should be identified.

Keywords Selection bias, health surveys, censuses, socio-economic factors, public policy

Accepted 22 August 2007


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Eur J Public HealthHome page
S. Drieskens, H. Van Oyen, S. Demarest, J. Van der Heyden, L. Gisle, and J. Tafforeau
Multiple risk behaviour: increasing socio-economic gap over time?
Eur J Public Health, November 23, 2009; (2009) ckp185v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
HEALTH PROMOT INTHome page
S. C. Wangberg, H. K. Andreassen, H.-U. Prokosch, S. M. V. Santana, T. Sorensen, and C. E. Chronaki
Relations between Internet use, socio-economic status (SES), social support and subjective health
Health Promot. Int., December 13, 2007; (2007) dam039v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.