Hi Hora
I was advised by Dr Trica Creswell a Public Health Specialist, based in
Durham, that if you were going to only use one measure then attainment of O
level's or not was the best marker to use. I think she has a reference for
this. Would you like me to try and get it? During my PhD I used post code
analysis using IMD lower level codes 2004, which takes population groups
down to 1000 or less people (See ONS niebourhood statitis), quite a
complicated process but worth while.
On a different note I undertook a fairly comprehension study on diabetes and
breastfeeding 1987 during my MSc, which unfortunately I didn't get chance to
publish, but it resulted in some interesting data. If you are interested?
Debbie Sen
-----Original Message-----
From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane sandall
Sent: 29 June 2005 16:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fw: A question to the list
> Dear all
> We are currently doing a retrospective study on breastfeeding and
> diabetes. Does any one know of any robust (or a pragmatic but good
> enough) measure for social class characterisation? The data we have
> access to at the moment
> are: maternal occupation, partner occupation and age of completeion of
> full time education. Can these measures be combined?
> In my previous studies, I have mainly used what is commonly in use
> (the head of household occupation), but would like to know other
> people's views on this.
> Appreciate your views greatly.
> Thanks
> Hora
> Dr Hora Soltani
> Lead Research Midwife
> Derby City General Hospital
> Tel: 01332 785134
>
> **********************************************************************
> ***** This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the
> intended recipient please accept our apologies; please do not
> disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any
> action in reliance on its
> contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
> inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank
> you for your co-operation.
>
***************************************************************************
>
|