Dear Alison
Thank you evry much, this is exactly what I was after.  
I do have post code information too but personally am more 
in favour of socio-economic classification from previous 
experiences.  Of course each have their own limits and there 
is no perfect one but at least now I know most experts 
advice on this. Using older versions of this, I remember 
vaguly,the problam with the socioeconomic classification was 
lumping students and housewives (and other undefined jobs 
together and not really grade them as they deserve).
I may come back to you on this, in the mean time, am very 
grateful for your help and also for other people's help and 
advice 
Cheers
Hora

---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:16:44 +0100 
>From: "Macfarlane, Alison" <[log in to unmask]>  
>Subject: RE: A question to the list  
>To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>, 
[log in to unmask]
>
>   If you have the three items of information available
>   then it is worth coding all three. The most robust
>   way to code occupations is by using the National
>   Statistics Socio-economic classification.
>
>   http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=947
>   
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/methods_quality/ns_sec/default.a
sp
>
>   This exists at various levels of complexity, but the
>   web site gives a reduced method and a simplified
>   one.
>   
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/methods_quality/ns_sec/steps_red
uced_method.asp
>   
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/methods_quality/ns_sec/steps_sim
plified_method.asp
>
>   These assume that the information you have isn't
>   very detailed.
>
>   As far as educational level is concerned, there are
>   a number of different approaches based either on the
>   highest qualification achieved, which allows for
>   study as mature students, or on the age at leaving
>   full time information. As the latter is what you
>   have, it is a good idea to harmonise the categories
>   you use with another reliable source, especially if
>   you want to compare your data with data from others.
>   The Infant feeding survey uses three groups, under
>   16, 17-18, 19 and over.
>
>   Rather than putting the three variables together, I
>   would suggest you keep all three in and analyse your
>   data by each separately. After doing this, you may
>   want to combine them. The concept of 'Head of
>   household' was binned before the 2001 census as it
>   was innapropriately male dominated and was replaced
>   by the 'Household reference person'. For further
>   information, see the 'harmonised concepts and
>   questions' page on ONS web site.
>   
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/about/data/harmonisation/default
.asp
>
>   This is also useful if you are at the stage of
>   designing questions, but it sounds as if you are
>   past that stage now.
>
>   Alison Macfarlane
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Soltani Hora (Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation
>   Trust)
>   [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>   Sent: 30 June 2005 11:25
>   To: [log in to unmask]
>   Subject: Re: A question to the list
>
>   Thanks for your reply. yes there are various methods
>   available but i am looking for one that is more
>   practical
>   and less complicated.  Appreciate your comment and
>   yes am
>   interested to see your work, its a shame you never
>   published
>   it?!
>   Cheers
>   Hora
>
>   ---- Original message ----
>   >Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:58:11 +0100
>   >From: debbie sen <[log in to unmask]> 
>   >Subject: Re: A question to the list 
>   >To: [log in to unmask]
>   >
>   >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.
>   >>
>   
>************************************************************
>   ***************
>   >>
>   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.
>   
*************************************************************
**************
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.
***************************************************************************