Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of jepicomhJournal of Epidemiology and Community HealthVisit this articleSubmit a manuscriptReceive email alertsContact usBMJ
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1995 December; 49(6): 634–641.
PMCID: PMC1060181

Interpreting the new illness question in the UK census for health research on small areas.


STUDY OBJECTIVE--The study aimed to identify the various factors that seem to influence the average response to the new census question on limiting, long standing illness at the small area level, to assess the extent to which the new questions adds to information already available in the census and elsewhere, and to discuss how useful the data are likely to be for those planning health and social services. DESIGN--This was a cross sectional analysis of the relationship between rates of limiting, long standing illness (standardised for age and sex) and a large number of indicators of health and socioeconomic status at the small area level. SETTING--The study used data relating to 4985 small areas covering the whole of England. The average population was about 10 000. PARTICIPANTS--The 1991 census of population was addressed to the entire population of England. MAIN RESULTS--There are wide variations in the levels of self reported long standing illness between small areas, 70% of which are explained by demographic factors. Variation in age/sex standardised responses to the new census question at the small area level can largely be explained by census data on self reported disability among those of working age, standardised mortality ratio, and by indicators of socioeconomic circumstances relating to social class, ethnicity, and the elderly living alone. These does not seem to be a significant reporting bias due to underemployment. CONCLUSION--Unlike the disability question in the census, the standardised, self reported long standing limiting illness ratio covers the entire population and it is not skewed towards men. Although the variable is a synthesis of the health and social determinants of perceived morbidity, it does not provide much information that was not already available. In addition, it is available every 10 years only and thus may be rather inaccurate as an indicator of relative need towards the end of the decade. Moreover, in future censuses, individuals' answers might be influenced by the knowledge that their responses will affect the volume of resources allocated to the area in which they live.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.5M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Brennan ME, Clare PH. The relationship between mortality and two indicators of morbidity. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1980 Jun;34(2):134–138. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Benzeval M, Judge K. The determinants of hospital utilisation: implications for resource allocation in England. Health Econ. 1994 Mar-Apr;3(2):105–116. [PubMed]
  • O'Donnell O, Propper C. Equity and the distribution of UK National Health Service resources. J Health Econ. 1991 May;10(1):1–19. [PubMed]
  • Mays N, Chinn S, Ho KM. Interregional variations in measures of health from the Health and Lifestyle Survey and their relation with indicators of health care need in England. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1992 Feb;46(1):38–47. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Bartley M. Unemployment and ill health: understanding the relationship. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1994 Aug;48(4):333–337. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Yuen P, Machin D, Balarajan R. Inequalities in health: socioeconomic differences in self-reported morbidity. Public Health. 1990 Jan;104(1):65–71. [PubMed]
  • Raleigh VS, Balarajan R. Public health and the 1991 census. BMJ. 1994 Jul 30;309(6950):287–288. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Smith P, Sheldon TA, Carr-Hill RA, Martin S, Peacock S, Hardman G. Allocating resources to health authorities: results and policy implications of small area analysis of use of inpatient services. BMJ. 1994 Oct 22;309(6961):1050–1054. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group