Article Text

PDF
Linkage of survey data with district-level lung cancer registrations: a method of bias reduction in ecological studies
  1. Gillian A Lancaster1,
  2. Mick Green2,
  3. Steven Lane1
  1. 1Centre for Medical Statistics and Health Evaluation, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
  2. 2Centre for Applied Statistics, Fylde College, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
 G Lancaster
 Centre for Medical Statistics and Health Evaluation, University of Liverpool, Shelley’s Cottage, Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GS, UK;g.lancaster{at}liv.ac.uk

Abstract

Objective: To investigate a stratified ecological method for reducing ecological bias in studies that use aggregate data, by incorporating information on individual-level risk factors into the analysis.

Design: Cross-sectional study investigating associations between socioeconomic risk factors and lung cancer in the north of England, using 1991 UK Census Small Area Statistics and Sample of Anonymised Records with lung cancer registrations from three regional cancer registries for 1993–6.

Setting and patients: 92 local authority districts in the north of England containing over three million people aged 45–74 years.

Results: Generally, groups considered more socioeconomically disadvantaged had an increased risk of lung cancer across districts. In the standard ecological analysis, effects for non-car ownership, social class III manual, social class IV/V and socioeconomic inactivity were insignificant, suggesting ecological bias. In the stratified ecological analysis these effects became significant (rate ratio (RR) 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79 to 2.78, p<0.001; RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.74, p = 0.022; RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.99, p<0.001; and RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.98, p = 0.039, respectively), and spuriously large positive effects for the social class III non-manual (RR 20.29) and unemployment groups (RR 147.53) reduced to a more reasonable level (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.46 to 2.52, p<0.001; and RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.22 to 4.55, p = 0.011, respectively).

Conclusions: Stratified ecological analysis incorporating information on individual-level covariates reduced the bias seen in a standard ecological analysis. The method is straightforward to apply and allows the linkage of health data with data from any large-scale complex survey where district of residence is known.

  • SAR, Sample of Anonymised Records
  • SAS, Small Area Statistics
  • SIR, Standardised Incidence Ratios

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Funding: This project was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) grant number RES-000-22-0143. Lung cancer data were provided by three regional cancer registries covering the Northern and Yorkshire region, the North West, and Merseyside and Cheshire. The SAS and SAR are Crown copyright and supplied by the Census Microdata Unit at the University of Manchester, with the support of the ESRC Joint Information Systems Committee.

  • Competing interests: None.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • In this issue
    Carlos Alvarez-Dardet John R Ashton