Responses

Download PDFPDF

SECURING THE EVIDENCE BASE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND ACTING ON IT
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Re: Psychosocial factors and Public Health. Authors' reply to the eLetter by John Macleod
    Dear Editor

    The discussion triggered by this paper is a useful one. In general I agree with McLeod, and Davey Smith that we have to be careful when we make conclusions regarding etiology. Socioeconomic factors could certainly confound the relationships. Adjustment for socioeconomic factors could also conceal true relationships, however. In this literature (see the review by Schnall et al. 2000 which has been referred...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Psychosocial factors and health: response by Macleod and Davey Smith to authors' reply
    • John Macleod, Clinical Research Fellow
    • Other Contributors:
      • George Davey Smith

    Dear Editor

    We are grateful to Peter and colleagues for taking the trouble to respond to our e-letter. They raise several issues that we will try to address briefly.

    First, they say effort-reward imbalance had no relation to socio-economic status in their study. We are unclear how they assessed this – the only SES measure they mention in their paper is a white-collar/blue- collar binary distinction. Effort–r...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Re: Psychosocial factors and Public Health. Authors' reply to the e-letter by John Macleod
    • Richard Peter
    • Other Contributors:
      • Johan Hallqvist, Johannes Siegrist, Töres Theorell

    Dear Editor

    We agree with John Macleod concerning the importance of a better understanding of social inequalities in health. Yet, the paper to which he refers (Peter et al., 2002) [1] was not primarily intended to explain social inequalities, but rather to demonstrate an improved prediction of CHD risk by combining standardized measures of two innovative theoretical concepts of psychosocial stress at work. M...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Psychosocial factors and Public Health
    • John Macleod, Clinical Research Fellow
    • Other Contributors:
      • George Davey Smith

    Dear Editor

    Patterns of human health, particularly the inequalities in health associated with inequalities in social position, are not fully explicable in terms of the social distribution of established risk factors. This lack of understanding may hamper initiatives to ameliorate health inequalities – one of the most important contemporary social projects. The significance of these issues is reflected in the amount o...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.