Sampling Frame and Disease Risk Assessment in Epidemiology

Running head: EPIDEMIOLOGY
Assessment 2
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1EPIDEMIOLOGY
Sampling frame for each phase of the Whitehall study
Sampling frame commonly refers to the source devise or material from which samples
are drawn. Thus, sampling frame incudes a list of individuals/houses/institutions that can be
sampled, within a population. The Whitehall study I included a sample that was selected from
British civil servants, all male during the 1960s. Approximately 19029 men from the selected
population, all aged between 40-69 years were recruited for investigation between the 1967-
1970s, for identifying the risk factors that lead to the incidence of cardiovascular diseases. No
women were included in the sampling frame for the first study. The Whitehall study II
selected participants from a new sampling frame that comprised of 10314 British civil
servant, comprised of men and women, aged 35-55 years. The cohort for the second study
included 3414 women and 6900 men. This study was conducted from 1985-1988 and
investigated the cause and degree of social gradients in morbidity in the new cohort.
Disease risk assessment
The study conducted by Breeze et al., (2001) resurveyed 400 survivors of the pilot
study conducted in 1997-1998. Data collection was conducted by distributing questionnaires
to the individuals that included questions on retirement and socioeconomic status, diagnosis
of diseases, and ability to carry out daily activities. Thus, the researches assessed the disease
risk by collecting information on 4 aspects of self-reported morbidity that encompassed poor
physical performance, mental health, general health and disabilities. Data analysis was
conducted by chi-square tests for determining univariate associations between the aspects.
Odds ratio estimation was done with the use of a logistic regression model.
Marmot et al., (1978) collected data for assessing the risks of coronary heart disease
by distributing London School of Hygiene Cardiovascular Questionnaire that focused on
several items, including employment grade. Use of this questionnaire can be cited as a correct

2EPIDEMIOLOGY
method for defining the risks that might predispose a person to cardiovascular disorders such
as, angina pectoris. Putting forth questions related to respiratory symptoms, smoking history,
leisure activities, medical treatment and ECG were an effective data collection method. Data
analysis was conducted by age adjustment and multivariate analysis that involved an
observation and analysis of several statistical outcomes at one time. Calculation of the
relative increase in risks for major factors was an appropriate step for risk assessment.
The study conducted by Chandola et al., (2007) collected data for evaluating the
association between heart disease and work stress with the use of the job-strain questionnaire.
Use of this self-assessment questionnaire helped to determine the psychological and social
characteristics of the jobs that the respondents were engaged in. This helped to evaluate the
relative risk of exposure to different work setting for predicting coronary heart disease and
job related distress. Adding cumulative measures of work stress and use of the Cox
proportional hazard regression model helped to determine association between stress and
cardiovascular events.
Generalisation of results
Generalisation involves the process of drawing inference from certain observations
and is acknowledged as a major standard of quantitative research. The results of the findings
by Breeze et al., (2001) can be generalised to the entire population since multimorbidity was
found prevalent among individuals belonging to the lower socioeconomic sections of the
society. Owing to the fact that socioeconomic status creates an impact on the morbidity and
disability status of individuals, the findings that illustrated an association between SES in
retirement, disadvantage accumulation and poor health status can be generalised to a larger
population.