1991
DOI: 10.1177/144078339102700204
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An ASCO Based Occupational Status Hierarchy for Australia: a Research Note

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the purpose of this study, an additional category`9' was added for students and others not in paid employment. These categories were recorded into a three-point hierarchical scale, developed by Najman and Bampton, 39 whereby: Upper status ± ASCO categories 1 ± 3; Middle status ± ASCO category 4; Lower status ± ASCO categories 5 ± 8. An additional scale,`other', was recorded for category 9 above.…”
Section: Variables and Their Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the purpose of this study, an additional category`9' was added for students and others not in paid employment. These categories were recorded into a three-point hierarchical scale, developed by Najman and Bampton, 39 whereby: Upper status ± ASCO categories 1 ± 3; Middle status ± ASCO category 4; Lower status ± ASCO categories 5 ± 8. An additional scale,`other', was recorded for category 9 above.…”
Section: Variables and Their Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using the hierarchical groupings of Najman and Bampton (1991), ASCO categories were then classified into upper, middle and lower status jobs. Upper status jobs encompassed ASCO categories 1-3, …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(15) Middle 3.3% (1) 6.7% (2) 6.7% (2) Lower 33.3% (10) 23.3% (7) 0.0% (0) Note. * Occupational status was determined using the hierarchical classification system of Najman and Bampton (1991).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The finding that those who had sought further treatment were more likely to be those who had relapsed or not benefited from treatment in the first place is not surprising, since they would likely have sought further treatment for the problem. As alluded to above, it may be that the reason there was no such relationship found between CSR pre and seeking treatment following this study's intervention is that the majority of participants were in the severe category pre-treatment [61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79].…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%