센서스인구 대 주민등록인구: 지역별 사망률 연구에서 어느 인구를 분모로 사용하여야 하나?

Objectives: Studies on the geographical differences in mortality tend to use a census population, rather than a registration population, as the denominator of mortality rates in South Korea. However, an administratively determined registration population would be the logical denominator, as the geog...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of preventive medicine and public health 2005, 38(2), , pp.147-153
Hauptverfasser: 황인아, 윤성철, 이무송, 이상일, 조민우, 이민정, 강영호, Hwang, In-A, Yun, Sung-Cheol, Lee, Moo-Song, Lee, Sang-Il, Jo, Min-Woo, Lee, Min-Jung, Khang, Young-Ho
Format: Artikel
Sprache:kor
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives: Studies on the geographical differences in mortality tend to use a census population, rather than a registration population, as the denominator of mortality rates in South Korea. However, an administratively determined registration population would be the logical denominator, as the geographical areas for death certificates (numerator) have been determined by the administratively registered residence of the deceased, rather than the actual residence at the time of death. The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in the total number of a district population, and the associated district-specific mortality indicators, when two different measures as a population denominator (census and registration) were used. Methods: Population denominators were obtained from census and registration population data, and the numbers of deaths (numerators) were calculated from raw death certificate data. Sex- and 5-year age-specific numbers for the populations and deaths were used to compute sex- and age-standardized mortality rates (by direct standardization methods) and standardized mortality ratios (by indirect standardization methods). Bland-Altman tests were used to compare district populations and district-specific mortality indicators according to the two different population denominators. Results : In 1995, 9 of 232 (3.9%) districts were not included in the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the population differences. A total of 8 (3.4%) among 234 districts had large differences between their census and registration populations in 2000, which exceeded the 95% CI of the population differences. Most districts (13 of 17) exceeding the 95% CI were rural. The results of the sex- and age-standardized mortality rates showed 15 (6.5%) and 16 (6.8%) districts in 1995 and 2000, respectively, were not included in the 95% CI of the differences in their rates. In addition, the differences in the standardized mortality ratios using the two different population denominators were significantly greater among 14 districts in 1995 and 11 districts in 2002 than the 95% CI. Geographical variations in the mortality indicators, using a registration population, were greater than when using a census population. Conclusion: The use of census population denominators may provide biased geographical mortality indicators. The geographical mortality rates when using registration population denominators are logical, but do not necessarily represent the exact mortality rate of
ISSN:1975-8375
2233-4521