Register      Login
Australian Health Review Australian Health Review Society
Journal of the Australian Healthcare & Hospitals Association
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Is Western Australia representative of other Australian States and Territories in terms of key socio-demographic and health economic indicators?

Antony Clark A B C , David B. Preen A , Jonathon Q. Ng A B , James B. Semmens B and C. D’Arcy J. Holman A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Centre for Health Services Research, School of Population Health, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia. Emails: jonathon.ng@graduate.uwa.edu.au; david.preen@uwa.edu.au; dholman@uwa.edu.au

B Centre for Population Health Research, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia. Email: james.semmens@curtin.edu.au

C Corresponding author. Email: a.clark@curtin.edu.au

Australian Health Review 34(2) 210-215 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH09805
Submitted: 4 July 2009  Accepted: 17 February 2010   Published: 25 May 2010

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the extent to which Western Australian (WA) represents the broader Australian population in terms of key socio-demographic and health economic indicators.

Methods. We compared key demographic, social and health economic indicators across all Australian States and Territories from Australian government publications in the census years 1991–2006. Jurisdictional averages (JAs) were calculated as the mean (±s.d.) or median (±range). Observed jurisdiction indicators were compared with the JA and ranked according its representativeness of the JA.

Results. WA was among the three closest jurisdictions to the national JA for all socio-demographic and health economic indicators examined, with the exception of uptake of private health insurance (ranked 6th) and per-capita health expenditure (ranked 5th). The Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory were least representative for the majority of indicators. Excluding the proportions of people living in rural or remote areas (0–100%) and of indigenous origin (0.4–28.8%), variations in the indicators across the jurisdictions were relatively small.

Conclusions. Population differences between Australia’s States were small, whereas Australia’s Territories were least representative of the JA. WA was the most representative population of Australia’s eight jurisdictions and continues to be in a strong position to contribute to knowledge of the Australian health system that is applicable Australia-wide.

What is known about the topic? The Western Australian Data Linkage system (WADLS) is a highly successful and productive research tool that facilitates population-based health research. A potential criticism and concern of this research surrounds the representativeness of the WA population to other Australian States and Territories. Anecdotally, there is a perception that WA’s isolation from other Australian populations may lead to systematic socio-demographic and socioeconomic differences; thus limiting the generalisability of research findings.

What does this paper add? This paper compares Australia’s State and Territory population profiles and allows researchers to determine the extent to which contextual issues concerning key socio-demographic and health economic indicators may affect the external validity of population-based research arising from any one jurisdiction.

What are the implications to practitioners? In the absence of previous evaluations in this area and with the continued emergence of new data linkage systems around the country, this information is important for health researchers and policy makers who may wish to draw conclusions and make policy decisions that rely upon extrapolating findings from population-based studies.

Additional keywords: data linkage, demography, population-based research, socioeconomics.


References


[1] Australian Bureau of Statistics. Year book Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2008.

[2] Holman CDJ,  Bass AJ,  Rosman DL,  Smith MB,  Semmens JB,  Glasson EJ, et al. A decade of data linkage in Western Australia: strategic design, applications and benefits of the WA data linkage system. Aust Health Rev 2008; 32(4): 766–77.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | [verified 16 November 2008].

[29] Medicare Australia. Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule Group Statistics Reports. 2008. Available at https://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/statistics/pbs_group.shtml [verified 16 November 2008].

[30] Private Health Administration Council. Quarterly Statistics. 2008. Available at http://www.phiac.gov.au/statistics/membershipcoverage/table1a.htm [verified 17 November 2008].

[31] National Key Centre for Social Applications of Geographical Information Systems, Australia. Department of Health and Aged Care. Measuring remoteness: accessibility/remoteness index of Australia (ARIA). Canberra: Department of Health and Aged Care; 1999.

[32] Holman CD,  Bass AJ,  Rouse IL,  Hobbs MS. Population-based linkage of health records in Western Australia: development of a health services research linked database. Aust N Z J Public Health 1999; 23(5): 453–9.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS | [verified 13 April 2009].

[38] Jong KE,  Vale PJ,  Armstrong BK. Rural inequalities in cancer care and outcome. Med J Aust 2005; 182(1): 13–4.
PubMed | [verified 11 September 2008].

[41] Kristman V,  Manno M,  Cote P. Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: how much is too much? Eur J Epidemiol 2004; 19(8): 751–60.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[42] Australian Bureau of Statistics. Census Dictionary. Canberra: ABS; 2006. ABS Cat No 2901.0.