Search

This paper examines the current interest in neighbourhood-based policy in England and considers the extent to which the output geography developed for the 2001 census helps to meet the need for neighbourhood-based data. The characteristics of the new census output geography are presented, and the difficulties of creating meaningful neighbourhood geographies from statistical reporting units reviewed. The new geography will provide a much improved basis for the consolidation of data from official administrative sources, but additional challenges are also discussed in relation to the future of census data collection and publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To analyze the general practitioners (GPs) with regard to the degree of urbanization, social deprivation, general health, and disability.Data Sources: Small area population data and GP practice data in England.Study Design: We used a floating catchment area method to measure spatial GP accessibility with regard to the degree of urbanization, social deprivation, general health, and disability.Data Collection: Data were collected from the Office for National Statistics and the general practice census and analyzed using a geographic information system.Principal Findings: In all, 25.8 percent of the population in England lived in areas with a significant low GP accessibility (mean z-score: -4.2); 27.6 percent lived in areas with a significant high GP accessibility (mean z-score: 7.7); 97.8 percent of high GP accessibility areas represented urban areas, and 31.1 percent of low GP accessibility areas represented rural areas (correlation of accessibility and urbanity: r = 0.59; p<.001). Furthermore, a minor negative correlation with social deprivation was present (r = -0.19; p<.001). Results were confirmed by a multivariate analysis.Conclusion: This study showed substantially differing GP accessibility throughout England. However, socially deprived areas did not have poorer spatial access to GPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]