In all aspects of epidemiology, measurement matters. Without carefully considered and clearly defined exposure, outcome, and covariate measurement, epidemiological studies are worthless. Socio-economic position should be no exception to this rule. Measures of SES should be selected in a study- and setting-specific way, rather than simply following convention or choosing measures on the basis of convenience. It is not necessarily the case that one SES indicator is universally `better' than others; different aspects of social and economic conditions may be more or less important for different diseases, or in different settings. An SES indicator should be an exposure amenable to social policy interventions. This requires a clear understanding of the socio-economic processes being captured by the SES indicator, and knowledge of its causal relationship to health. Education: Education is considered to measure both resource and prestige aspects of SES. Since education rarely changes after early adulthood, it is often used to reflect early life experiences when looking at inequalities with a life course perspective. It is a very frequently used measure of SES, easy to measure, not generally a sensitive subject to ask questions about, and not subject to large recall bias. …show more content…
A child's education is affected by its family's resources, so effects of education on adult health could be reflective of the influence of childhood circumstances 2. Education strongly affects income and occupation in later life 3. Education may affect how receptive an individual is to health messages, both because of ease of understanding these messages and because education may lead to material and cultural resources that facilitate behavior change 4. A background factor may influence both the ability of an individual to successfully complete education and their ability to maintain health 5. Health in childhood can affect educational achievement and is also strongly predictive of adult