UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A cross-national comparison of physician utilization by the socioeconomic status groups Vohlonen, Ilkka Juhani 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A6_7 V63.pdf [ 15.41MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094212.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094212-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094212-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094212-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094212-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094212-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094212-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094212-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094212.ris

Full Text

A CROSS-NATIONAL COMPARISON OF PHYSICIAN UTILIZATION BY THE SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS GROUPS by ILKKA JUHANI VOHLONEN B.A., Univ e r s i t y of Michigan, 1975 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Health Care and Epidemiology) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA July, 1977 (cP) Ilkka Juhani Vohlonen, 1977 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced deg ree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t he L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Depar tment o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Depar tment o f 4-j vLoArV^v Cc^y ^ \ ^ -e.l> ^ i Q ^ ^ The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date "VS^V, \ ^ 5 ABSTRACT This study i s a part of a three stage pursuit to examine and to comprehend the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the resources a v a i l a b l e , the apparent u t i l i z a t i o n patterns of those resources by the population being served, and the selected c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the populations u t i l i z i n g and not u t i l i z i n g the p r e v a i l i n g medical care system. The f i r s t stage of the research involves the examination of the e x i s t i n g patterns of medical care u t i l i z a t i o n by socioeconomic status groups. Cross-national Comparison of Physician U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socioeconomic Status Groups i s the p i l o t research for the f i r s t stage and both modifies and develops the methodology for t h i s type of research and ;\ also examines the physician u t i l i z a t i o n patterns of a population i n well defined basic measurements — i n t h i s case the socioeconomic status index, the diagnosed disease, and the number of physician contacts. The comparison of the physician u t i l i z a t i o n patterns of socioeconomic status groups i n respect to the p r e v a i l i n g medical care d e l i v e r y system n e c e s s a r i l y involves cross-area studies at l e a s t at regional l e v e l , but most l i k e l y cross-national comparisons as well. This study used already c o l l e c t e d data, nevertheless, primary data, which had been c o l l e c t e d and p a r t l y analysed i n the World Health Organization/International Collaborative Study of Medical Care U t i l i z a t i o n . The data came from twelve geographical areas, altogether from seven countries, and provided documented research material on the There i s no page i i i surveyed respondents' s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , standard diagnostic procedures, and standard d e f i n i t i o n s of the i n t e r a c t i o n s between the users and the p r e v a i l i n g medical care d e l i v e r y systems. The s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were used separately, but i n a standardized way, i n order to derive socioeconomic status groups i n each area; the diseases d i s t r i b u t i o n s were examined i n r e l a t i o n s h i p to the socioeconomic status groups, and the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n patterns were r e l a t e d to the socioeconomic status groups while c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f v s e l e c t e d diseases, a f t e r which the study areas were compared to each other i n terms of the exhibited r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the physician u t i l i z a t i o n and the socioeconomic status groups. The p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n patterns were found to vary only l i t t l e from one area to another, however, c o n s i s t e n t l y , to warrant the use of derived information f o r the second stage of the research. Physician u t i l i z a t i o n s were very weakly cor r e l a t e d to the socioeconomic status and these c o r r e l a t i o n s were not s u b s t a n t i a l l y e f f e c t e d by the s e l e c t i o n of the c o n t r o l l i n g disease, i . e . , they were consistent. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I . INTRODUCTION 1 I I . STUDY APPROACH 5 I I I . METHODOLOGY ' 8 1. The D e s c r i p t i o n of the O r i g i n a l World 'Health O r g a n i z a t i o n / l n t e r n a t i o n a l C o l l a b o r a t i v e Study of Medical Care U t i l i z a t i o n (WHO/ICS-MCU) Data 9 2. S e l e c t i o n of V a r i a b l e s f o r the Comparison of P h y s i c i a n U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socioeconomic Status 15 3. Stages of A n a l y s i s 25 IV. RESULTS 33 1. Socioeconomic Status Index C o n s t r u c t i o n " 3^ 2. D e s c r i p t i o n of Diseases h$ 3. R e l a t i o n s h i p s between the Socio-economic Status Group (SESG) and U t i l i z a t i o n of P h y s i c i a n 55 V. DISCUSSION 63 1. Summary of the A n a l y s i s Stages and Observations 6^4-2. Caveats of the A n a l y s i s Stages and Relevance to Health S e r v i c e s Planning 68 3. Suggestions and Conclusions 73 BIBLIOGRAPHY 75 APPENDICES 80 V I LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. The Age D i s t r i b u t i o n of the Family Heads by Five Year Intervals i n Each Study Area After the Socioeconomic Index Population Selection 37 I I . The Factor Score C o e f f i c i e n t s of the Socioeconomic Index Variables as Produced by the P r i n c i p a l Component Analysis Without I t e r a t i o n f o r Each of the Study Areas 4-1 I I I . The Ranges, the Means, and the Standard Deviations of the Socioeconomic Index Scores (SES) f o r Each Study Area k3 IV. The Relationships between the Socioeconomic Status Group (SESG) and the Sex of Household Head, and the Normalized Socioeconomic Score (SESZ) and Age of Household Head k6 V. The Percentage Dis t r i b u t i o n s of Indicator Diseases i n Study Area; Percentages of Low Scores (normal) and Percentages of High Scores (highest severity) of the Household Heads ^8 VI. Spearman Rank Order Correlation C o e f f i c i e n t s between Socioeconomic Status Groups and the Five Indicator Diseases by Each Study Area 51 VII. The Gamma Co e f f i c i e n t s between the Number of Physician Contacts i n Last Two Weeks and the Socioeconomic Status Groups (SESG), Co n t r o l l i n g and Not Cont r o l l i n g for Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index for Bed Days, Restricted Days, and Health Problems i n Last Two Weeks, the Anxiety Index, and Angina Pectoris 57 v i i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. World Health Organization/international Study of Medical Care U t i l i z a t i o n Study Groups 12 2. The D i s t r i b u t i o n s of Male and Female Household Heads as Percentages of the Household Heads of Each Study Area 35 3. Multidimensional Scalogram of the Physician U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socio-economic Status Groups; i n Two . . Dimensional Presentation 60 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I want to take t h i s as an opportunity to thank the following persons for t h e i r academic assistance throughout t h i s research project, e s p e c i a l l y f o r t h e i r patience of l i s -tening and providing feed-hack. Dr. D. 0. Anderson provided the data f o r the study, acted as the chairman of the super-v i s o r y committee, and contributed most to the preliminary conceptualization of the study approach. Dr. W. Cohn stood as the a l l around f i l t e r for the s e l e c t i o n of the appropriate channels of methodology, and e s p e c i a l l y contributed to the construction of the socioeconomic status index. Dr. B. Morrison acted as the basic s t a t i s t i c a l advisor, providing the most advice i n the se l e c t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n procedures. Dr. M. Vernier had had the experiences of not o r i g i n a l l y working i n the English language, and helped most i n the examination of the diseases. Dr. R. Hakstian provided the basic background f o r the factor anal-y s i s theory and the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the products u t i l i z e d , Mr. F. Flynn advised i n the ap p l i c a t i o n of the comparative Q-techniques, and Mr. S. Ki t a gave generously his time and patience during the beginning of the f i r s t stages of computer analyses. Thank You 1 I . INTRODUCTION The u n d e r l y i n g i n t e r e s t f o r t h i s study was sparked up from my r e a d i n g s i n 1975 i n Ann Arbor. At t h a t time I was completing a paper, f o r a s o c i o l o g y c l a s s 'Race and C u l t u r e ' , d e a l i n g with the American m i n o r i t y groups and t h e i r i n t e r -a c t i o n with the p r e v a i l i n g medical care d e l i v e r y system. From those r e a d i n g s i t became c l e a r t h a t the medical and h e a l t h problems of the m i n o r i t i e s were not " t o t a l l y i g n o r e d " , t h a t these problems were not- o n l y c o n f i n e d to a p a r t i c u l a r r a c i a l group, and t h a t the pl a n n e r s of the o l d and the new improvement programs were i n f a c t q u e s t i o n i n g very s i m i l a r assumptions to those which t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s were ques-t i o n i n g i n completely d i f f e r e n t s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s . I n the August 1975 S c i e n t i f i c American there was an a r t i c l e by K e r r . L. White, " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Comparisons of M e d i c a l Care", which summarized some of the r e s u l t s from the World H e a l t h O r g a n i ' z a t i o n / l n t e r n a t i o n a l C o l l a b o r a t i v e Study of M e d i c a l Care U t i l i z a t i o n (WHO/ICS-MCU). The data f o r t h i s household survey study were c o l l e c t e d i n e i g h t coun-t r i e s i n 1968 and I969, and the f i r s t comprehensive r e p o r t was p u b l i s h e d i n 1976, Health Care: An I n t e r n a t i o n a l Study (Kohn and White, 1976). These primary data and the accompanying r e s e a r c h manuals are a l s o s t o r e d by the D i v i s i o n of Health S e r v i c e s 2 Research and Development i n the Unive r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, and i n the f a l l 1975 they were promised to be available to me for further analysis (by Dr. D. 0. Anderson). From the numerous e a r l i e r i n d i v i d u a l a r t i c l e s and the f i n a l report of WHO/ICS-MCU i t appeared that research i n the area of "system-generated" medical care u t i l i z a t i o n patterns had hardly been touched upon, but i t was rather recommended for future research, and the question of pred i c t i v e s o c i a l char-a c t e r i s t i c s of an in d i v i d u a l ' s health behaviour explained only portions of the t o t a l variances of u t i l i z a t i o n . My major i n t e r e s t i s i n the combination of the socioeconomic status d i s t r i b u t i o n among populations and the medical care de l i v e r y systems. F i r s t , i n various medical care delivery systems, what are the rel a t i o n s h i p s between the medical care u t i l i z a t i o n and the socioeconomic status?; second, do the various medical care d e l i v e r y systems induce p a r t i c u l a r pat-terns of u t i l i z a t i o n of the medical care delivery system i n respect to the socioeconomic status?; and t h i r d , how are these patterns induced by the p r e v a i l i n g medical care d e l i -very system? The content of t h i s p i l o t study focuses on the exam-in a t i o n of the f i r s t question, which i n turn i s broken into more manageable sub-questions. From previous i n t e r n a t i o n a l comparisons of morbidity l e v e l s of populations and t h e i r respective medical care del-i v e r y systems i t has become obvious that although there appear q u i t e l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the modes of ambulatory care d e l i v e r y and the i n p a t i e n t s e r v i c e s used f o r the t r e a t -ment of w e l l - d e f i n e d medical c o n d i t i o n s , there are, never-th e l e s s , - o n l y r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s i n the measurable m o r b i d i t y l e v e l s , a t l e a s t i n the s o - c a l l e d "developed" c o u n t r i e s ( B a i l e y and Thomson, 197^-). The above mentioned three q u e s t i o n s , i n a sense, form an o u t l i n e s u i t a b l e f o r the a n a l y s i s of d i f f e r e n c e s between the o p e r a t i o n a l modes of v a r i o u s m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems and t h e i r u n d e r l y i n g h e a l t h s e r v i c e s p l a n n i n g approaches, and s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l p r e f e r e n c e s . The importance of comparison of d i f f e r e n t so-c i e t i e s i n r e s p e c t to u n d e r s t a n d i n g of human behaviour and f u n c t i o n i n g of human i n s t i t u t i o n s has l o n g been p r e s e n t e d by the s u p p o r t e r s of comparative s o c i a l a n a l y s i s ; Comte, Marx, Weber and Durkheim ( B e l l , 1971). The mode of comparison of the v a r i o u s medical care d e l i v e r y systems i n r e s p e c t to t h e i r u t i l i z a t i o n by each socioeconomic s t a t u s w i l l be c a r r i e d out i n terms of " s i m i l a r i t y and d i f f e r e n c e " approach as d e s c r i b e d by De M i guel (197^). T h i s type of comparison r e q u i r e s two b a s i c steps of comparison; f i r s t , the measurement of phen-omena i n the v a r i o u s s o c i e t i e s , and secondly, the measure-ment, comparison, of the s o c i e t i e s between themselves. The r e s e a r c h i n the area of p o p u l a t i o n behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n by the m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y system c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s p r a c -t i c a l l y n i l . However, there are f a i r l y l a r g e numbers of c r o s s - n a t i o n a l s t u d i e s t h a t have d e a l t w i t h the comparison of the n a t i o n a l h e a l t h systems i n terms of e x i s t i n g morbid-i t y l e v e l s , o r g a n i z a t i o n and number of medi c a l care d e l i v e r y r e s o u r c e s , 'outcome' e v a l u a t i o n s , e t c . Most of these have taken p l a c e w i t h i n t e n years, from 1965 "to 1975 (De Miguel, 197*0 • Numerous medi c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n and a c c e s s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s i n r e s p e c t to the socioeconomic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p o p u l a t i o n have been c a r r i e d out i n v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s to form a b a s i s f o r the government p o l i c y f o r m u l a t i o n , but even these have taken p l a c e o n l y s i n c e about the mid s i x t i e s (Titmuss, 1968 and Rein, 1970). I n the Canadian c o n t e x t perhaps the b e t t e r known r e p o r t s i n t h i s a r e a are the r e p o r t to Royal Commission i n 196^ (Canada, 196*0 and the subsequent documentation by Robert Kohn i n 1967 (Kohn, 1967). None of these s t u d i e s o f the u t i l i z a t i o n of m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems, conducted w i t h i n country, or r e g i o n , by s o c i o -economic s t a t u s have been extended to the c r o s s - n a t i o n a l comparative a n a l y s i s which would have a p p l i e d c o n s i s t e n t methodologies f o r examination of presumably ' e q u i v a l e n t ' c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of socioeconomic s t a t u s , d i s e a s e , and u t i l i z -a t i o n s o f the medical care d e l i v e r y system s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . 5 I I . STUDY APPROACH C r o s s - c u l t u r a l and c r o s s - n a t i o n a l s t u d i e s of func-t i o n a l "behaviour p a t t e r n s and f u n c t i o n a l o p e r a t i o n s of i n s t i t u t i o n s have m u l t i p l i e d w i t h i n the l a s t twenty f i v e y e a r s . The two q u i t e d i f f e r e n t study areas, both i n the go a l s and the methodologies, are r e p r e s e n t e d by the "Com-p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s of Hea l t h Care Systems: A S o c i o - P o l i t i c a l Approach" by T. J . Litman and L. Robins (1971) and by the " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Comparisons i n the Study o f the F u n c t i o n a l Psychoses" by J . K. Wing (1971). S i m i l a r approaches are a l s o found i n the f i e l d o f s o c i a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n and comparative works of p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e . One of the fo u n d a t i o n s of the comparison of the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s i s the study by A. I n k e l e s and P. R o s s i , " N a t i o n a l Comparisons of Occu-p a t i o n a l P r e s t i g e " , (1956). As noted e a r l i e r , t h i s study examines the r e l a t i o n -s h i p between socioeconomic s t a t u s and me d i c a l care u t i l i z -a t i o n i n v a r i o u s m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems. Thus the focus o f t h i s study i s two f o l d ; f i r s t , to examine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between medical care u t i l i z a t i o n and s o c i o -economic s t a t u s i n each of the medical care d e l i v e r y systems s e p a r a t e l y , and second, to compare these r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the medical care d e l i v e r y systems. Being an i n t r o -6 ductory study i n some r e s p e c t s , t h i s study w i l l o n l y d e a l w i t h the examination and comparison of p h y s i c i a n u t i l i -z a t i o n . The medical care d e l i v e r y systems are r e p r e s e n t e d by the WHO/ICS-MCU study areas, the me d i c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n i s r e p r e s e n t e d by the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n , and the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s w i l l be r e p r e s e n t e d by socioeconomic i n d i c e s t h a t are s p e c i f i c to each study area. Throughout the com-p l e t i o n of the above two tas k s i n t h i s study runs a g e n e r a l t h e o r e t i c a l assumption of f u n c t i o n a l s i m i l a r i t y of human b e h a v i o u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s from one s o c i e t y to another. T h i s a l l o w s an i n v e s t i g a t i o n , f i r s t , to examine a s o c i e t y and d i f f e r e n t i a t e i t i n t o d e f i n e d socioeconomic groups, second, to r e l a t e these groups with a p a r t i c u l a r behaviour ( p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n ) , and t h i r d , t o compare t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the co r r e s p o n d i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p from another s o c i e t y (Rokkan, 1966, 1968 and Rokkan e t . a l . , 1970). The technique a p p l i e d here, the c r o s s - n a t i o n a l comparison o f the d i f f e r e n c e s o f s o c i e t a l ( w i t h i n study area) b e h a v i o u r a l p a t t e r n s , i s a c t u a l l y no more than a s t a n d a r d i z i n g device which enables to perform c r o s s -n a t i o n a l comparisons and ana l y s e s o f human behaviour w i t h r e s p e c t to medic a l care d e l i v e r y systems. Since much of the medical care u t i l i z a t i o n i s d e t e r -mined by the i n d u c i n g medical c o n d i t i o n (the p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g o f i l l - h e a l t h ) of the us e r s (Kohn and White, 1976) the r e l a -t i o n s h i p between m e d i c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s w i l l be s t u d i e d . w i t h r e s p e c t to p o p u l a t i o n s with 7 i d e n t i f i e d and measured disease d i s t r i b u t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and s o c i o -economic s t a t u s w i l l have to be examined i n r e g a r d to a s p e c i f i c d i s e a s e . F u r t h e r , i f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s i s s t u d i e d f o r a few d i f f e r e n t d i s e a s e p o p u l a t i o n s the c o n s i s t e n c y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p can.be v e r i f i e d . The examination of d i f f e r e n t d i s e a s e p o p u l a t i o n s a l s o promotes the understanding of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f d i f f e r e n t d i s e a s e s as i n d u c i n g persons to p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n . Thus by comparing the socioeconomic p a t t e r n s of p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n from one type of disease p o p u l a t i o n to another type we are c o u n t i n g ( f o r ) the w i t h i n area d i f f e r e n c e s i n d i s e a s e d i s t r i b u t i o n s , which comparison thereby becomes an e f f i c i e n t r e s e a r c h t o o l by i t s e l f . I t enables an i n v e s t i g a t i o n to assess c o r r e c t l y the r e l a t i o n -s h i p between socioeconomic s t a t u s and p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n , and to p a r t l y assess the i n f l u e n c e s of s p e c i f i e d d i s e a s e s on the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s . 8 I I I . METHODOLOGY 1. The Description of the Ori g i n a l World Health Organiz-ation/International Collaborative Study of Medical Care U t i l i z a t i o n (WHO/ICS-MCU) Data 2. Selection of Variables for the Comparison of Physician U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socioeconomic Status 3. Stages of Analysis 9 1. The D e s c r i p t i o n o f the O r i g i n a l World H e a l t h Organiz- a t i o n / i n t e r n a t i o n a l C o l l a b o r a t i v e Study of M e d i c a l - C a r e  U t i l i z a t i o n (WHO/ICS-MCU) Data ' ~ The o r i g i n a l WHO/ICS-MCU study data c o n s i s t e d of survey data c o l l e c t e d i n twelve g e o g r a p h i c a l areas, i n seven c o u n t r i e s . The t o t a l number of respondents, both a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n , was ^76^8 of which 33701 were a d u l t s . Each a d u l t had responded to 29 -^ q u e s t i o n s while the c h i l d r e n (age up to 1^) had been s u b j e c t to 201 q u e s t i o n s which were.responded to by a parent or other r e s p o n s i b l e a d u l t . The g e n e r a l areas o f q u e s t i o n i n g f o r the a d u l t s were ni n e t e e n ; - i d e n t i f y i n g i n f o r m a t i o n - d o c t o r v i s i t s w i t h i n l a s t two weeks - at most r e c e n t v i s i t " d i d someone. . . . " ( i . e . , content of v i s i t ) - other h e a l t h worker v i s i t s w i t h i n l a s t two weeks - h e a l t h i n l a s t two weeks (bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, h e a l t h problem) - d e n t i s t v i s i t s i n l a s t month - d e n t a l problems i n l a s t month - h o s p i t a l admissions, l a s t year - a v a i l a b i l i t y o f p a r t i c u l a r d o c t o r and/or p l a c e f o r care - c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s (angina p e c t o r i s , b r o n c h i t i s , dyspnea, a r t h r i t i s ) - smoking h a b i t s - p h y s i c a l examination and p r e v e n t i v e immunization - v i s i o n - r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h e a l t h of f a m i l y - medicines taken or used - a t t i t u d e s , about m e d i c a l care system - a n x i e t y l e v e l - e d u c a t i o n and employment - income These same areas, a l l but c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s , smoking h a b i t s , and income were a l s o asked f o r each c h i l d . I n a d d i t i o n each area had an o p p o r t u n i t y to develop and use a s e t "of q u e s t i o n s of i t s own i n t e r e s t i n a p a r t of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e put aside 10 f o r " O p t i o n a l Questions". A l s o , before i n t e r v i e w s , each i n t e r v i e w s e t t i n g was re c o r d e d i n a "Household L i s t " i d e n t i -f y i n g the g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the respondents' l i v i n g s urroundings, e.g., the number of a d u l t s r e l a t e d and l i v i n g i n the same p l a c e and the address of the d w e l l i n g . In each study a r e a the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were asked i n the o f f i c i a l language o f the p o p u l a t i o n , by t r a i n e d i n t e r v i e w e r s , and a t the respondents' home surroundings ( f o r t r a n s l a t i o n s see Kohn and White, 1976, Appendix C). The c o m p a r a b i l i t y o f the i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y c o l l e c t e d WHO/ICS-MCU data was i n s u r e d by; the common t r a i n i n g of the study area i n t e r v i e w s u p e r v i s o r s , s i m i l a r t r a i n i n g of the i n t e r v i e w e r s , a r e a v i s i t s o f a con-s u l t a n t team, and a n e w s l e t t e r o f problem q u e s t i o n s and changes i n data c o l l e c t i o n procedures (WHO/ICS-MCU Manuals 4-and 5» T r a i n i n g and S u p e r v i s o r s ' Manual, and I n t e r v i e w e r s '  Manual, 1970). For each area the respondents' answers were coded i n t o computer format and s t o r e d as 665 c h a r a c t e r s of i n f o r m a t i o n r e p r e s e n t i n g 307 p i e c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r each a d u l t and 236 p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n f o r each c h i l d ( f o r the cod i n g and s t o r i n g o f the respondents' answers see WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 8, Tape Layout Manual, 1970). A l l twelve study areas had t h e i r own c h o i c e s of s e l e c t i o n f o r the sampling techniques to be a p p l i e d but the u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p a l of sampling to be f o l l o w e d by a l l areas was "some s p e c i f i e d method of choosing which g i v e s each i n d i v i d u a l i n the group to be s t u d i e d an equal chance o f being i n the sample" (WHO/ 11 ICS-MCU Manual 5, Interviewers' Manual. 1970). While eight d i f f e r e n t sampling techniques were a c t u a l l y u t i l i z e d by the twelve study areas, "most study areas did l i s t sampling from l i s t s of rateable units, pieces of property, i n d i v i d u a l households, insurance l i s t s or did area sampling with clus-t e r i n g " (WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 7, Analysis Manual, 1970). The twelve study areas, Figure 1., on the next page, by the countries were as follows: Country Study Area (WHO/ICS-MCU Study Group Argentina Buenos Aires Canada Fraser (Vancouver) Grande P r a i r i e (Edmonton) Jersey (Vancouver) Saskatchewan (Saskatoon) Finland Helsinki Poland Lodz (Warsaw-Lodz) United Kingdom Liverpool (London) United States • Baltimore Northwestern Vermont (Burlington) Yugoslavia Banat (Belgrade) Rijeka (Zagreb) The following few paragraphs attempt to describe the twelve study areas i n terms of the very general character-i s t i c s of the populations' environments and means of l i v i n g ; f o r more detailed information about the s o c i a l characteris-t i c s the WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 1, Organization and Development, 1970, should be consulted and for the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the pr e v a i l i n g health services systems i n the twelve study areas 12 Figure 1. World Health CTganizatlon/lntcrnatloaal Collaborative Study of Medical Care U t i l i z a t i o n Study Groups 13 the f i n a l r e p o r t (Kohn and White, 1976) should be c o n s u l t e d . The order o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the twelve study areas i n t h i s study w i l l d i f f e r from t h a t used by the WHO/ICS-MCU (from n o r t h to south by c o n t i n e n t s ) , as here the study areas are ordered by t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e l o c a t i o n s i n the a r c h i v e tape l a y o u t . Grand P r a i r i e : p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , Baltimore L i v e r p o o l : Northwestern Vermont: R i j e k a : H e l s i n k i Vancouver, J e r s e y : Vancouver, F r a s e r : economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, p o p u l a t i o n , u r b a n / r u r a l , economy, 1.5 m i l • , 1/1, a g r i c u l t u r e , l o g g i n g and some o i l p r o d u c t i o n , 1.9 m i l . , 6/1, s t e e l i n d u s t r y , food pro-d u c t i o n , 2.3 m i l . , 7/1, mining, s t e e l works, 0.2 m i l . , 1/1, wood p r o d u c t i o n , farming, 0.4 m i l . , 1/1, s t e e l works, farming, f i s h i n g , 0.7 m i l . , 9/1, storage and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , f i s h i n g , 0.02 m i l . , 1/6, commerce, crop farming, 0.01 m i l . , 1/2, f o r e s t r y , crop farming, Ik Saskatchewan: population, urban/rural economy, Lodz: population, urban/rural, economy, O.75 m i l . , 2/1, l i g h t manufacturing, crop farming, Banat: population, urban/rural, economy, 0.7 m i l . , 1/2, crop farming, l i g h t industry, Buenos Aires: population, urban/rural, economy, For a b r i e f review of the WHO/ICS-MCU organization and the research approach the WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 1, Organization and  Development, 1970, and the a r t i c l e by K. White (1975) should be r e f e r r e d to. p a r t i c i p a t i n g study areas, which each had t h e i r own objectives i n respect to products of the shared work (for s p e c i f i c objectives see the Preface of Kohn and White, 1976). Most of the area research projects are being published by the p a r t i c i p a t i n g Study Groups, nevertheless, on the commonly gathered and a r t i c u l a t e d data. The s i m i l a r i t y of data under-l y i n g these various area reportings makes them d i r e c t l y com-parable, and therefore the readings available on these i n d i -vidual group objectives mostly d i f f e r i n t h e i r use of the basic data and the respective approach of research. Two examples of these types of productions, that are quite inde-pendent i n t h e i r approaches, but could be seen as building The WHO/ICS-MCU was an aggregation of research from a l l 15 knowledge about the medical care u t i l i z a t i o n by mutual bene-f i t s , are the a r t i c l e , "Interrelationships i n the Use of Selected Health Services", by Kalimo, Kohn and Bedenic, (1972), and the a r t i c l e , "Measurement of Use and Demand", by D. 0. Anderson, (1973). 2. Selection of Variables for the Comparison of Physician  U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socioeconomic Status Referring back to the e a r l i e r chapter on the Study Approach, t h i s study consists of three major components; the socioeconomic status, the disease, and the physician u t i l i z -ation, which are compared between the twelve study areas. To f a c i l i t a t e the use of the o r i g i n a l WHO/ICS-MCU data, or parts of i t , the above mentioned three components were taken as separate e n t i t i e s of study populations which i n turn were to be defined by the available information of the surveyed respondents, not necessarily according to the variables already constructed by the WHO/ICS-MCU study. The variables to be used to represent these three components were to be fac t u a l (non-attitudinal) and preferably have been previously examined i n respect to t h e i r v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y . The s e l e c t i o n of the variables f o r the purposes of th i s study was done according to three basic c r i t e r i a ; f i r s t , an assumption of face v a l i d i t y , that a p a r t i c u l a r measurement defines a phenomenon, e.g., that anxiety i s considered a d i s -ease; second, that previous l i t e r a t u r e on v a l i d i t y and r e l i -a b i l i t y , i f available, could be applied to measurement process 16 i n t h i s study, e.g., socioeconomic status indices, and t h i r d l y , the constraints imposed by the methods u t i l i z e d i n the o r i g i n a l study i n the c o l l e c t i o n and arrangement of sur-vey data, e.g., the way the r e c a l l period of physician u t i l -i z a t i o n and the time frame of disease d e f i n i t i o n resemble each other. Socioeconomic Status: Each one of the study areas had o r i g i n a l l y constructed i t s own i n d i v i d u a l socioeconomic index, a l l u t i l i z i n g d i f f e r e n t outlines and methodology (for s p e c i f i c area methods see WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 7, Analysis  Manual, 1970). For two reasons the already e x i s t i n g socio-economic indices were not, however, adapted for the purposes of t h i s study: f i r s t , each one of them was composed of a d i f -ferent set of input variables, and second, f o r some study areas the respondents' socioeconomic index scores did not appear i n the archive tapes held at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. The f i r s t occurrence, the va r i e t y of e a r l i e r methods i n the construction of the area l e v e l socioeconomic status indices, would have l e d into a ca r e f u l examination of the comparability of the various socioeconomic status indices before cross-area comparisons of disease and physician u t i l -i z a t i o n i n respect to the socioeconomic status could have been performed. The second occurrence, the absence of the information i n some study areas, was not a shortage of i n -formation from the study areas but rather was an accident which r e l a t e d to the archive tapes of WHO/ICS-MCU held at 17 the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. I t was decided that a derived socioeconomic index (SES) would be constructed of the available information on a person's s o c i a l character-i s t i c s . This index was to have uniform input variables, i . e . , i t was constructed of the same s o c i a l measurements i n each area. The selected input variables: amount of education, t o t a l family income, available income, and a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense, were used i n each area separately by a factor analysis to derive a socioeconomic factor score for each person; the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures applied are discussed i n the next chapter. The o r i g i n a l questions and data coding are copied i n Appendix B., and the WHO/ICS-MCU Manuals 2 and 6, Questionnaires and Coders' Manual, 1970 i should be con-sulted for the available information on the s o c i a l character-i s t i c s of the respondents. The amount of education was measured i n terms of the years of education completed by the i n d i v i d u a l . The cross-area equivalences of years of schooling and respective educational l e v e l s are not known to have been assessed (WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 5 , Interviewers' Manual, 1970 ) , but for the attainment of within area dispersion the reported years of schooling and the respective input to the socio-economic status index years of schooling have been reported to have s i m i l a r a t t r i b u t e s i n d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l settings (Kahl and Davies, 1955)• Total family income from a l l sources was represented by the reported t o t a l family income group of the head of the household who was usually the respondent (Appendix 18 B). The t o t a l f a m i l y income group was d e f i n e d f o r each f a m i l y i n terms of an o r d i n a l s c a l e , from zero to six,- i n each study area. Each study a r e a had determined the r e s p e c t -i v e income range ( i n the area monetary currency) of each of the seven c a t e g o r i e s on comparison to the o v e r a l l f a m i l y income d i s t r i b u t i o n of the sampled area and the respondents were to r e p o r t themselves i n t o one of the income range i n -t e r v a l s . "As the s p e c i f i c income c a t e g o r i e s were not c a l i -b r a t e d to r e p r e s e n t comparable amounts of r e s o u r c e s i n the d i f f e r e n t study a r e a s " (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 49) the r e p o r t e d income ranges c o u l d not be d i r e c t l y comparable but, however, c o u l d be used f o r the i n t e r n a l a r e a d e r i v a t i o n o f a socioeconomic s t a t u s index knowing t h a t the e f f e c t s of the respondents' income on the socioeconomic s t a t u s do have a st r o n g p r e d i c t i v e value s i m i l a r i l y i n many s o c i e t i e s ( B l i s h e n , 1971 and Cohen, 1968). I n the WHO/ICS-MCU a n a l y s i s t h i s v a r i a b l e was r e c a l c u l a t e d and was r e f e r r e d to as "per c a p i t a f a m i l y income" (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 48) and was d e f i n e d as the t o t a l f a m i l y income d i v i d e d by the f a m i l y s i z e . T h i s was c o n s i d e r e d important as r e p r e s e n t i n g the a c t u a l p u r c h a s i n g power of the respondents, an important p a r t of the person's socioeconomic s t a t u s , and a l s o r e l e v a n t to the use of h e a l t h s e r v i c e s p a r t i c u l a r l y i n study areas where the use i n v o l v e s d i r e c t payment by the p a t i e n t s (Kohn and White, 1976). The f o u r t h i n p u t v a r i a b l e of the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s index, a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense, was to express the amount of monetary reserves of the res-pondents. The c o l l e c t i o n of t h i s a b i l i t y / n o n a b i l i t y measure-ment was done i n terms of s e t t i n g a reference monetary value, an average monthly income chosen f o r each study area as a part of the defining survey question (Appendix B ). I t i s known that the size of monetary cash flow of an i n d i v i d u a l does not necessarily indicate the actual f i n a n c i a l wealth of an i n d i v i d u a l (for example see Tables 647.and 649 i n The  S t a t i s t i c a l Abstract of the U.S., as prepared by the Bureau of the Census, 1975)- However, the methodology of data c o l -l e c t i o n about the a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense (by se t t i n g the reference monetary value to a standard for each respondent) might have introduced somewhat distorted repre-sentation of the actual meaning of one's a b i l i t y to meet unexpected expenses since the size of the perceived d i s -turbing unexpected expense probably varies with the respon-dents' o v e r a l l f i n a n c i a l background. Although the u t i l i z -a t i o n of a mean monthly income p a r t l y accounts for the d i f f e r e n t f i n a n c i a l settings, i t does not, nevertheless, completely describe the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the perception of the unexpected expense and the size of the respondents' wealth. Hence, the a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense i n t h i s study i s used to represent a respondent's a b i l i t y to meet a standard "unexpected expense" of an area, i t i s not necessarily the actual representation of the capacity of meeting unexpected expenses of the respondents i n t h e i r 20 s o c i a l s e t t i n g s . D isease: The disease component of t h i s study con-s i s t e d of f i v e m e d i c a l l y diagnosed c o n d i t i o n s which were assessed i n a l l a d u l t s , i . e . , the respondent need not to have "been i n c o n t a c t with the medical care system. The con-d i t i o n s are e p i d e m i o l o g i c a l l y (although, not c l i n i c a l l y ) d e f i n e d as d i s e a s e s and i n d i c a t e i n t h i s study the l e v e l of m o r b i d i t y of p a r t i c u l a r d i s o r d e r s as measured by standard procedures throughout the twelve study a r e a s . The qu e s t i o n s and the r e s p e c t i v e c o d i n g and a l g o r i t h i m s of the f i v e d i s -eases are d e s c r i b e d i n Appendix C. The f i v e c o n d i t i o n s u t i l i z e d as ' i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s ' i n t h i s study are; the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n the l a s t two weeks, the a n x i e t y index, angina p e c t o r i s , b r o n c h i t i s , and dyspnea. The composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n the l a s t two weeks i s a c t u a l l y an aggregate measure of three sub-measurements of h e a l t h i n the l a s t two weeks; bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, bother-hurt-worry index f o r r e s t r i c t e d days, and bother-hurt-worry index f o r h e a l t h problems (WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 8, Tape Layout Manual, 1970). The three sub-measurements of p e r c e i v e d h e a l t h by the respondent were i d e n t i f i e d as e x i s t i n g / n o t e x i s t i n g and by the p e r c e i v e d s e v e r i t y as an o r d i n a l s c a l e from zero to nine, i . e . , t e n s e v e r i t y c a t e g o r i e s . These v a r i a b l e s were designed by the 21 WHO/ICS-MCU c o l l a b o r a t o r s more to d e s c r i b e the f u n c t i o n a l aspect of dis e a s e episode, " s o c i a l d y s f u n c t i o n " , on the r e s -pondents' normal d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s r a t h e r than p r e c i s e d i a g -noses which have been shown to have d i f f e r e n t responses of s i c k n e s s behaviour depending on the s o c i o c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g s (Kohn and White, 1976). Thus the composite b o t h e r - h u r t -worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h pro-blems i n the l a s t two weeks e s s e n t i a l l y f ocuses on the f u n c t i o n a l e f f e c t s o f an episode o f " f e e l i n g u n w e l l " r a t h e r than on the standard d i a g n o s i s and t h e r e f o r e g i v e s a more p r e c i s e i n d i c a t i o n o f the respondent's s t a t e o f d y s f u n c t i o n than a more o f t e n u t i l i z e d t r a d i t i o n a l diagnoses c l a s s i f i -c a t i o n (Koos, 1954). A n x i e t y l e v e l of a respondent was measured through the p a r t i a l use of C o r n e l l M e d i c a l Index (Broadman, Erdmann, Lorge, and Wolf, 1949). Every respondent was s c a l e d from the lowest score, zero, to the h i g h e s t score, ten, (Appendix C) a c c o r d i n g to the number of 'yes' responses to the t e n as-s e s s i n g q u e s t i o n s . The a l g o r i t h i m j o i n i n g the 'yes' answers by t h e i r frequency to the r e s p e c t i v e scores o f the a n x i e t y index i s c o p i e d i n t o Appendix C. The t h r e e c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s ; angina p e c t o r i s , bron-c h i t i s , and dyspnea, were each determined by d i f f e r e n t s c a l e s of q u e s t i o n s (the o r i g i n a l WHO/ICS-MCU data a l s o c o n s i s t e d o f i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f a r t h r i t i s , but the con-d i t i o n was not c o n s t r u c t e d i n t o a measurement s c a l e ) . 22 Appendix C , c o n s i s t s o f the measurement q u e s t i o n s and s c a l i n g a l g o r i t h i m s f o r the three c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s . An-g i n a p e c t o r i s was s c a l e d i n t o seven c a t e g o r i e s o f which the lowest one, zero, means "normal", the next three i n d i c a t i n g grades of " n o n - s p e c i f i c d i s t r e s s " , and the three h i g h e s t ones measuring the grades o f angina. For the purposes o f t h i s study a l l l e v e l s o f the angina s c a l e were u t i l i z e d i n order to secure a g r e a t e r number of cases and supress an i n -f l u e n c e from the p o s s i b l e l a c k o f s e n s i t i v i t y o f the measure-ment instrument. The angina p e c t o r i s q u e s t i o n s were adapted from Rose's (1962) e a r l i e r e p i d e m i o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s o f ischemic h e a r t d i s e a s e . The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n q u e s t i o n n a i r e v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y have been reviewed by Mi l n e , Hope, and Wil l i a m s o n (1970), and the r e l a t i v e w i t h i n a r e a f r e q u e n c i e s of three grades o f angina p e c t o r i s (Kohn and White, 1976) were f a i r l y s i m i l a r i n the study a r e a s . These two as p e c t s suggest t h a t ; f i r s t , the e f f e c t s o f the degree o f s e n s i t i v i t y of the angina p e c t o r i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n instrument on the c r o s s -a r e a comparisons are reduced by i n c l u s i o n o f more c a t e g o r i e s of the s c a l e , and second, t h a t the i n c l u s i o n o f more c a t e -g o r i e s does not n e c e s s a r i l y give a d i s t o r t e d p i c t u r e of the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f angina p e c t o r i s s i n c e the r e l a t i v e f r e q u e n c i e s of the d i s e a s e , w i t h i n a r e a s e v e r i t y d i s p e r s i o n s , seem to be s i m i l a r . B r o n c h i t i s and dyspnea ( i n WHO/ICS-MCU a l s o r e f e r -r e d to as "shortness o f breath") were i d e n t i f i e d and measured by the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s adapted from the instrument developed 23 by the M e d i c a l Research C o u n c i l of Great B r i t a i n (1966). B r o n c h i t i s was s c a l e d i n t o s i x c a t e g o r i e s , one i n d i c a t i n g normal c o n d i t i o n , the next two i n d i c a t i n g "winter b r o n c h i t i s " , and the two h i g h e s t ones meaning the presence of c h r o n i c b r o n c h i t i s . The v a r i a b i l i t y of the b r o n c h i t i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e answers of the respondents to d i f f e r e n t i n t e r v i e w e r s has been e v a l u a t e d by F a i r b a i r n e t . a l . , (1959). s u g g e s t i n g only s m a l l v a r i a t i o n . From H e a l t h Care: An I n t e r n a t i o n a l Study (Kohn and White 1976, p. 86) i t appears t h a t the w i t h i n study area d i s p e r s i o n s of s e v e r i t y of b r o n c h i t i s d i f f e r only l i t t l e , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the i n c l u s i o n of the lower s e v e r i -t i e s of b r o n c h i t i s s c a l e ; morning w i n t e r phlegm, simple w i n t e r b r o n c h i t i s , and compound wint e r b r o n c h i t i s , improves the examination of the o v e r a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n of the b r o n c h i t i s s c a l e c a t e g o r i e s . Dyspnea, however, c o n s i s t e d of a s c a l e i n d i c a t i n g the degree of shortness of b r e a t h of each respon-dent on a s i x l e v e l range (Appendix C ). The measurement of dyspnea has been reviewed by M i l n e , Hope, and W i l l i a m s o n (1970) s u g g e s t i n g t h a t there appears some l a c k of r e l i a b i l i t y i n the produced measurements. However, s i n c e dyspnea, l i k e the a n x i e t y index, grades every respondent from low to high, the problem of dichotomy e x i s t e n c e / n o n - e x i s t e n c e i s passed. The w i t h i n a r e a d i s p e r s i o n s of s e v e r i t y of s h o r t n e s s of b r e a t h do, n e v e r t h e l e s s , resemble each other from one study area to another (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 89), s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h i s d i s e a s e , l i k e the ones before, i s d i s t r i b u t e d very much i n the s i m i l a r manner i n terms of r e l a t i v e d i s p e r s i o n 24 of i t s severity i n the twelve study areas. I t should be noted that the disease measurement instruments, the questions i d e n t i f y i n g the occurence and degree of diseases, used to categorize the respondents' morbidity l e v e l s are a l l , except the anxiety index, part of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n procedures u t i l i z e d by physicians i n t h e i r ordinary practices (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 88). Physician U t i l i z a t i o n : The u t i l i z a t i o n of physician by the respondents was indicated by the t o t a l number of phy-s i c i a n contacts i n the l a s t two weeks, Appendix D. The t o t a l number of physician contacts consisted of the t o t a l of a l l ten possible categories (Appendix D ) of types of physi-cian contacts. Due to the d i f f e r e n t numbers of physicians per the study area populations and the d i f f e r e n t organiza-tions of ambulatory care (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 118), the use of physician was not examined i n respect to the types of contacts by the s i t e s as to reduce the e f f e c t s mistakes i n the respondents' r e c a l l s of the s i t e of the physician con-tact. Also, the focus of t h i s study i s to examine only the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the t o t a l number of physician contacts among the socioeconomic status groups (Appendix D ). From Health  Care: An International Study, (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 144) i t appears that the numbers of persons with a physician con-tact within the l a s t twelve months per 1,000 population do not greatly vary between the study areas, and the numbers of physician contacts per 1,000 population i n the l a s t two weeks 25 vary mostly due to m u l t i p l e p h y s i c i a n c o n t a c t s per persons. 3- Stages o f A n a l y s i s The a n a l y s i s f o r comparing the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the socioeconomic s t a t u s and the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n be-tween the twelve study areas c o n s i s t e d o f f o u r b a s i c stages; f i r s t , the s e l e c t i o n o f cases f o r the purposes o f t h i s study and the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s f o r the study areas to i d e n t i f y each respondent by the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s , second, the examination o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the f i v e d i s e a s e s and e x c l u s i o n o f two from the f o l l o w i n g stages, t h i r d , the examination o f r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s r e g u l a t i n g f o r the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s , and f o u r t h , the c r o s s - a r e a comparison o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the u t i l -i z a t i o n of p h y s i c i a n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s while r e g -u l a t i n g f o r the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the three s e l e c t e d i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s . The f o u r stages o f a n a l y s i s form a 'chain s t r u c t u r e ' one hooked to the next one, and were c a r r i e d out by the man-i p u l a t i o n of the v a r i a b l e s reviewed p r e v i o u s l y . As noted a l r e a d y , i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of the o r i g i n a l WHO/ICS-MCU data, there appeared some v a r i a b l e s f o r which the i n f o r m a t i o n was only c o l l e c t e d f o r a p a r t i c u l a r group of respondents ( a l s o i n the Appendices A, B, C) and others where i t was onl y coded on a r c h i v e tapes f o r c e r t a i n study areas. The l a t t e r occur-rence caused Baltimore and North western Vermont to be excluded from the stages of a n a l y s i s d e a l i n g with the 26 re l a t i o n s h i p s of the socioeconomic status. Selection of Cases and Construction of the Socio-economic Status Index: The four variables to be factored; years of education, t o t a l family income group, available income, and the a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense, were factor-analysed by the p r i n c i p a l component procedure pro-vided by the S t a t i s t i c a l Package for the Soc i a l Sciences (SPSS) computing package (Nie, H u l l , Jenkins, Steinbrenner and Bent, 1975). The factor analysis was c a r r i e d out ten times, once f o r each study area separately, and the factor scores for the selected respondents i n each area were then calculated by the produced factor c o e f f i c i e n t s of each study area. At t h i s stage there also appeared some necessary case s e l e c t i o n . Only 'heads of households' were u t i l i z e d because . parts of the information required for the above mentioned factor analyses were only c o l l e c t e d for the heads of the households of the adults, and the information about the de-fined chronic indicator diseases were not c o l l e c t e d f o r the children. Heads of households of ages 18 to 90 were u t i l i z e d because of s l i g h t cross-area differences i n data c o l l e c t i o n i n respect to the minimum age of respondents with the i n f o r -mation of the.heads of households. Only those heads of households of the above categories who reported t h e i r actual family income group, 'refusal', don't know' and 'not ascert-ained' responses were not suitable for the socioeconomic status index (SES) construction and were omitted. And f i n a l l y , only heads of households were included who reported 27 as 'yes' or 'no' t h e i r a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense and who r e p o r t e d the a c t u a l number o f years o f s c h o o l i n g com-p l e t e d ; persons who gave a response of ' r e f u s a l ' , 'don't know' and 'not a s c e r t a i n e d ' to one of the q u e s t i o n s under study here, were excluded from the a n a l y s i s . For the t o t a l number of excluded respondents, heads of households, due to the three above c a t e g o r i e s of answers i n each study area see Appendix A. The produced f a c t o r s c o r e s , SES s c o r e s , o f the heads of households i n each of the t e n study areas (B a l t i m o r e and Northwestern Vermont excluded) then were nor-m a l i z e d f o r each study a r e a through means of the z-score t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f SES i n t o SESZ. T h i s procedure s t a t i s t i c a l l y c a l i b r a t e d each study sample p o p u l a t i o n i n t o a standard norm-a l i z e d p o p u l a t i o n i n terms of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of SES s c o r e s , e n a b l i n g the c r o s s - a r e a comparison of the t e n samples. Although i n the o r i g i n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n of the f a m i l y income ranges of the r e s p e c t i v e t o t a l f a m i l y income groups was per-formed by the d e r i v a t i o n of monetary ranges on the b a s i s of a n o r m a l i z e d d i s t r i b u t i o n of income i n the t o t a l a r e a popula-t i o n , and the q u e s t i o n about the a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense was r e p r e s e n t e d i n terms o f the average monthly s a l a r y of the t o t a l a r e a p o p u l a t i o n , these were not c o n s i d e r e d i n f l u e n t i a l enough to p r o v i d e a s t a t i s t i c a l l y normal sample p o p u l a t i o n of e i t h e r v a r i a b l e . x The SESZ s c o r e s , as w e l l as Chi-Square and Kolmogorov-Smirnov t e s t s of goodness of f i t were used to v e r i f y the assumption. They were com-puted by "UBC *FREQ" (Mr. S. K i t a ) . the SES ones, were of i n t e r v a l nature that could not "be r e a d i l y u t i l i z e d i n some of the following analysis techni-ques due to the l i m i t i n g nature of the other variables u t i l -ized; mainly the l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by the use of ordinal scale variable i n the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n computations (Nie, H u l l , Jenkins, Steinbrermer and Bent, 1975). Therefore, for each area, the SESZ scores were broken into a socioeconomic group index (SESG) by di v i d i n g the range of SESZ of each area by the desired number of subgroups. In t h i s study i t was five-based on the recommendations of the technical pro-cedures of the selected analysis for the examination of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the socioeconomic status group score and the use of physician (Andrews, Morgan, Sonquist, and Klem, 1973). a discussion based on Kalton's memos, 1966 and 1967). The socioeconomic status groups thus created could be conceptualized as d i r e c t transformations of actual area SESZ scores, and the SESG sub-populations of a study area could be l e g i t i m a t e l y compared with those of another area, however, not f o r g e t t i n g the r e l a t i v e importance of the four input variables i n the underlying factor analyses i n the separate areas . Distributions of Diseases: The f i v e diseases, i n d i -cator diseases, were f i r s t described i n terms of the per-The difference between the correlations of SES and SESG with the diseases was tested and i t was found to vary from + 0.01 to + 0 . 0 3 . 29 centages of sick and healthy populations i n each study area. This was to give an appreciation of the most robust measure-ment, existence/non-existence, of the study areas i n terms of the f i v e u t i l i z e d morbidity i n d i c a t o r s . Then fo r each disease group the persons reporting 'does not apply'/ 'not c l a s s i f i a b l e ' or 'not ascertained' were excluded due to t h e i r p o t e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c a l disturbance at the l a t e r stages of analysis. As a second descriptive procedure, the disease d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n respect to the SESZ scores were expressed v i a the computation of Spearman Rank Order Correlations (Hays 1973, and Nie, Hu l l , Jenkins, Steinbrenner and Bent 1975). Scattergrams were used to v i s u a l i z e 'the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of diseases by t h e i r existence/nonexistence and by t h e i r severity i n r e l a t i o n to the SESZ scores and the ages of the selected heads of households i n the ten study areas. The s e l e c t i o n of the i n d i c a t o r diseases f o r the c o n t r o l l i n g or standardizing purposes was done since not a l l f i v e diseases could be ex-amined because of the time and research constraints. The use of only one disease would not be enough since the patterns of physician u t i l i z a t i o n s of the socioeconomic status groups i n the ten study areas could not be compared to anything else while the examination of two or more diseases as c o n t r o l l i n g variables w i l l help to v e r i f y the appropriateness of general-^See Appendix C , B-H-W Index was recoded 98=10, and 10's v/ere included; they represented the persons without any severity, Appendix C. 30 i z a t i o n s of the p a t t e r n s observed. T h e o r e t i c a l l y there appears a s t r o n g j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r c a r r y i n g out the a n a l y s i s f o r d i f f e r e n t s e t s of i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s , meanwhile, the p r a c t i c a l s e l e c t i o n o f three d i s e a s e s f o r the use i n the t h i r d stage o f t h i s a n a l y s i s i s d e s c r i b e d i n the d i s c u s s i o n of the o b s e r v a t i o n s of disease d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n the next chapter. U t i l i z a t i o n of P h y s i c i a n and Socioeconomic S t a t u s : The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s was expressed i n terms of Gamma c o r r e l -a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s . These Gammas, ze r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s , between the number of p h y s i c i a n c o n t a c t s i n the l a s t two weeks and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were produced s i m u l t a n e o u s l y with the P a r t i a l Gammas, c o r r e l a t i o n s between the two v a r i a b l e s while c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the t h i r d one (each one o f the three i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s ) through means o f the S t a t i s t i c a l Package f o r S o c i a l S c i e n c e s (Nie, H u l l , J e n k i n s , S t e i n b r e n n e r and Bent, 1975). Thus f o r each study a r e a there are f o u r c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s d e s c r i b i n g the r e l a -t i o n s h i p between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s groups i n t h a t a r e a . The ze r o - o r d e r c o r r e l -a t i o n (Gamma) d e s c r i b e s the g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two c o r r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s while the three others ( p a r t i a l Gammas) d e s c r i b e the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the two c o r r e l -a t e d v a r i a b l e s a f t e r each respondent has been ' e q u a l i z e d ' i n terms of the occurrence o f the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e ; thus the 31 r e l a t i o n s h i p between the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e and p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n i s counted f o r ( M u e l l e r , S c h u e s s l e r and Costner, 1970). I t should be noted t h a t i n the d i s e a s e c o n t r o l l i n g p r o c e s s only the s p e c i f i e d d isease i s being u t i l i z e d and t h e r e f o r e the e f f e c t of the presence of any other d i s e a s e s i s i g n o r e d . I f one were to analyse completely the r e l a t i o n -s h i p between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups and the e f f e c t s of the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s i t would be n e c e s s a r y to perform a thorough d i a g n o s i s of a l l p r e v a i l i n g d i s e a s e s of each case, the head of the household, i n order to e x a c t l y c o n t r o l f o r the d e s i r e d d i s e a s e s . C r o s s - a r e a Comparison of P h y s i c i a n U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socio-economic Status Groups: A f t e r a c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x was c o n s t r u c t e d of the t e n study areas, each w i t h f o u r c o r -r e l a t i o n s between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s , i t was used as i n p u t data f o r the examination of the s i m i l a r i t i e s of the ten study areas. Each of the study areas was thus d e s c r i b e d by a p r o f i l e o f f o u r measures, the use of p h y s i c i a n s by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups, and the t e n area p r o f i l e s were compared to each other i n terms of s i m i l a r i t y / d i s s i m i l a r i t y i n a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l space by the M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l Scalogram A n a l y s i s (Lingoes, 1973)-The program c a l c u l a t e s f o r each a r e a the u n i t v e c t o r c o e f -f i c i e n t s ( t h r e e orthogonal v e c t o r s with e t a s g r e a t e r than z e r o ) , a d j u s t s the v e c t o r s i n t o user s p e c i f i e d dimensions by the c o r r e s p o n d i n g etas, i t e r a t e s the c o n f i g u r a t i o n to f i n d the boundaries of the s m a l l e s t d i s t a n c e s between the cases a c c o r d i n g to the user s p e c i f i e d c o e f f i c i e n t of c o n t i g u i t y , and p l o t s the cases by s c a l i n g the d i s t a n c e s of s i m i l a r i t y / d i s s i m i l a r i t y to f a c i l i t a t e the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a l l cases. From the produced scalogram the comparison of each study area, to each other i s g r e a t l y enhanced i n r e s p e c t to the f o u r c o r r e l a t i o n s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . - F i r s t , the cases are r e p r e s e n t e d as p l o t s on a two dimensional graph, and second, f o r each item (each of the f o u r types of c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f -f i c i e n t s ) the o u t e r - p o i n t m a t r i c e s (the s m a l l e s t d i s t a n c e boundaries and r e s p e c t i v e r a n k i n g s ) are p l o t t e d . The f i r s t p l o t s , the cases, h e l p to i d e n t i f y the degree of o v e r a l l s i m i l a r ! t y / d i s s i m i l a r i t y , while the second p l o t s h e l p to i d e n t i f y the o r i g i n s of the p a r t i c u l a r placement of the study area i n r e s p e c t to the o t h e r study a r e a s . 33 IV. RESULTS 1. Socioeconomic Status Index Construction 2. Description of Diseases 3. Relationships between the Socioeconomic Status Group (SESG) and U t i l i z a t i o n of Physician 34 1. Socioeconomic Status Index C o n s t r u c t i o n A f t e r the s e l e c t i o n o f onl y "Heads of Households" f o r the study purposes, the remaining number of cases i n the twelve study areas was 17,353> Appendix A. For t h i s pop-u l a t i o n the male heads o f households were the m a j o r i t y i n each study a r e a while the female heads of households appeared as a q u a r t e r o f heads o f households. The maximum percentage of male heads o f households was i n Vancouver-Jersey, 85$ and maximum percentage o f female heads o f households was i n H e l s i n k i , 38$. A g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the area d i s t r i -b u t i o n s o f male and female heads o f households i n each a r e a i s the Fi g u r e 2., on the f o l l o w i n g page. The imbalance o f sexes i n the heads o f households i s c o n s i d e r e d as a b a s i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the s o c i e t i e s under the study; i t i s a c u l t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n of f a m i l y r o l e s , however, some b i a s e d survey answers i n f a v o r o f one of the sexes might have been i n t r o d u c e d i n the data c o l l e c t i o n pro-c e s s . An example of the o r i g i n s of t h i s type o f b i a s c o u l d perhaps be d e t e c t e d from the respondents' p r e v i o u s exper-i e n c e s with some other more g e n e r a l survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , such as the census data c o l l e c t i o n s , which c u s t o m a r i l y ask to i d e n t i f y the head o f household ( f o r the WHO/ICS-MCU def-i n i t i o n s o f Heads of Households, see Appendix 0 ). For the purposes o f t h i s study, to compare c r o s s -n a t i o n a l l y the p a t t e r n s o f p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n of s o c i o -economic groups of an .area, the sex d i s t r i b u t i o n s were l e f t 35 Figure 2. The Distributions of Hale and Female Household Heads aa  Percentages of the Household Heads of Each Study Area Percentage of a l l family heads In the study area 1.00 .90 .80 .70 .60 •50 .40 .30 .20 .10 B f GP B f SAL a f LIV m f NWV a f RLI B f HEL a f VAJ B f B f VAF SAS a f LCD a f BAN B f BA a eq. sale t eq.. female (for numbers of cases, see Appendix A) GP BAL LIV NWV RLT HEL VAJ VAF SAS LOT) BAN BA eq. Grand P r a i r i e eq. Baltimore eq« Liverpool eq. Northwestern Veraont eq. Rijeka eq. Helsinki eq. Vancouver,Jersey eq. Vancouver (Fraser sq. Saskatchewan eq. Lodz eq. Banat eq. Buenos Aires unstandardized. Each one of the selected heads of house-holds would be distinguished according to his/her socio-economic status and the disease reported. The f i r s t i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n i s derived from the t o t a l number of heads of house-holds, consisting of both sexes. This procedure i n a sense already represents the e f f e c t s of sex d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the base population. The second i d e n t i f i c a t i o n variable, the disease, i s used as a c o n t r o l l i n g variable i n the examination of the physician u t i l i z a t i o n patterns. The existence or nonexistence of a disease, i n either male or female head of household, i s treated i n the same manner for both sexes v i a the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n procedure, the P a r t i a l Gamma Coef-f l c i e n t s . The age l i m i t s for the heads of households for each area were selected to be from 18 to 90 . These l i m i t s were chosen as to include the most respondents f o r the twelve study areas and at the same time have the same lower and higher age l i m i t s . As r e s u l t , the highest lower l i m i t , the youngest heads of households, of a l l twelve study areas became the low l i m i t of the t o t a l population to be used i n t h i s study; and the lowest higher l i m i t , the oldest heads of households, of a l l twelve study areas became the high l i m i t of the t o t a l population to be used for t h i s study. Table I The c o n t r o l l i n g procedure with respect to diseases d i s t r i b u t i o n s w i l l , i n f a c t , count for the e f f e c t s of d i f -ferent age and sex d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n physician u t i l i z a t i o n (Kohn and White, 1976, p.20). 37 Table I. The Age Distribution of the Family Heads by Five Year  Intervals ln Each Study Area After the Socioeconomic  Index Population Selection Average for Age 18-22 GP BAL LIV NWV RIJ HEL VAJ VAF SAS LCD BAN BA a l l areas 11.3 10.6 11.3 lo.o 8.5 13.9 10.0 10.8 12.5 11.3 8.7 lo.o 10.7 23-27 10.6 9.3 9.7 11.9 .7.5 14.7 9.0 6.1 10.4 7.8 8.5 10.9 9.7 28-32 11.2 8.4 7.7 10.2 9.6 9.5 7.8 6.7 7.7 8.5 9.5 '8.6 8.8 33-37 10.0 7.5 7.9 7.3 10.4 8.3 8.1 8.4 10.2 9.5 10.3 9.3 8.9 38-42 9.8 16.5 8.1 8.5 10.5 8.7 9.1 8.7 8.9 10.1 11.1 10.5 9.5 43-47 9.1 9,0 7.2 9.0 9.9 7.8 7.6 7.6 7.2 9.5 9.4 10.0 8.6 48-52 7.8 10.3 7.1 7.0 4.8 7.4 7.2 8.3 8.0 8.3 6.6 9.2 7.7 53-57 5.7 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.0 7.1 8.6 8.1 7.6 8.2 8.2 7.4 7.7 58-62 6.6 6.8 9.5 7.6 9.7 7.3 7.6 9.9 6.7 9.1 8.0 7.3 8.0 63-67 5.4 7.8 8.3 5.6 7.8 5.9 8.1 8.0 6.1 7.0 6.8 5.6 6.9 68-72 4.8 7.3 6.2 6.9 *.5 6.3 6.5 4.9 5.7 5.2 5.5 5.7 73-77 3.7 4.1 4.3 4.1 3.4 2.7 .^7 4.5 4.2 2.8 4.2 3.4 3.8 78-82 2.7 2.3 2.4 3.1 2.1 1.6 3.4 3.3 2.7 1.3 2.2 1.5 2.4 83-90 0.9 1.6 1.6 1.4 0.9 0.8 2.2 3.1 3.0 0.9 1.4 1.0 1.5 GP eq. Grand Kralrie (for numbers of cases in the BAL eq. Baltimore study areas,see Appendix A) LIV eq. Liverpool NWV eq. Northwestern Vermont R U eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires 38 d e s c r i b e s the age d i s t r i b u t i o n of each study a r e a as percen-tages of heads of households of an area i n f i v e - y e a r i n t e r v a l s . The g e n e r a l age d i s t r i b u t i o n of the s e l e c t e d heads of households f o r the twelve study areas are f a i r l y s i m i l a r , with about $0% t 10% of the area household heads under the age of 43, w i t h about 80% ± $%> of the area household heads under the age of 63. Since the age d i s t r i b u t i o n s are s i m i -l a r from one study a r e a to another ( a l l means were 4 5 - 3 and a l l standard d e v i a t i o n s were 17.5 - 0.05)» n o a g e stand-a r d i z a t i o n between the areas was c o n c e i v e d to be n e c e s s a r y . The d e r i v a t i o n of the socioeconomic index from the t o t a l a rea p o p u l a t i o n w i l l c o n s i s t o f the aggregate of the c h a r a c t -e r i s t i c s of a l l age groups' i n f l u e n c e s , and t h e r e f o r e the e f f e c t s of unequal age d i s t r i b u t i o n s w i t h i n an area sample do not r e f l e c t themselves i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the s o c i o -economic index. However, the r e l a t i o n s h i p between age and occurrence o f the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s w i l l be examined i n the next chapter; f u r t h e r the u t i l i z a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n r e l a t i o n to the age of the p a t i e n t s . Age and sex of the person are known to have d i s t i n c t r e l a t i o n -s h i p s with the d i s t r i b u t i o n of m o r b i d i t y (Pugh and MacMahon, 1970). Since the r o l e of the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s i s t h a t of a c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e i n the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n computations, the age-disease, the sex-disease and p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n imbalances are t r e a t e d v i a the P a r t i a l Gamma c o r r e l a t i o n s . Before the P r i n c i p a l Component a n a l y s i s of the f o u r 39 s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s (years o f educat i o n , t o t a l f a m i l y income group, a v a i l a b l e income, and a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense) was performed, the means and the standard d e v i a t i o n s o f the f o u r v a r i a b l e s were computed. These two s t a t i s t i c s were to p r o v i d e a g e n e r a l view of the v a r i a b l e s i n each study a r e a i n comparison with those o f other study areas. The means of the v a r i a b l e s d e s c r i b e the g e n e r a l l e v e l o f the v a r i a b l e s i n each area, while the standard d e v i a t i o n s d e s c r i b e the d i s p e r s i o n o f the v a r i a b l e s i n each a r e a . Appendix E, i s a t a b u l a t i o n o f the means and the standard d e v i a t i o n s o f the f o u r v a r i a b l e s used to d e r i v e the socioeconomic s t a t u s index. The l a r g e s t between a r e a d i f f e r e n c e s o f the means of the f o u r v a r i a b l e s e x i s t among the years of e d u c a t i o n and the t o t a l f a m i l y income group; a v a i l a b l e ' i n c o m e and a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense have more even means between the t e n study a r e a s . But adh e r i n g to the e a r l i e r mentioned approach, the comparison o f d i f f e r e n c e s o f i n t e r n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the study areas, we can observe t h a t the standar d d e v i a t i o n s o f the f o u r v a r i a b l e s are very much more even than the r e s p e c -t i v e means. F u r t h e r , the study areas t h a t have hi g h means f o r a v a r i a b l e do not n e c e s s a r i l y have h i g h standard d e v i a -t i o n s , e.g., the d i s p e r s i o n among the t o t a l f a m i l y income groups i s not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the g e n e r a l l e v e l (mean) of the t o t a l f a m i l y income groups, or t h a t the mean l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n v a r i e s from one area to another but the i n t e r n a l d i s p e r s i o n s of years o f e d u c a t i o n i n each study area are ko q u i t e s i m i l a r . A l l o f the f a c t o r a n a l y s i s techniques s t a r t the procedures from a c o n s t r u c t i o n of a c o r r e l a t i o n matrix among the u t i l i z e d i n p u t v a r i a b l e s . Standard d e v i a t i o n i s an im-p o r t a n t p a r t of the computation of the P e a r s o n i a n c o r r e l a t i o n , and t h e r e f o r e from the between a r e a s i m i l a r i t i e s of the f o u r v a r i a b l e s u t i l i z e d we c o u l d assume s i m i l a r i t i e s a l s o i n the end-products of the P r i n c i p a l Component a n a l y s i s , the f a c t o r c o e f f i c i e n t s . From Appendix F, i't appears t h a t the c o r r e l a -t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between the socioeconomic index v a r i a b l e s and the f i r s t p r i n i c p a l component produced are of the s i m i -l a r magnitude and of the s i m i l a r order of importance f o r each study area. These c o r r e l a t i o n s d e s c r i b e the r e s p e c t i v e im-portance of each p r i n c i p a l component. The t o t a l f a m i l y income group, a v a i l a b l e income, years of e d u c a t i o n , and the a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense form the d e c r e a s i n g order o f c o r r e l a t i o n magnitude f o r a l l areas except f o r L i v e r p o o l where a v a i l a b l e income comes before the t o t a l f a m i l y income group. Once the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the f o u r v a r i a b l e s and the p r i n c i p a l component are e x t r a c t e d as the f a c t o r score c o e f f i c i e n t s , Table I I , the v a r i a b l e s s t i l l h o l d t h e i r e a r l i e r order o f d e c r e a s i n g magnitude. The e a r l i e r n o t i o n about the e f f e c t of s i m i l a r standard d e v i a -t i o n s of the v a r i a b l e s between the t e n study areas now i s c l e a r l y m a n i f e s t e d as s i m i l a r i t y of the f a c t o r score c o e f -Table II The Factor Score Coefficients of the Socioeconomic  Index Variables as Produced by the Principal  Component Analysis Without Iteration for Each  of the Study Areas Years of Total family Available Ability to meet am education Income group income unusual expense GP .32059 .^ 2555 .38696 .31249 LIV .26563 .39176 .39410 .27437 RLJ .28460 .35788 .34761 .27718 HEL .29361 .42969 .37^ 57 .347OO VAJ .26269 .41906 .41193 .25578 VAF .24-269 .41821 .41025 .29267 SAS .30277 .41006 .37663 .29469 LCD .30695 .38626 .37891 .24830 BAN .27387 .36975 .36857 .25^ 08 BA .28851 .38105 .36837 .26481 GP eq. Grand Prairie Years of educatioa eq. 01+ LIV eq. Liverpool Total family income group eq. 0-6 RLJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki Available inceme eq. 0-6 VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan Ability to meet a n unusual expense eq. LCD eq. Lodz 0/no, l/yes BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires (for the questions, coding, and algorlthims of the four variables, see Appendix B.) f i c i e n t s of each v a r i a b l e from one study area to another. Another measure of the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of the v a r i a b l e s s e l e c t e d i s the amount of the t o t a l v a r i a n c e of the f o u r v a r i a b l e s e x p l a i n e d by the p r i n c i p a l component e x t r a c t e d i n each study a r e a . Again there appears homogeneity between the ten study areas, 47.1$ i n Grand P r a i r i e to 61.5$ i n R i j e k a , with seven study areas between 51$ to 60$, Appendix G. . The f a c t o r score c o e f f i c i e n t s o f each study a r e a were used to compute a socioeconomic s t a t u s index (SES) f o r each head of household as d e s c r i b e d i n Table I I I . Table I I I a l s o d e s c r i b e s the range, the mean and the standard d e v i a t i o n of the computed a r e a SES s c o r e s o f the heads of households. The s i m i l a r i t y of the f a c t o r score c o e f f i c i e n t s of the f o u r SES v a r i a b l e s i s now m a n i f e s t e d i n terms of the standard d e v i a t i o n s of the SES a r e a s c o r e s . While the means of the SES scores show s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s , the d i s p e r s i o n s of the SES area s c o r e s are q u i t e even from one a r e a to another. I t now seems, too, t h a t the s i z e o f the range of SES and of the mean of SES are c o r r e l a t e d to the amount o f d i s p e r s i o n . To b e t t e r f a c i l i t a t e the f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s , the SES s c o r e s of each a r e a were n o r m a l i z e d v i a the Z-score t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ; t h i s i n f a c t c r e a t e s t e n normally d i s t r i b u t e d ( i n terms of SES) p o p u l a t i o n s i n such a manner t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l i s d e s c r i b e d by the amount of d e v i a t i o n from the area mean. The r e s u l t i n g s c ore, SESZ, can be used f o r c r o s s - a r e a com-Table I I I The Ranges, the Means, and the Standard Deviations ef the  Socioeconomic Index Scores (5SS) for Each Study Area Range Mean Standard deviation GP 11.279 5.215 1.810 LIV 9.251 3.652 1.328 RU 7.960 2.314 1.507 HEL 13.651 5.133 1.991 TAJ 10.978 3.935 1.828 VAF 8.886 3.597 1.704 SAS 11.979 4.661 1.938 LCD 8.950 2.761 1.624 BAN 8.503 1.884 1.429 BA 9.494 2.655 1.639 Socioeconomic Index Score of a Household Head eq. (years of education x the factor score coefficient of the variable ln the area) + (total family income group x the factor score coefficient of the variable in the area) + (available Income x the factor score coefficient 6t the variable in the area) + ( a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense x the factor score coefficient ef the variable in the area) GP eq. Grande Prairie LIV eq. Liverpool RLJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Leda BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires 44 p a r i s o n s . The SESZ s c o r e s , however, c o u l d not "be used i n the s t a t i s t i c a l methods r e l a t i n g the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n to the socioeconomic s t a t u s while c o n t r o l l i n g f o r a d i s e a s e because of the nature of the i n f o r m a t i o n on the d i s e a s e s and the non-normality of both d i s e a s e occurrence and u t i l i z a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , the SESZ sc o r e s were f u r t h e r transformed i n t o an o r d i n a l s c a l e v a r i a b l e socioeconomic s t a t u s group (SESG). SESG score f o r an i n d i v i d u a l was determined by the SESZ i n -t e r v a l t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l belonged t o . The SESZ score range of each area was d i v i d e d by the number of d e s i r e d s o c i o -economic s t a t u s groups, i n t h i s study f i v e , and then the h i g h e r and lower l i m i t s of each SESG were computed by adding the i n t e r v a l f i r s t to the lowest SESZ score, then to the sum of those two, e t c . T h i s procedure c o n s t r u c t e d f i v e SESG groups f o r each study a r e a t h a t then c o u l d be used f o r ord-i n a l data s t a t i s t i c s . The number of i n d i v i d u a l s i n each socioeconomic group of the ten study areas was not neces-s a r i l y the same, Appendix H, but now i t was con c e i v e d a p p r o p r i a t e to compare p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n d i f f e r e n c e s of the w i t h i n study area socioeconomic s t a t u s groups. To get an a p p r e c i a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the socioeconomic s t a t u s of an i n d i v i d u a l and the sex and the age of the i n d i v i d u a l , three computations were performed. The f i r s t one, Appendix I , was a simple frequency count of the male and female heads of households i n each socioeconomic s t a t u s group. From t h a t count i t appeared t h a t the female 45 heads of households i n a l l areas were a p r o p o r t i o n a l m a j o r i t y i n the two lowest socioeconomic s t a t u s groups. A Chi-square computation was performed to r e p r e s e n t the a s s o c i a t i o n between the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups and the sex of the respondent, Table IV, which supported the above mentioned n e g a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between female heads of households and the r e s p e c t i v e socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n a l l a r e a s . Table IV a l s o d e s c r i b e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the respon-dents' age and the SESZ s c o r e s . There appears a c l e a r nega-t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t i n each study a r e a between the age and SESZ; i t i s the s t r o n g e s t , -0.511, i n R i j e k a , and the weakest, -0.257. i n Buenos A i r e s . T h i s type of ne g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n c o u l d perhaps be a t t r i b u t e d to the i n f l u e n c e of the f a c t o r score of years o f educat i o n , s i n c e the o l d e r g e n e r a t i o n would not have o b t a i n e d as many ye a r s as the younger g e n e r a t i o n . 2. The D e s c r i p t i o n o f Diseases There were f i v e m o r b i d i t y c o n d i t i o n s , a l s o r e f e r r e d as i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s , t h a t were chosen to serve as the i d e n -t i f i c a t i o n v a r i a b l e s f o r the s t a t e of h e a l t h o f the heads of households of the twelve study a r e a s . These d i s e a s e s , com-p o s i t e bother-hurt-worry index ( f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days and h e a l t h problems) i n the l a s t two weeks, the a n x i e t y index, angina p e c t o r i s , b r o n c h i t i s and dyspnea, were des-c r i b e d f o r each study a r e a by two methods. The f i r s t c o n s i s t e d o f a frequency count ( i n percentages) of the persons 46 Table IV. The Relationships between the Socioeconomic Status  Group (S5SG) and the Sex of Household Head, and the  Normalized Socioeconomic Status Score-(S53Z) and Age of Household Head Chl-3iuare c o e f f i c i e n t between Pearson c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s i o m GP ' 57.43A -O.432 P.tO.OOO LIV 148.73A -O.344 P . jO .OOO RIJ 29.30A -0.511 P . jO .OOO HEL 221.65A -0.275 P.iO.000 VAJ 68.91A -0.371 P.tO.OOO VAF 79.20A -O.345 P . tO .OOO SAS 68 .43A -0.315 P.tO.OOO LOO 12.63A -0.483 P.to.013. BAN 56.55A -0.416 P.tO.OOO BA 41.15A -0.257 P.tO.OOO GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e Sex eq. l/male, 2/female LIV eq. Liverpool RIJ eq. Rljeka Age eq. 18-90 years HEL eq. H e l s i n k i VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey SESZ-eq, . (SES - 53?)/ standard d e v i a t i o n VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser of SES SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz SESG eq.(The range of SESZ)/5 creates BAN eq. Banat the study area S23G i n t e r v a l s ; BA eq. Buenos A i r e s which then determine the SESG group of an i n d i v i d u a l on the basis of the SSSZ score value 47 who had the l e a s t amount of a d i s e a s e or were normal, and the persons who had the h i g h e s t s e v e r i t y of the d i s e a s e or had the h i g h e s t index score ( f o r the types of d i s e a s e c a t e g o r i z -a t i o n see Appendix C). These frequency t a b u l a t i o n s , i n Table V, were done f o r a l l f i v e d i s e a s e s and the twelve o r i g i n a l study areas. The major i n t e r e s t was i n the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the "normal" ( h e a l t h y ) p o p u l a t i o n , as i t was f e l t t h a t the d i s t i n c t i o n betv/een the h e a l t h y and the s i c k , i . e . , w i t h some s e v e r i t y , i s more r e l i a b l e i n the c r o s s - n a t i o n a l comparison of the occurrence/non-occurrence of d i s e a s e s than the d i s -t i n c t i o n between the p r e c i s e s e v e r i t y stages of the i d e n t i -f i e d d i s e a s e s . I n many comparative d i s e a s e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s the s e v e r i t i e s i d e n t i f i e d vary c o n s i d e r a b l y from one a r e a to another, y e t a t the same time the dichonomy r a t i o h e a l t h y / s i c k f o r a p a r t i c u l a r d i s e a s e does not d i f f e r to any g r e a t e x t e n t . T h i s phenomenon i s perhaps due to the low s e n s i t i -v i t y of the instrument to measure the l e v e l of disease (Mausner and Bahn, 1974). T h i s f a i r l y s i m i l a r breakdown between the h e a l t h y and those i d e n t i f i e d s i c k , from one a r e a to another, seemed to c h a r a c t e r i z e the heads of households s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s study. The g r e a t e s t d i f f e r e n c e s appeared i n the f r e q u e n c i e s of a n x i e t y i n d i c e s ; R i j e k a , Lodz, Banat, and Buenos A i r e s showing the s m a l l e s t percentages of lowest s c o r e s , "normal", and the remaining nine showing s i m i l a r and much g r e a t e r per-centages of low score a n x i e t y i n d i c e s . For the twelve study 4 8 Table Y The Percentage Distributions of Indicator Diseases In Each  Study Area; Percentages of Low Scores (norra.1) and Percentages  ef High Scores (highest severity) of the Household Heads Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index for Bed-Days, Restricted Angina Days and Health Problems Anxiety Pectoris Bronchitis Dyspnea CP L 77.0 66.8 67.2 76.4 75.6 H 2.2 0.1 0.4 3.4 0.6 BAL L 69.4 62.6 68.2 73.6 74.0 H 6.7 0,2 1.5 3.7 0.9 LTV L 70.3 59.3 70.5 66.8 74.4 H 3.1 0.2 1.5 6.1 0.8 NWV L 77.3 59.5 ~ 70.1 71.1 72.5 H 2.8 0.2 1.2 3.5 0.4 RU L 61.1 27.3 68.1 68.7 68.2 H k.7 1.1 1.2 6.2 0.8 HEL L 54.2 65.2 55.3 78.8 79.4 H *.3 0.1 2.6 3.1 0.9 VAJ L 75.5 63.6 71.0 78.7 76.9 H 3.2 0.1 1.0 2.6 0.6 VAF L 71.4' 61.6 67.3 75.6 75.9 H 2.8 0.2 0.9 2.7 1.3 SAS L 67.3 63.3 62.0 72.8 72.7 H 3.1 0.2 0.8 3.0 0.4 LCD L 58.2 28.9 58.6 73.1 59.7 H 9.8 1.0 1.7 5.8 1.0 BAN L 57.2 20.1 62.5 68.7 61.7 H 6.1 2.1 3.0 5.9 0.4 BA L 70.7 36.6 82.5 79.8 84.9 H **.5 0.3 1.7 2.7 0.3 means for L 67.5 51.2 66.9 73.7 73.0 areas H 4.4 0.5 1.4 4.1 0.7 # CP sq. Grande Prairie VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser BAL eq. Baltimore SAS eq. Saskatchewan NWV eq. Northwestern Vermont L0D eq. Lodz LIV eq. Liverpool BAN eq. Banat RLJ eq. Rijeka BA eq. Buenos Aires HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey L; eq. the lowest score persons * H eq. the highest score persons * for score types see Appendix C. 49 areas the mean percentages of h e a l t h y people i n the p o p u l -a t i o n , i n r e s p e c t to the f i v e s e l e c t e d d i s e a s e s , were j u s t about the same f o r b r o n c h i t i s and dyspnea, 73-7% and 73-0% • r e s p e c t i v e l y ; the means of the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n l a s t two weeks and angina p e c t o r i s were s i m i l a r , 67.5% a n d 66.9% r e s p e c t i v e l y . The lowest mean f o r the f i v e d i s e a s e s i n twelve study areas was f o r the h e a l t h y p o p u l a t i o n i n re-, spect to the occurrence of a n x i e t y , o n l y 51.2%. The above mentioned d i f f i c u l t y o f i d e n t i f y i n g the comparable s e v e r i t y f r e q u e n c i e s o f the d i s e a s e s was a l s o apparent from the mor-b i d i t y data employed i n t h i s study. For example, Banat and Saskatchewan both had about the same percentages of persons without angina p e c t o r i s , i . e . , normal, 62.5% a n d 62.0% r e s p e c t i v e l y , however, Banat had 3.0fo of a l l respondents with the h i g h e s t s e v e r i t y of angina p e c t o r i s while Saskatchewan had o n l y 0.8% of " e q u i v a l e n t " cases. The second method of comparing the d i s e a s e d i s t r i b u -t i o n s w i t h i n and between the study areas i n v o l v e d the com-p a r i s o n of non-existence, e x i s t e n c e , and s e v e r i t y of d i s e a s e s i n r e s p e c t to the socioeconomic s t a t u s of the heads of the households. T h i s was performed by p r o d u c i n g the scattergrams f o r each of the f i v e i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s by SESZ scores of the heads of the households of the study areas where the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s index c o n s t r u c t i o n c o u l d have been c a r r i e d out. Appendix M shows the d i s t r i b u t i o n of each d i s e a s e i n 50 each of the t e n study areas as p l o t t e d a g a i n s t the 'normal-i z e d ' SES s c o r e s . To t r a n s f o r m the v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s i n t o s y s t e m a t i z e d measurements, the SESZ scores c o u l d not be em-p l o y e d f o r the s t a t i s t i c s due to the dichonomous, non-normal, and o r d i n a l nature of the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e v a r i a b l e s . A c c o r d i n g to the v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s there appear d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s of d i s e a s e d i s t r i b u t i o n i n r e s p e c t to the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s index, but the p a t t e r n f o r each d i s e a s e seems to be very s i m i l a r from one study a r e a to another. The c o r -r e l a t i o n s between the s e v e r i t y (no d i s e a s e = 0 s e v e r i t y ) of each d i s e a s e and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were com-puted v i a the Spearman Rank Order c o r r e l a t i o n . The r e s u l t s , i n Table VI, adhere to the e a r l i e r v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s . F i r s t , the t r e n d s between the occurrence o f d i s e a s e s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n a l l areas t u r n e d out to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . Second, the a b s o l u t e v a l u e s o f the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s are not, as g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d , h i g h . The s t r o n g e s t c o r r e l a t i o n , - 0 . 3 5 9 2 , was between the a n x i e t y index and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n Banat, while the weakest c o r r e l a t i o n , - 0 . 0 2 1 5 i was between angina p e c t o r i s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n L i v e r p o o l . T h i r d l y , although the a b s o l u t e v a l u e s of the c o r r e l a t i o n s are not c o n s i d e r e d h i g h , they a l l show i n a l l t e n study areas c l e a r n e g a t i v e d i r e c t i o n . The h i g h e s t n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n , the mean f o r a l l ten study areas, was between the a n x i e t y index and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups, - 0 . 2 4 6 0 ; the next h i g h e s t n e g a t i v e was between dyspnea and the socioeconomic Table VI. Spearman Rank Order C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s between  Socioeconomic Status Croups and the Five Indicator  Diseases by Each Study Area Composite Bother-Hurt- Worry Index f o r Bed Days,Restricted Days and Health Problems Anxiety Angina Pe c t o r i s B r o n c h i t i s Dyspnea CP -0.1429 P. i .001 -0.2133 P.:.001 -0 .0708 P. i .003 -0.0858 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.2330 P. 1.001 LIV -0.0689 P . » . 0 0 9 -0.2389 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.0215 P . t . 2 3 1 -0.0955 P.i.001 -O.2692 P . t.001 RLJ -0.0838 P . t . 0 0 3 -0.3199 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.0746 P.1.001 -0.1595 P . t . 0 0 7 -0.1818 P . t.001 HEL -0.2132 P. i .001 -0.2624 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.1369 P. 1.038 -0.1018 P . t.001 -0.2526 P . t . 0 0 1 VAJ -0.0946 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.2090 P. 1.001 -0.0519 P . t . 121 TO.0518 P . t . 0 3 9 -0.1783 P.:.001 VAF -0.1138 P . t.001 -0.2231 P . t.001 -0.0349 p . t .151 -0.0254 P . t.198 -0.2183 P . t . 0 0 1 SAS -0.1163 P . t.001 -0.2459 P . t.001 -0.0289 P. 1.001 -0.0623 P . t . 0 1 3 -0.1644 P . t.001 LCD -0.1273 P . t.001 -0.2050 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.1031 P. 1.001 -0.0822 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.2115 P . t . 0 0 1 BAN -0.1489 P . t.001 -0.3592 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.1131 P. 1.001 -0.0750 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.1748 P . t.001 BA -0,0995 P . t .001 -0.1836 P . t . 0 0 1 -0.0670 P.1.003 -0.0538 P. 1.014 -0.0581 P.:.009 mean f o r a l l -0.1209 areas -0.2460 -O.O63I -0.0793 -0.1942 GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e VAF eq. LIV eq, Liverpool SAS eq. RIJ eq. Rijeka LOD eq. HEL eq. H e l s i n k i BAN eq. VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey BA eq. Vancouver,Fraser Saskatchewan Lodz Banat Buenos A i r e s 52 s t a t u s groups, -0.1942; the third, h i g h e s t was between the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n l a s t two weeks, -0.1209, and the f o u r t h and the f i f t h s t r o n g e s t a s s o c i a t i o n s between the d i s e a s e s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were f a i r l y c l o s e to each other; b r o n c h i t i s c o r r e l a t e d -0.0793 and angina p e c t o r i s c o r r e l a t e d -O.O63I with the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups. Because the d i s e a s e s , each one of them, showed such a homogenious r e l a t i o n s h i p with the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups throughout the t e n study areas, each d i s e a s e , n e v e r t h e l e s s , h a v i n g i t s d i s t i n c t p a t t e r n , and because of the r e l a t i v e l y s i m i l a r dichotomies o f h e a l t h y / s i c k o f the f i v e d i s e a s e s among the twelve study areas, i t was decided t h a t the d i s e a s e s (amounts and s e v e r i t i e s ) need not to be s t a n d a r d i z e d between the study a r e a s . T h i s d e c i s i o n had two p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h i s study. F i r s t , the s e l e c t e d d i s e a s e s c o u l d be per-c e i v e d as o c c u r r i n g i n the same r e s p e c t i v e amounts as i n d u c i n g p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n i n the twelve study areas; and secondly, each of the d i s e a s e s c o u l d be used as a c o n t r o l l i n g v a r i a b l e i n the examination of the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n pat-t e r n s among the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups, and the c r o s s -a r e a comparisons of these p a t t e r n s c o u l d be done without the concern of s t a n d a r d i z i n g the amount and s e v e r i t i e s o f d i s e a s e s among the t e n study p o p u l a t i o n s . Although the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f d i s e a s e s f o r the twelve 53 heads of households p o p u l a t i o n s t u r n e d out to be q u i t e s i m i -l a r i n the twelve study areas, i t should be noted t h a t we are d e a l i n g with only f i v e d i s e a s e s o f hundreds t h a t a c t u a l l y are i n d u c i n g respondents to use a p h y s i c i a n . Another note should be made of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i s e a s e s , i n r e a l i t y , t h a t i d e n t i f i e s the frequency of persons who might have more than one disease s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , i . e . , m u l t i p l e d i s e a s e cases. Appendix J i s a simple count of the number of cases o f the r e p o r t e d f i v e d i s e a s e s i n the twelve study a r e a s . I f the t o t a l study p o p u l a t i o n , the number of the heads of households, i n the twelve study areas i s 17,353 and the t o t a l number of r e p o r t e d f i v e d i s e a s e s i s JO,753> then i t i s an i n d i c a t i o n t h a t there e x i s t a number o f persons with m u l t i p l e d i s e a s e s , i . e . , with more than one of the r e p o r t e d d i s e a s e s . To s t r i c t l y i d e n t i f y a di s e a s e i n a u t i l i z a t i o n p o p u l a t i o n would mean the s e p a r a t i o n o f the s i n g l e d i s e a s e cases, the cases with two d i s e a s e s , e t c . T h i s procedure would s t i l l , i n the context o f t h i s study, l e a v e u n c e r t a i n t y about the exact d i s t r i b u t i o n of the g e n e r a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i s e a s e s because only a p o r t i o n o f the t o t a l s p e c i f i c human d i s e a s e s was o r i g i n a l l y i d e n t i f i e d by the WHO/ICS-MCU study. There-f o r e an assumption i s made th a t the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the m u l t i p l e d i s e a s e cases i s s i m i l a r between the study areas with r e s p e c t to the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups (probably a n e g a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p ) , and the u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s induced by the presence o f the m u l t i p l e d i s e a s e s are comparable 54 between the t e n study areas. The d i s e a s e s to be used i n l a t e r a n a l y s e s were s e l -e c t e d as; the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems, the a n x i e t y index, and angina p e c t o r i s . The major reason f o r s e l e c t i n g the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c -t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n l a s t two weeks as a con-t r o l l i n g v a r i a b l e was l a r g e l y imposed by the o r i g i n a l data c o l l e c t i o n by WHO/ICS-MCU. T h i s i n d i c a t o r d isease was de-f i n e d i n r e f e r e n c e to the respondent's m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n the l a s t two weeks which p e r i o d a l s o was the time r e f e r e n c e f o r the u t i l i z a t i o n of p h y s i c i a n s . A n x i e t y was s e l e c t e d due to i t s nature as an 'on-going' s t a t e o f d i s o r d e r ; a l s o i t s s c a l i n g i n the o r i g i n a l data format p r o v i d e s a continuous s c a l e (Appendix C). The measurement v a l i d i t y and r e l i a -b i l i t y o f the a n x i e t y index had been t e s t e d and proven good by v a r i o u s other s t u d i e s and by some e a r l i e r r e p o r t s of the WHO/ICS-MCU study p o p u l a t i o n s (Kalimo, Bice and Novosel, 1970). Angina p e c t o r i s was s e l e c t e d to r e p r e s e n t the c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s , of which the a c t i v i t y stages f o r l a s t t h r e e months (Kohn and White, 1976, p. 63) were not u t i l i z e d i n the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n / S E S G computations. Angina p e c t -o r i s p r o v i d e d the' l a r g e s t number of cases o f any of the c h r o n i c c o n d i t i o n s and i t a l s o t u r n e d out to have the smal-l e s t rank order c o r r e l a t i o n with SESZ of any of the c h r o n i c • c o n d i t i o n s ; both aspects s u g g e s t i n g i t f o r f u r t h e r a n a l y s e s . 55 The larger number of reported cases provides s t a t i s t i c a l l y more s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s , and the smaller the c o r r e l a -t i o n between the c o n t r o l l i n g variable (a disease) and the two others (physician u t i l i z a t i o n and SESG) the easier to detect the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the variables to be cor-re l a t e d . 3. Relationships between the Socioeconomic Status Group  (SESG) and U t i l i z a t i o n of Physician The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the u t i l i z a t i o n of physicians and the socioeconomic status groups was expressed by the computation of P a r t i a l Gammas. Before the computations of p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s , and zero-order corr e l a t i o n s , the actual numbers of reported physician contacts i n the l a s t two weeks were compared among the twelve study areas, Appendix K. The percentages of the heads of the households without physician contacts i n the l a s t two weeks are very much the same i n a l l study areas. The range of these per-centages among the twelve study areas i s 8.7$. The greatest number of heads of the households with physician v i s i t s was i n Baltimore, 20.5$ and the smallest number of the heads of the households with physician v i s i t s was i n Grand P r a i r i e , 11.8$. The percentages of persons with only one physician contact i n the l a s t two weeks were comparatively s i m i l a r from one area to another, however, there are proportionally greater area differences i n the percentages of persons with at l e a s t two, and with three or more, physicians contacts i n 56 the l a s t two weeks. The Gamma c o e f f i c i e n t s between the use of physician and SESG, without any c o n t r o l l i n g by the diseases, and the P a r t i a l Gamma c o e f f i c i e n t s between the use of physicians and SESG, c o n t r o l l i n g by the three selected diseases separately, are tabulated i n Table VII. After c o n t r o l l i n g with the three i n d i c a t o r diseases i t appears that the u t i l i z a t i o n of physician and the socioeconomic status of the head of the household are not strongly correlated. The strongest p o s i -tive c o r r e l a t i o n , 0.23562, was i n Lodz by c o n t r o l l i n g for the anxiety index, the strongest negative c o r r e l a t i o n , -0.34049, was i n Liverpool by c o n t r o l l i n g for the composite bother-hurt-worry index for bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and health problems i n the l a s t two weeks. The four means for the correlations between the socioeconomic status groups and the use of physician i n the ten study areas were - 0.04942, 0.01384, -0.04039, and -0.00813 for the use of physician and SESG, the use of physician and SESG -- c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the composite bother-hurt-worry index for bed days, r e s t r i c -ted days, and health problems i n the l a s t two weeks, the anxiety index, and angina pectoris r e s p e c t i v e l y . The main r e s u l t s that come c l e a r l y out of the matrix of correlations between the use of physician and the socio-economic status groups are; f i r s t , the ef f e c t s of the con-t r o l l i n g for the diseases are small, i . e . , each area seems to produce the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s of si m i l a r magnitude Table V I I . The Gamma C o e f f i c i e n t s between the Number of Physician Contacts  ln l a s t Two Weeks and the Socioeconomic Status Croups (S55G), C o n t r o l l i n g and Not C o n t r o l l i n g f o r Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry  Index f o r Bed Days,Restricted Days, and Health Problems ln Last  Two Weeks, the Anxiety Index, and Angina Pe c t o r i s C o n t r o l l i n g f o r Composite B-H-W Index f o r Eed Days, C o n t r o l l i n g Zero-order eq. Re s t r i c t e d Days and f o r C o n t r o l l i n g f o r a l l persons Health Problems Anxiety Angina P e c t o r i s CP - 0.09483 0.00171 0.01378 -0.04867 LTV -0.23284 -0.34049 -0.09138 -O.25873 RLI 0.05048 0.12666 0.17900 0.10702 HEL -0.14904 0.11508 -0.03847 -0.05948 VAJ -0.09229 -O.IO653 -0.02084 -0.08366 VAF 0.01759 -0.04057 0.02975 0.07648 SAS -O.O9135 - 0.02050 -O.O36O3 -0.06257 LCD O.IO45O O . I76I8 0.23562 0.21095 BAN O.O7505 ' 0.21418 0.15926 0.12308 BA -0.08149 0.01266 -0.02676 -O.O8569 mean -0.04942 •0.01384 -0.04039 -0.00813 GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e LIV eq. Liverpool R U eq. Rijeka HEL eq. H e l s i n k i VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos A i r e s Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index f o r Bed Day3,Restricted Days, and Health Problems in Last Two Weeks eq. 10(no index),9(lowest) to 0(highest) Anxiety Index eq. 0(lowest) to 10(highest) Angina P e c t o r i s eq. 0(normal) to 6(angina, grade I I ) Number of Physician Contacts i n Last Two Weeks eq. 0-10 58 r e g a r d l e s s of c o n t r o l l i n g procedures. I n the Canadian study areas and i n Buenos A i r e s the d i f f e r e n c e "between the Gamma and anyone o f the P a r t i a l Gammas was s m a l l e r than or equal to 0.10. T h i s means t h a t the e f f e c t s of the d i s e a s e s are s i m i l a r i n r e s p e c t t o the o v e r a l l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the u t i l i z a t i o n of p h y s i c i a n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s . The H e l s i n k i study a r e a showed the l a r g e s t change i n the abs o l u t e value of the Gammas; i t had a value of -0.14904 f o r the zero-order Gamma, and the value o f 0.11508 f o r the P a r t i a l Gamma c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and h e a l t h problems i n the l a s t two weeks, an ab s o l u t e change of 0.264. T h i s study a r e a a l s o had the lowest percentage o f h e a l t h y persons f o r the same i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e of a l l the twelve study areas. (Table V). R i j e k a , Lodz, and Banet a l l showed c o n s i s t e n t l y s t r o n g e r p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s a f t e r the c o n t r o l l i n g s f o r the d i s e a s e s were performed. The d i f f e r e n c e s between Gammas and P a r t i a l Gammas g e n e r a l l y were 0.5 to 0.14. I t should be noted t h a t except f o r a n x i e t y , these three study areas showed s i m i l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the socioeconomic s t a t u s and the three c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s i n comparison to the seven other study areas (Table V I ) . T h i s means t h a t the w i t h i n study area d i s t r i b u t i o n s of d i s e a s e s ( d i s e a s e s by SESG) do not c o r r e s -pond t o the d i f f e r e n c e s between Gammas and P a r t i a l Gammas. For L i v e r p o o l study a r e a a l l f o u r c o r r e l a t i o n s , Gamma and three P a r t i a l Gammas, were n e g a t i v e . Here, the most d i s t i n c t 59 c o r r e l a t i o n was the P a r t i a l Gamma between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i -z a t i o n and the socioeconomic s t a t u s while c o n t r o l l i n g f o r a n x i e t y , -0 .091. From Table VI i t appears t h a t ( i n L i v e r p o o l ) a n x i e t y had the s t r o n g e s t c o r r e l a t i o n (of the three c o n t r o l -l i n g d i s e a s e s ) with socioeconomic s t a t u s . Thus, i n L i v e r -p o o l the lower socioeconomic s t a t u s groups tend to be more anxious than the h i g h e r socioeconomic s t a t u s groups. Yet, the lower socioeconomic s t a t u s groups tend to use p h y s i c i a n s more s i m i l a r i l y to the h i g h e r socioeconomic groups w i t h r e s -p ect to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a n x i e t y than to the other two di s e a s e s — or even what the g e n e r a l t r e n d seems to be (the Gamma). Second, although the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s do not take, g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d , h i g h v a l u e s , there appear d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s w i t h i n the t e n study areas. By comparing the f o u r c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s ; Gamma, and the three P a r t i a l Gammas, one f o r each c o n t r o l -l i n g d i s e a s e , the r e s u l t s show t h a t b a s i c l y three groups of the types o f study areas can be d i s t i n g u i s h e d : L i v e r p o o l as having the s t r o n g e s t n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s , Grand P r a i r i e , H e l s i n k i , the Vancouver study areas, Saskatchewan, and Buenos A i r e s as ha v i n g very c l o s e to zero c o r r e l a t i o n s , and the three study areas, R i j e k a , Lodz, and Banat as having the s t r o n g e s t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s . The above mentioned grouping i s a l s o produced by the M u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l Scalogram A n a l y s i s , F i g u r e 3- I~t p l a c e s a l l study areas except. L i v e r p o o l f a i r l y c l o s e to each other. Figure 3« Multidimensional Scalogram of the Physician U t i l i z a t i o n by the Socioeconomic Status Groups! i n Two Dimensional Presentation " ~ ~ Vector 2 0 + Vector 1 0 Liverpool Banat Lodz Rijeka Vancouver-Fraser • H e l s i n k i Vancouver-Jersey Grand P r a i r i e Saskatchewan Buenos Aires » o e (For the an a l y s i s and GLiMSAl program output , see Appendix L.) ON o 61 From the e t a v a l u e s of the three computed v e c t o r s , Appendix L, i t appears t h a t the f i r s t two dimensions are the most important d e s c r i p t o r s of the s i m i l a r i t i e s ( d i s t a n c e s ) between the t e n study a r e a s . T h i s means t h a t the c o n f i g u r -a t i o n of F i g u r e 3. i n two dimensional p i c t u r e , i n f a c t rep-r e s e n t s very much the t o t a l m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l placements of the t e n study areas i n r e s p e c t to each other. I n o n l y one dimensional d e s c r i p t i o n , the most r o b u s t measurement, the o n l y d i f f e r e n t study a r e a i s L i v e r p o o l . In two dimensional d e s c r i p t i o n , the more d e t a i l e d examination, the R i j e k a , Lodz, and Banat study areas are separated somewhat from the r e s t s i x study areas which form a homogeneous group. The o u t e r -p o i n t matrix, Appendix L, i n d i c a t e s t h a t none of the con-t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s r e f l e c t any other r e l a t i v e placements of the study areas; i . e . , each of the three d i s e a s e s would group the t e n study areas very c o n s i s t e n t l y . The t h r e e major r e s u l t s a r e : f i r s t , the t e n study areas a l l show o n l y very weak c o r r e l a t i o n s between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s groups; second, the L i v e r p o o l study area appears as the most d i s t i n c t one because of the c o m p a r a t i v e l y s t r o n g n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s groups; and t h i r d , a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n R i j e k a , Lodz, and Banat. The trends are not, on o v e r a l l , s t r o n g l y e f f e c t e d by the s e l e c t i o n of the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e , ( f o r o u t e r - p o i n t matrix, 6 2 see Appendix L) i . e . , the r e l a t i o n s h i p "between the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups does not appear important. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z -a t i o n and the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s was not e s p e c i a l l y examined, however, s i n c e the e f f e c t s of the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s are s m a l l and the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were proven minimal (Table VI) i t seems t h a t the i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s u t i l i z e d do not s t r o n g l y c o r r e l a t e with the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n . T h i s means t h a t the s e l e c t e d d i s e a s e s , by and l a r g e , are not the reasons f o r the p h y s i c i a n c o n t a c t s and they i n f a c t do r e p -r e s e n t s i m i l a r measures of m o r b i d i t y throughout the t e n study areas. Another c o n c l u s i o n would be t h a t the t h r e e d i s e a s e s , each, induce s i m i l a r p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s i n the t e n study areas. However, s i n c e the o v e r a l l d i s t r i -b u t i o n of the i n d u c i n g d i s e a s e s , or reasons, f o r the p h y s i -c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n s are not known, the r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s of the three d i s e a s e s i n i n d u c i n g p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n cannot be p r e c i s e l y determined. I f the t e n study areas were to be a n a l y s e d from the . g e n e r a l s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e then they c o u l d be c l a s s i f i e d as; the ones wi t h the p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s ( R i j e k a , Lodz and Banat), the ones with p r a c t i c a l l y zero c o r r e l a t i o n s ( H e l s i n k i , Buenos A i r e s and the Canadian study a r e a s ) , and the one ( L i v e r p o o l ) with the n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s . 63 V. DISCUSSION 1. Summary of the Analysis Stages and Observations 2. Caveats of the Analysis and Relevance to Health Services Planning 3- Suggestions and Conclusions 64 1. Summary of the A n a l y s i s Stages and Observations I n t h i s study the behaviour p a t t e r n s of the heads o f households who h o l d d i f f e r e n t or v a r y i n g socioeconomic s t a t u s were used as measurements of s i m i l a r i t y or d i s s i m i l a r i t y between the d i f f e r e n t m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems. The socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were f i r s t i d e n t i f i e d as to be comparable from one study a r e a to another. T h i s was done by the socioeconomic s t a t u s index c o n s t r u c t i o n , i n each study a r e a s e p a r a t e l y but i n a c o n s i s t e n t l y s i m i l a r f a s h i o n w i t h r e s p e c t to methodology, which then was used to compute an i n d i c a t o r of socioeconomic s t a t u s group f o r each head of household i n the ten study areas. The b a s i c d e s i r e was to o b t a i n socioeconomic s t a t u s groups t h a t were s i m i l a r from one study area to another i n terms of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c d i f f e r -ences of the lower and the h i g h e r groups of each area. Four s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each head of household were used i n the f a c t o r a n a l y s i s of each a r e a to d e f i n e the a r e a f a c t o r s c o r e s , the socioeconomic s t a t u s index s c o r e s . The ten study area f a c t o r c o e f f i c i e n t s of the f o u r i n p u t v a r i -a b l e s were.very s i m i l a r , and t h i s was a l s o r e f l e c t e d i n the s i m i l a r standard d e v i a t i o n s of the f i n a l socioeconomic s t a t u s scores of each study area. The importance of stand-ard d e v i a t i o n s , (which were very s i m i l a r i n each area) l i e s i n the f a c t t h a t they are an important i n d i c a t i o n of the r e s u l t s to be a t t a i n e d from the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the socioeconomic s t a t u s scores and the s e l e c t e d m o r b i d i t y measurements. From the p o i n t - o f - v i e w of a more g e n e r a l r e s e a r c h methodology, the s i m i l a r i t i e s of w i t h i n a r e a d i s -p e r s i o n s of the i n p u t v a r i a b l e s and a l s o the end-products (the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s ) between the study areas c l e a r l y support the u t i l i z a t i o n of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l , or a t l e a s t c r o s s - a r e a , s t u d i e s as an instrument of b e h a v i o u r a l measurement with r e s p e c t to the comparison of f u n c t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n p o p u l a t i o n s . The f a c t o r a n a l y s i s proce-dures, as w e l l as the f a c t o r s c o r e s , showed t h a t r e g a r d l e s s of the seven supposedly d i f f e r e n t s o c i e t i e s the p o p u l a t i o n s tend to group i n t e r n a l l y ( w i t h i n themselves) i n a s i m i l a r f a s h i o n , at l e a s t i n r e s p e c t to the s e l e c t e d f o u r c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c s , although e x t e r n a l l y (between themselves) they might show c o n s i d e r a b l y more v a r i a t i o n when d e s c r i b e d only by the averages (the g e n e r a l l e v e l s ) of the same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . T h i s same g e n e r a l n o t i o n of s i m i l a r i n t e r n a l d i s p e r s i o n s between the t e n study areas i s a l s o m a n i f e s t e d by the d i s t r i -b u t i o n s of d i s e a s e s i n r e s p e c t to the socioeconomic s t a t u s of the heads o f households. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the f i v e s e l e c t e d m o r b i d i t y i n d i c a t o r s were q u i t e s i m i l a r from one area to another, the o n l y e x c e p t i o n being the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a n x i e t y . However, even the d i s p e r s i o n s of the s e v e r i t y of a n x i e t y among the p o p u l a t i o n s t h a t were d i f f e r e n t r e -sembled very much those i n the other areas. The d i s t r i b u -t i o n s of the d i s e a s e s among the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups were s i m i l a r , with some g e n e r a l tendency f o r the lower 66 socioeconomic s t a t u s groups having s l i g h t l y more d i s e a s e s and of h i g h e r s e v e r i t y . The p a t t e r n s of the disease d i s t r i -b u t i o n s among the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups a c r o s s the ten study areas were a l s o very much the same, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t i r r e s p e c t i v e o f the d i f f e r e n t s o c i e t i e s the d i s e a s e d i s t r i -b u t i o n s were s i m i l a r although there might have been s l i g h t v a r i a t i o n i n the b a s i c dichotomy of the d i s e a s e d i s t r i b u t i o n ("disease" or "no d i s e a s e " ) . The d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the d i s -eases were a l s o checked with r e s p e c t t o the ages o f the heads of the households; no s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two v a r i a b l e s e x i s t e d , and the between ar e a comparisons confirmed the s i m i l a r i t i e s found b e f o r e , Appendix N. The comparison of the d i s e a s e d i s t r i b u t i o n s by the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n the t e n study areas p r o v i d e d two b a s i c r e s e a r c h n o t i o n s . F i r s t , from e a r l i e r e p i d e m i o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s (e.g., Kohn and White, 1976) i t was known t h a t the g e n e r a l breakdowns of disease/no d i s e a s e f o r the f i v e s e l e c t e d c o n d i t i o n s are q u i t e s i m i l a r i n the t e n study areas; from the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study i t . a l s o appears t h a t the s e v e r i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the d i s e a s e s i n the separate study areas are very s i m i l a r i n terms of c e n t r a l d i s p e r s i o n s . Second, the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the d i f f e r e n t d i s e a s e s and the socioeconomic s t a t u s a l l resembled each others and were c o n s i s t e n t l y s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n the t e n study areas, meaning t h a t the u t i l i z e d socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s i n the study areas a p p a r e n t l y have d e s c r i b e d the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the t e n sample p o p u l a t i o n s s i m i l a r l y , 6? and t h e r e f o r e the comparison of p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n of these p o p u l a t i o n s w i l l he based on the examination of func-t i o n a l l y s i m i l a r p o p u l a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t are combined i n t o the t e n socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s . The u t i l i z a t i o n o f p h y s i c i a n s c o r r e l a t e d weakly, i f at a l l , w i t h the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s group. The major d i s t i n c t i o n s were the compar a t i v e l y s t r o n g n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n i n L i v e r p o o l and the s l i g h t l y p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s i n the R i j e k a , Lodz, and Banat study a r e a s . The zero-order c o r r e l a t i o n s , p h y s i c i a n use by socioeconomic s t a t u s without c o n t r o l l i n g f o r any s p e c i f i c d i s e a s e , showed only very s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s i n com-p a r i s o n to the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s a f t e r c o n t r o l l i n g manip-u l a t i o n s were performed f o r the s e l e c t e d i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s . These f i n d i n g s suggest three b a s i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s ; f i r s t , the trend s observed ( j u s t about n e g l i g i b l e ) are c o n s i s t e n t with-i n each study area, second, the d i f f e r e n c e s between the study areas i n terms of t h e i r c o r r e l a t i o n s between p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and socioeconomic s t a t u s group are c o n s i s t e n t , i . e . , the s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s between the study areas are pro-duced r e g a r d l e s s o f the c o n t r o l l i n g procedures, and t h i r d , the e f f e c t s o f the c o n t r o l l i n g d i s e a s e s , as manifested- by the d i f f e r e n c e s between the zer o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s and the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s , are c o n s i d e r e d weak, i . e . , the r e l a -t i o n s h i p s between the socioeconomic s t a t u s and the d i s e a s e s are o f only s m a l l importance i n a l l study.areas. S i m i l a r i l y , o nly a weak r e l a t i o n s h i p appears between the p h y s i c i a n 68 u t i l i z a t i o n and the s e l e c t e d i n d i c a t o r d i s e a s e s which, how-ever, c o u l d be p o s t u l a t e d because of the examination of the use of only a few of a l l the p o s s i b l e a v a i l a b l e reasons of p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n . The comparison of the t e n study areas i n r e s p e c t to t h e i r f o u r c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y produced a continuum of types o f study areas, based on the s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s of types of c o r r e l a t i o n s , i . e . , p o s i t i v e , zero, or n e g a t i v e . The three E a s t e r n European study areas, as mentioned above, showed a c o n s i s t e n t p o s i -t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n , the Canadian, the F i n n i s h , and the Argent-i n i a n study areas showed j u s t about zero c o r r e l a t i o n s , or very s l i g h t l y n e g a t i v e , and the B r i t i s h study area, had d i s t i n c t l y the most n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n . Thus, although the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s and the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n are not s t r o n g l y c o r r e l a t e d i n any of the. t e n study areas, the study areas do s t i l l appear as having t h e i r separate groupings. 2.' Caveats of the A n a l y s i s and Relevance to Health S e r v i c e s  P l a n n i n g As has been demonstrated, comparative socioeconomic s t a t u s groups can be s t u d i e d c r o s s - n a t i o n a l l y i n r e s p e c t to t h e i r p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s . Thus i t seems l o g i c a l t h a t they a l s o can be s t u d i e d i n r e s p e c t to the other forms of m e d i c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n , e.g., use of nurses, use of types of medicines, e t c . The f i n d i n g s of t h i s study i n d i -cate t h a t the d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s u t i l i z e p h y s i c i a n s very much s i m i l a r i l y i n r e s p e c t to the socioeconomic s t a t u s , i . e . , 69 t h a t r e g a r d l e s s of the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the m e d i c a l care sys-tems and t h e i r u n d e r l y i n g s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s , the w i t h i n study area uses of p h y s i c i a n s by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups are q u i t e s i m i l a r . T h i s means t h a t the d i f -f e r e n t mechanisms of p l a n n i n g f o r the development and organ-i z a t i o n of m e d i c a l care systems r e s o u r c e s are i n f a c t respon-s i b l e f o r the f u n c t i o n a l l y s i m i l a r o p e r a t i o n s w i t h i n the study areas. I t should be remembered though, t h a t the study areas are not at the same stage i n t h e i r s o c i a l development and t h e r e f o r e the systems of m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y need not to be the same i n numbers and i n o r g a n i z a t i o n . In f a c t , the systems can h a r d l y be the same i n order to have s i m i l a r outcomes ( p h y s i c i a n use by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups) while s e r v i n g the d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s , i n d i f f e r e n t environments. The examined study areas are known to have d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems (Kohn and White, 1976); these systems serve p o p u l a t i o n s with d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s and means of l i v i n g , and the p o p u l a t i o n s have d i f -f e r e n t standards of l i v i n g . Yet, s i x out of the t e n study areas are s i m i l a r , t hree others are s i m i l a r , and o n l y one study a r e a i s somewhat d i s t i n c t w i t h r e s p e c t to p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n by socioeconomic s t a t u s groups. Some of the d i s s i m i l a r i t y of the m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems i s prob-a b l y m a n i f e s t e d by the three groups of types of study a r e a c o r r e l a t i o n s , between the socioeconomic s t a t u s and the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n , however, based on only s m a l l d i f f e r -70 ences. For the h e a l t h s e r v i c e s p l a n n e r s the s i m i l a r i t i e s of the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n s i n the d i f f e r e n t medical care d e l i v e r y systems suggest t h a t the "behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n s of the u s e r s , the p a t i e n t s , have not been shown to vary between the study areas, t h a t the r e s p e c t i v e h e a l t h s e r v i c e s p l a n n e r s i n the t e n study areas somehow have operated t o -wards the same end-products, and the e f f e c t s of the d i f f e r e n t s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s , by and l a r g e , are the same i n terms of the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n . Although the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups are s i m i l a r at the time o f the survey, i n d i c a t i n g s i m i l a r e f f e c t s of the h e a l t h s e r v i c e s p l a n n e r s , the study o n l y measures a p o i n t i n time, i . e . , the trends of the developments of the t e n medical care d e l i v e r y systems have not been measured over a p e r i o d of time and t h e r e f o r e the o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h i s study have i g n o r e d the developmental stages of d i f f e r e n t medical care d e l i v e r y systems. The t e n medical care d e l i v e r y systems, however, are c e r t a i n l y i n d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t stages, or at l e a s t .the seven n a t i o n a l ones u n d e r l y i n g them are, and t h e r e -f o r e the caveat i n terms of time i n t e r v a l measurements would onl y be shown a f t e r the same areas were s t u d i e d s i m i l a r l y at l e a s t once more. To v a l i d a t e the s i m i l a r i t i e s found here the u t i l i z a -t i o n s of the other o u t l e t s o f the medical care d e l i v e r y systems by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups should be examined. T h i s would advance the r e l i a b i l i t y o f the f i n d i n g s of t h i s 71 study In r e s p e c t to the s i m i l a r i t i e s / d i s s i m i l a r i t i e s between the study areas and i t would s i m u l t a n e o u s l y advance the i n f o r m a t i o n to be used i n the examination of the observed m e d i c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n r e s p e c t to the medical care d e l i v e r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s and r e s o u r c e s . The c o n n e c t i o n between the r e s o u r c e s and the u t i l i z a t i o n would g i v e most b e n e f i t to the h e a l t h s e r v i c e s planners- s t r u g g l i n g with the measurement and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f p a t i e n t behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n by the a l t e r n a t e m e d i c a l care r e s o u r c e s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s of these r e s o u r c e s . No measurement of the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s of the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s c o n s t r u c t e d was performed. T h i s was con c e i v e d unnecessary f o r the purposes of t h i s study a f t e r the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the i n d i c e s u t i l i z e d r e p r e s e n t e d the c o m p a r a t i v e l y same p o p u l a t i o n s i n each o f the t e n study a r e a s . The respondents were d e s c r i b e d by the s o c i a l charac-t e r i s t i c s commonly used i n the socioeconomic s t a t u s measure-ments of s o c i a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n and s o c i a l p o l i c y p l a n n i n g . I f the exact degree of a p p r o p r i a t n e s s of the socioeconomic s t a t u s i n d i c e s c o n s t r u c t e d was to be assessed, something s i m i l a r to Kahl's and Davies's (1955) comparison of d i f f e r e n t approaches of d e f i n i n g socioeconomic s t a t u s would be neces-s a r y . How much the f o u r v a r i a b l e s used to determine the socioeconomic s t a t u s index, and the respondents' age^ and ^The c o r r e l a t i o n s between age and p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a -t i o n were very weak i n the study area, a l l weaker than 0.10 72 sex, a re a p a r t o f t h e p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s ob-s e r v e d would r e q u i r e a r e - a n a l y s e s o f the t e n s t u d y a r e a s ' s e p a r a t e l y i d e n t i f y i n g f o r each o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t o he examined. However, t h i s was c o n s i d e r e d o f secondary i m p o r t -ance i n the a n a l y s i s p r o c e d u r e s s e l e c t e d s i n c e much o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the above mentioned u n d e r l y i n g v a r i a b l e s and t h e p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n were c o n t r o l l e d f o r v i a t he p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n c o m p u t a t i o n s performed. Even though the t r e n d s might n ot t o t a l l y be r e f l e c -t i o n s o f the e f f e c t s o f the a c t u a l s o c i o e c o n o m i c s t a t u s o f the p e r s o n s s t u d i e d t h e y seem t o i n d i c a t e t h a t the v a r i a n c e s measured f o r t h e s e p a r a t e i n p u t v a r i a b l e s a r e v e r y much the same i n each o f the s t u d y a r e a s . F o r example, i f the t r e n d s o b s e r v e d between the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n and the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s groups, were i n f a c t r e f l e c t i o n s o f the age/ so c i o e c o n o m i c s t a t u s r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h e y , n e v e r t h e l e s s , a re s i m i l a r r e f l e c t i o n s , and the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s have been compared l e g i t i m a t e l y . The a p p l i c a t i o n o f a n o t h e r type o f Q - a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e , e.g., c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s o f c a s e s , f o r t he e x a m i n a t i o n o f the s i m i l a r i t i e s o f the s t u d y a r e a s s h o u l d perhaps be u t i l i z e d t o i n s u r e the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e -ness o f the f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y . Even b e f o r e t h a t , the use o f d i f f e r e n t o u t l e t s o f m e d i c a l c a r e d e l i v e r y systems by the s o c i o e c o n o m i c s t a t u s groups c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the t h r e e the p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s , c o n t r o l l i n g f o r SES, d i f f e r e d o n l y t 0.01 from the z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s . 73 d i s e a s e s c o u l d be a n a l y s e d by the M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l Scalogram A n a l y s i s . By p r o v i d i n g more cases (three p a r a l l e l d e f i n i -t i o n s of each study area, one per d i s e a s e ) and more c o r r e l -a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s , items, (one f o r each type o f use o f med i c a l care d e l i v e r y system by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups) the r e l i a b i l i t y o f the r e l a t i v e placements ( d i s t a n c e s of s i m i l a r i t y ) o f the study areas i n r e s p e c t to others would be enhanced and the e f f e c t s of the d i s e a s e s on the u t i l i z a -t i o n p a t t e r n s c o u l d be more b r o a d l y assessed. I t should be remembered though t h a t the scalograms r e p r e s e n t the s e l e c t e d cases, the study areas, as a whole (a sample) and t h e r e f o r e the s i m i l a r i t i e s appearing should only be r e f e r r e d to the study areas, i . e . , how these study areas r e p r e s e n t the sys-tems of medi c a l and h e a l t h care d e l i v e r y i n g e n e r a l has not been i d e n t i f i e d . 3. Suggestions and C o n c l u s i o n s The study would suggest t h a t the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s o f the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups are r a t h e r s i m i -l a r i r r e s p e c t i v e o f the p r e v a i l i n g medical care d e l i v e r y systems or p o l i t i c a l systems i n the s t u d i e d areas. There are, however, s l i g h t d i f f e r e n c e s between the study areas which c o u l d be used as i d e n t i f i c a t i o n measurements i n the context of a l a r g e r study examining the types o f medi c a l care u t i l i z a t i o n by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups i n g e n e r a l . T h i s can be thought o f as a measure of s i m i l a r i t y among the med i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems, and t h e r e f o r e the f u n c t i o n a l 74 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the system -- p a t e i n t i n t e r a c t i o n s , i n d i c a t e the degree of s i m i l a r i t y t h a t the t e n systems of m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y operate i n . The two b a s i c q u e s t i o n s to be r a i s e d would be; f i r s t , how w e l l do the p h y s i c i a n u t i l i z a t i o n p a t -t e r n s o f the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups compare i n terms of the s i z e and d i r e c t i o n of c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h those of the other types of m e d i c a l u t i l i z a t i o n s ; and second, at the l a t e r exam-i n a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the o r g a n i z a t i o n and r e s o u r c e s of m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y systems and the u t i l i -z a t i o n of them by the socioeconomic s t a t u s groups, how does the d i f f e r e n c e o f c o r r e l a t i o n s r e l a t e to the d i f f e r e n c e o f supply? The f i r s t q u e s t i o n r e q u i r e s a wider a n a l y s i s , i n terms of uses of m e d i c a l care d e l i v e r y system by the s o c i o -economic s t a t u s groups, q u i t e s i m i l a r to the one c a r r i e d out i n t h i s study. The second q u e s t i o n assumes the o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h i s study and the answers of the f i r s t q u e s t i o n , and c o n c e n t r a t e s on the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the u t i l i z a t i o n , the supply, and the socioeconomic s t a t u s ; components t h a t have l o n g been s t u d i e d i n more t r a d i t i o n a l forms of marketing and consumer behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n . 75 BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, D. 0. (1973) "Measurement of Use and Demand", i n Uses of Epidemiology i n P l a n n i n g H e a l t h S e r v i c e s , ed. Davies, M., V o l . 1, Belgrade, I n t e r n a t i o n a l E p i d e m i o l -o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Savrema A d m i n i s t r a c i j a , pp. 321-324. Andrews, F. M., Morgan, J . N., Sonquist, J . A. and Klem, L. (1973) M u l t i p l e C l a s s i f i c a t i o n A n a l y s i s , 2d. ed., a d i s c u s s i o n on "A technique f o r choosing the number of a l t e r n a t i v e response c a t e g o r i e s to p r o v i d e i n order to l o c a t e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o s i t i o n on a continuum" ( K a l t o n , G., Three memos dated, Nov. 7. 1966, Feb. 10, 1967 and Mar. 10, 1967, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Sampling S e c t i o n , Survey Research C e n t e r ) , Ann Arbor, Michigan, I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i a l Research, pp. 10-11. B a i l e y , N. T. J . and Thomson, M. (eds.) (1974) Systems  Aspects of H e a l t h P l a n n i n g : proceedings o f the IIASA conference, Baden, A u s t r i a , August 20-22, New York: American E l s e v i e r Pub. Co. B e l l , Wendell (1971) "Comparative s t u d i e s : a commentary", i n I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s : P r e s e n t Status and Future  P r o s p e c t s , ed. Riggs, F. W., P h i l a d e l p h i a : The American Academy of P o l i t i c a l Science, pp. 56~73« B l i s h e n , B. R., e t . a l . (1971) "A Socio-Economic Index f o r Occupations i n Canada" i n Canadian S o c i e t y / S o c i o l o -g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e s , A l e r i d g e d ed., Toronto: Macmillan of Canada. Broadman, K.A., Erdmann, A. J . Lorge, I., and Wolff, H. G. (1949) "The C o r n e l l M e d i c a l Index - an adjunct to medical i n t e r v i e w " , J . Amer. Med. Ass., V o l . 140, PP. 530-534. Bureau o f Census (1975) The S t a t i s t i c a l A b s t r a c t of the  U.S., 95th ed., Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. Canada (1964) Royal Commission on H e a l t h S e r v i c e s . Report Queen's P r i n t e r , Ottawa. Cohen, P. S. (1968) Modern S o c i a l Theory, New York, B a s i c Books, and 1969, London: Heinemann. 76 De Miguel, J. M. (1974) "A Framework for the Study of National Health Systems", a paper submitted to the VIII th Congress of Sociology, August 19-23, Toronto. Fairburn, A. S., Wood, C. H., and Fletcher, C. M. (1959) " V a r i a b i l i t y i n Answers to a Questionnaire on Respira-tory Symptoms", B r i t J. prev. soc. Med., Vol 13, pp. 175-193. Hays, W. L. (1973) S t a t i s t i c s for the Social Sciences, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc. Inkeles, A l , and Rossi, P. H. (1956) "National Comparisons of Occupational Prestige", Amer. J. of Soc., Vol. 6 l , PP. 329-339. Kahl, J. A., and Davies, J. A. (1955) "A Comparison of Indexes of Socio-Economic Status", Amer• Soc. Rev. , Vol. 20, pp. 76-84. Kalimo, E., Bice, T. W. and Novosel, M. (1970) "Cross-Cu l t u r a l Analysis of Selected Emotional Questions from the Cornell Medical Index", B r i t . J. prev. soc. Med., Vol. 24, pp. 229-240. Kohn, R., and Bedenic, B. (1972) " I n t e r r e l a t i o n -ships i n the Use of Selected Health Services: A Cross-national Study", Medical Care, Vol. 10, pp. 95 - I O 8 . Kohn, R. (1967) The Health of Canadian People, Queens Printer, Ottawa. . and White, K. L. (eds.) (1976) Health Care: An International Study, London: Oxford University Press. Koos, E. L. (1954) The Health of Regionville - What the  People Thought and Did About I t , New York: Columbia University Press. Lingoes, J. C. (1973) The Guttman-Lingoes Nonmetric Program  Series, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Mathesis Press. Litman, T. J., and Robins, L. (1971) "Comparative Analysis of Health Care Systems: A S o c i o - P o l i t i c a l Approach", Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 5> PP« 573 _58l. MacMahon, B., and Pugh, T. F. (1970) Epidemiology: P r i n c i p l e s  and Methods, Boston: L i t t l e , Brown and Company. Mausner, J. S., and Bahn, A. K. (1974) Epidemiology: An  Introductory Text, Toronto: W. B. Saunders Company. 77 M e d i c a l Research C o u n c i l (Great B r i t a i n ) (1966) Q u e s t i o n n a i r e on B r o n c h i t i s with I n s t r u c t i o n s , London: HMSO. Mi l n e , J . S., Hope, K., and Williamson, J . (1970) " V a r i a -b i l i t y i n R e p l i e s to a Q u e s t i o n n a i r e on Symptoms o f P h y s i c a l I l l n e s s " , J • chron. D i s . , V o l . 22, pp. 805-810. M u e l l e r , J . H., S c h u e s s l e r , K. F., and Costner, H. L. (1970) S t a t i s t i c a l Reasoning i n S o c i o l o g y , 2d. ed., Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n . Nie, N. H., H u l l , C. H., J e n k i n s , J . G., S t e i n b r e n n e r , K., and Bent, D. H. (1975) S t a t i s t i c a l Package f o r the  S o c i a l S c i e n c e s (SPSS) 2d. ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Rein, M. (1970) S o c i a l P o l i c y : . Issues of Choice and Chance, New York: Random House. Rokkan, S. (1966) "Comparative C r o s s - n a t i o n a l Research: the Context o f Current E f f o r t s " , i n Comparing Nations, ed. M e r r i t t , R. L. and Rokkan, S., New Haven: Yale U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . (ed.) (1968) Comparative Research Across C u l t u r e s and Nations, P a r i s : Mouton. e t . a l . (1970) C i t i z e n s , E l e c t i o n s , and P a r t i e s . Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Process of  Development, New York: David McKay. Rose, G. A. (1962) "The D i a g n o s i s of Ischaemic Heart P a i n and I n t e r m i t t e n t C l a u d i c a t i o n i n F i e l d Surveys", B u l l . Wld. H l t h Org., V o l . 27, pp. 6^5-658. Titmuss, R. M. (1968) Commitment to Welfare, London: Unwin. White K. L. (1975) " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Comparisons of M e d i c a l Care", S c i e n t i f i c .American, V o l . 233, PP- 17-25. Wing, J . K. (1971) " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Comparisons i n the Study of the F u n c t i o n a l Psychoses", B r i t Med. B u l l . , V o l . 27, pp. 77-81. World He a l t h O r g a n i z a t i o n / I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o l l a b o r a t i v e Study o f M e d i c a l Care U t i l i z a t i o n (1970) Manual 1: Organiz- a t i o n and Development, B a l t i m o r e : C o o r d i n a t i n g Com-mitte e , and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va.: N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l I n f o r -mation S e r v i c e PB-23^ 277/AS. There is no page 79 7 8 Manual 2 : Question-n a i r e s , Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va., N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l Information S e r v i c e PB-23V 2 7 6 A S . . Manual 3: H e a l t h S e r v i c e s Systems and Demography Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va., N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 4 2 7 7/AS. - - - • Manual 4 : T r a i n i n g and S u p e r v i s o r s ' Manual, Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va.: N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 4 2 7 8 . Manual 5 ; I n t e r v i e w e r ' s Manual, Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va., N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l Information S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 4 2 7 9 / A S . Manual 6: Coders' Manual, Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d Va., N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 ^ 2 8 0 / A S . " . ' M a n u a l 7 : A n a l y s i s Manual, Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va.: N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 ^ 2 8 1/AS. Manual: '8 : Tape Layout Manual, Baltimore: C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee, and S p r i n g f i e l d , Va.: N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l Information S e r v i c e P B - 2 3 4 2 8 2 / A S . 80 APPENDICES 81 Appendix Ar The Total Numbers of the Heads of Households Before and After  the Selection for the Construction of Socioeconomic Status Indext a f t e r the Exclusion of "Refusal","Don't Know",and "Not Ascertained" Responses to the Questions about the Years of Education,the Total  Family Income and the A b i l i t y to Meet an Unusual Expense,Ages 18 to 90 The T o l a l Number of The Total Number of Heads of Households Heads of Households Before the SES Selection After the SES Selection Accepted Not Accept GP 1583 1465 118 BAL 1291 1189 102 LIV 1236 1177 59 NWV 1049 995 54 RLJ 1161 1102 59 HEL 2455 2360 95 VAJ 1236 1161 75 VAF 1184 1122 62 SAS 1327 1281 46 LCD 1929 1665 264 BAN 2283 2176 107 BA 1828 1660 168 Total 18562 17353 1209 GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e BAL eq. Baltimore LIV eq. Liverpool NWV eq. Noethwestern Vermont RLJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires Not Accepted eq. the persons who had codlngsj " r e f u s a l " and/or "don't know" and/or "not ascertained", f o r the answers to the questions about; years of education and/or t o t a l family Income group and/or a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense . Appendix Bi The Years of Education, the Total Family Income Group, the A b i l i t y to  Meet an Unusual Expenset Questions, Codings and Algorlthims. and the Derivation of Available Income Questionsi Aaount of Education! How many years of schooling did you complete? The Total Family Income Group» Which of the income groups (show card) represents your t o t a l , combined family Income for the past 12 months? That Is, a l l the income of ( a l l cambers of the respondent's primary family). Include a l l income from a l l sources, such as wages, salaries, (social security), (old age) pensions, (family allowances), help from relatives, rents from property, and so forth. A-From A. through G. were coded as 0 through 6, zero being the lowest groupi the groups A. to G. were expressed as monetary Income ranges constructed on the study area income distributions as measured before the Interval l i m i t s setting. The A b i l i t y to Meet an Unusual Expenset I f (your family) (you) had to meet within one week an unusual, nan-medical expense of (the average monthly salary of the area), would ; or would* you not be able to pay for i t with money from any source? A. B. *C. D, E. >. "G. refusal "don't know Would, be able to pay for i t 0, receded 1 1, receded 0 7 8 Would not be able to pay for i t Refusal Don't know Froai WHO/ICS-MCU Manuals 2,5, and 8, Questionnaires, Interviewers' and Tape Layout Manuals, 1970. Available Incomei The Total F a a l l y Income Group/ The Fauily Size (= nuaber of persons)j t h i s produced a r a t i o scale with the minimus value of 0, and with the B&XIBUB value of 6. * The English wording of the question l n regard to the person's a b i l i t y to Beet an unusual expense, "would you or would you not", was causing some error since the wording did not necessarily represent one's a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense i n the sense that wording "could you or could you not" would have dcone ( see, WHO/ICS-MCU Manual 7i Analysis Manual. 1970). Appendix Ct The WHO/lCS-MCi) Questions, Codings, and Algorlthlaa of the  Selected Five Indicator Diseases 1. The CoHposite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index f o r Bed Days, Restricted Days, and Health Problems i n the l a s t Two Weeks 2« The Anxiety Index 3 * Angina Pectoris 4. Bronchitis 3 » Dyspnea. 0 85 1« The Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index for BedDays,Restricted Days, and Health Problems in the Last Two Weeks Questions; iw I would like to ask you about your health and how you have been feeling recently. . Within the last two week?, did you stay In bed all or part of any day because you were not feeling well? [Include days in hospital or (nursing home) (convalescent home).] oo • No [Go to 65] Yes 58A. How many days altogether? days . Could you tell me what the problem was? At its worst, did this bother you a great deal, 4 D somewhat 'ED hardly at all, or 'CD not et all? 8 • Don't know . « • At its worst, did this hurt or pain you a great daol, ; . somewhat, . . . hardly at all, or » Q not at all? * • Don't know * • At its worst, were you concerned or worried about this. . .a great deal, . . » • somewhot, . . . ' • hardly st all, or * CD not at all? » • Don't know 8 CD 86 (Apart from the days you stayed In bed), were there any (other) days within the last two weeks when you were not able to do your usual activities because you were not feeling well? <"> • No [Go to 7i] Yes 65A. How many days altogether? days S. Could you tell me what the problem was? Same as reason for bed dayc 0 0 C C^ 0 t o 7*] 7. At Its worst, did thla bother you c great deal 0 O somewhot 1 D hardly et all, or . . not at oil? 8 • Don't know 8 • 8. At Its worst, did thta hurt or pain you a great deal 0 Q somewhat, 1 C hardly at all, or » • not at oil? » • Don't know . . . . • • 9. At Its worst, were you concerned or worried about this. . .a great deal, . . » • somewhat, 1 0 hardly et all, or . . » • not a* all? 8 • Don't know 8 D 72. (Apart from this) within the last two weeks, did you think there was anything (else) wrong with your health? 73, Could you tell me what the problem was? 70^ At Its worst, did this bother you o great deal, somewhat, . . . . hardly at all, or not at oil? Dont know . . . 7 5 . At Its worst, did this hurt or pain you a great deal, . somewhat, hardly ot all, or not at all? Don't know . . 73. At Its worst, were you concerned or worried about t h i s . . . a great deal, . somewhat, . . . hordly at oil, or not et all? . . . Don't know . . 88 The Composite Bother-Hurt-Worry Index for Bed Days, Restricted Days,  and Health Problems ln the Last Two Weeks Questions; 6 0 , 6 1 , 6 2 , refer to Bother, Hurt, and Worry ln respect to Bed Days, 6 7 , 6 8 , 6 9 , refer to Bother, Hurt, and Worry in respect to Restricted Days, 74,75 ,76 , refer to Bother, Hurt, and Worry in respect to Health Problems 6 0 , 6 7 , 7 4 At its worst,did this bother you 6 1 , 6 8 , 7 5 At its worst,did this hurt or pain you 6 2 , 6 9 , 7 6 At its worst,were you concerned or worried about this a great deal 0 somewhat 1 hardly at all,or ... 2 not at a l l 3 don't know 8 a great deal 0 somewhat 1 hardly at all,or ... 2 not at a l l 3 don't know 8 a great deal ...... 0 somewhat 1 hardly at all,or ... 2 not at a l l 3 don't know ......... 8 •Codlngt For the purposes of this studyt Composlt Bother-Hurt-Worry Index for Bed. Days,Restricted Days, and Health Problems 00 0 1 -08 09 98, also. 1 0 . . . . . . 99 • Highest score Intermediate scores Lowest score Does not apply Not ascerxained 89 Algorlthlm: First, the reported- scores were added together for the three answers: bother, hurt and worry for each of three sub-conditions ; bed days, restricted days, and health problems . Second, these three total scores (max^O,min=9) were aggregated into the Composite score (max=0, mln>=9) so that each of the categories of the three scores was equal to the respective category of the Composite score and for each person there was only the one score -the highest of the three sub-conditions (for detailed algorlthlm ,see WHO/lCS-MCU Manual 8: Tape Layout Manual,1970) . 90 2. The Anxiety Index  Questions: Now some questions about yourself ... 255« Do you wear yourself out worrying about your health?....No,Yes. 256. Are you often bothered by thumping of your heart? No,Yes 257. Does your heart often race like mad?. No, Yes 258. Does pressure or pain in the head often make l i f e miserable ? No, Yes 259» Does your thinking get completely mixed up when you have to do things quickly? No,Yes 260. Do you often shake or tremble ?• No, Yes 261. Are you constantly keyed up and jittery? No, Yes 262. Do frightening thoughts keep coming back in your mind ..No,Yes 263. Do you often get spells of complete exhaustion or fatigue ? ..No,Yes 264. Do you usually feel unhappy or depressed ? No, Yes Coding; The "No" answers were coded as 0, and the "Yes" answers were coded as 1 Algorlthlm; The answers were added up for each Individual, and the sum represents the Anxiety Index score From: WH0/T.CS-MCU Manuals 2 and 8,Questionaires and Tape Layout Manuals, 1970 . 3. Angina Pectoris Questionsi (on the following page) >0. • Have you ever had any pain or discomfort In your chest? O No .OA. Novo you ever had any pressuro or heaviness In your chest? 92 2 Q No [Co to 156] Yes il; Do you get it when you walk uphill or hurry? [Record yes if either walking uphill or hurrying pain or dincvmfort.] O Y e s "* 1 5**>- D o you get it when you walk at an ordl-n Q No [Co to 155] nary pace on the level? i Q No n u .... .. Y " <' O N e v e r hurries) -18X8. Do you get it when you walk nor walks > at on ordinary pace on the uphill ) level? » • j [ (7o to 152] What do you do If you get it while you are walking? [Record stop or slow down if subject carries on after taking nitroglycerin (trinit>in).] . • No [Go to 155] Yes stop or slow down, or . > (~1 carry on ' • K'n *> /«] 3 . - If you stand still, what happens to It ? relieved, or O not relieved »fj [Go to 1 5 5 ] JA.-How soon? 10 minutes or less, or more than 10 minutes V.— Will you show me where it was? »• >• No 1. Sternum (upper or middle) O 2. Sternum (lower) O 3. Left anterior chest . . . o 4 . Left arm O 5. Other O [Go to 155] i Yes oi • "* CD Uf other, mark on diagram.] 05- 1,2 06- 1,3 07- 1,1, 08- 1,5 09- 2,3 10- 2A [For coder*: Codes for combinations] 11- t,S 17-1,2,5 23-2,i,5 12- 3,4 18-1,3,4 24-3,4,5 13- 3,5 19-1,3,5 25-1,2,3,4 U-4,5 20-1,4.5 26-1,2,3,5 15- 1,2,3 21-2,3,4 27-1,2,4,5 16- 1,2,4 22-2,3,5 ii<-l,3,i,5 29- 2,3,4,5 30- 1,2,3,4,5 S M A T D O you foel It anywhere else? O ? Racord additional [information above LKL_ Have you had this (pain or discomfort) (pi-Maura or be evinces) In your chest within the last threo months? : » • No Yes No Yes [Go to chart] 93 Coding: CHEST PAIN (Adults only) A150 300 EVER HAD PAIN, DISCOMFORT OR PRESSURE, HEAVINESS C* IN CHEST? 0 Has had pain or discomfort 0 * 1 Has had pressure or heaviness 1 * 2 Has had no pain, discomfort, pressure, or heaviness 2 >'c 6 Does not apply (Child) * 7 Does not apply .- * 9 Not ascertained 9 * Q NO. COL. CODE ON SHEET ADULT CHILD A151 301 GET IT WHEN HURRYING OR WALKING AT ORDINARY PACE? C* 0 .... . .Not when hurrying Gets i t when hurrying: 1 Not when walking at an ordinary pace 2 Also when walking at an ordinary pace Never h u r r i e s : 3 Does not get i t when walking at an ordinary pace 4 Gets i t when walking at ordinary pace 5 Does not apply 6 Does not apply (Child) 7 Gets i t when hurrying, unknown for ordinary pace 8 Never h u r r i e s , unknown for ordinary pace 9 Not ascertained A152 302 WHAT DO YOU DO IF YOU GET IT WHILE WALKING? C* 0......Stop 1 Carry on 6 Does not apply (Child) 7 Does not apply 9 Not ascertained A153 303 IF YOU STAND STILL, HOW SOON IS IT RELIEVED? C" 0 It i s not r e l i e v e d I A f t e r more'than. 10 minutes 2 In 10 minutes or less 6 Does not apply (Child) 7 Does not apply 9 Not ascertained A154 304- WHERE WAS THE (PAlN OR DISCOMFORT) (PRESSURE OR C* 30 5 HEAVINESS)? 00 Upper or middle sternum only 01 Lower sternum only 02 Left a n t e r i o r chest only 03 Left arm only 04 Other only Upper or middle sternum and: 05 Lower sternum 06 Left a n t e r i o r chest 07 Left arm 08 Other Lower sternum and: 09 Left a n t e r i o r chest 10 Left arm II Other 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 00 it 01 • it 02 it 03 it 04 it 05 it 06 it 07 it 08 it 09 it 10 it 11 it 95 Q NO. COL. CODE ON SHEET ADULT CHILD Left a n t e r i o r chest and: 12. Le f t arm 12 13 Other 13 Le f t arm and: 14 Other 14 Upper or middle and lower sternum and: 15 L e f t a n t e r i o r chest 15 16 Left arm 16 17 Other 17 Upper or middle sternum, l e f t a n t e r i o r  chest and: 18 Le f t arm 18 19 Other 19 Upper or middle sternum, l e f t arm and: 20 Other 20 Lower sternum, l e f t a n t e r i o r chest and: 21 Left arm 21 22 Other ~" 22 Lower sternum, l e f t arm and: 23 Other 23 Left a n t e rior chest, l e f t arm and: 24 Other 24 Upper or middle and lower sternum, l e f t a nterior chest and: 25 Left arm 25 26 Other 26 Upper.or middle and lower sternum, l e f t arm and: 27 Other 27 Upper or middle sternum, l e f t a n t e r i o r chest, l e f t arm, and: 28 Other 28 Lower sternum, l e f t a n t e r i o r chest, l e f t arm, and: 29 Other 29 30 Upper or middle and lower sternum, l e f t a n t e r i or chest, l e f t arm, and other 30 66 Does not apply (Child) 9 7 Does not apply 9 8 Don't Know 9 8 99 Not ascertained 99 96 Q NO. COL. ' CODE ON SHEET ADULT CHILD A15 5 306 HAS THIS PAIN, ETC., OCCURRED WITHIN LAST 3 C* MONTHS? 0 No 0 * 1 Yes 1 * 6 Does not apply (Child) * 7 Does not apply - * 9 Not ascertained 9 * 307 BLANK 576- ANGINA (Adults o n l y ) * * 577 00 Normal 01 Non-specific d i s t r e s s , grade I 02 Non-specific d i s t r e s s , grade II 03 Non-specific d i s t r e s s , grade III 04 Angina - possible 05 Angina - grade I 06 Angina - grade II 66 C h i l d 9 7 Does not apply 99 Not ascertained 97 Algorlthimt (1) S i i f (300),(30i),(302)lor I f ( l ) i s not true, and I f ( l ) , ( 2 ) , are not true , and (3.00)= 7, ( $ o ^ ( 3 0 l J , ? 3 0 2 ),or ( 3 0 3 ) - 9 , code 99 code 97 (4) If ( 1 ) , ( 2 ) ,and (3) are not true and (5) (300) =2, code 00 (6) (300) =0 or 1, and (a) (301) - 0 or 3 , code 01 (b) (301) = 1, and (i) (302) - 0 , and (303) - 0 or 7. code 02 (3°3) - 1, code 03 (303) = 2 , and (304-305) 0 0 , 0 1 , 0 3 , 0 5 - 1 2 , or 14-30, code 05 ( i i ) (302) « 1, code 02 ( i l l ) ( 3 ° 2 ) - 7, code 99 (c) (301) >= 2 or 4 , and (i) (302) o 0 , and (3°3) •=» 0 or 7, code 02 p 0 3 ) - 1, code 03 (303) «= 2, and (304-305) fi 0 0 , 0 1 , 0 3 , 0 5 - 1 2 , or 14-30, code 04 (304-305) . 0 0 , 0 1 , 0 3 , 0 5 - 1 2 , or 14-30, code 06 ( i i ) p 0 2 ) « 1, code 02 ( i i i ) (302) - 7, code 99 From: WHO/lGS-MCU Manuals 2 and 8, Questlonaires and Tape Layout Manuals 1970 98 k. Bronchitis Questions: 1 from this. . wou.d like to ask you some addition., questions about your health, up" rn^^i:^^,: . , 8 ^ P h , ° 8 m "°m « - « *« « * , on getting n • No . • Yes o O No [f7o (o i • Yes 143. Do you bring up phlegm ilk. this on moat day, or night, for ae much a , thrca months each year? _ • • 149. In the lest three years have you had a period of (Increased) cough and phlegm lasting for three weeks or more? ( > • No [Go to ISO] i Q Yes [Go to chart] 19 l i s A. In the lest three yeers howa you had a period trf Increased cough and phlegm tasting for tfereo weehs or more? , Q No Yea [Go to U9] [Go to chart] Coding; 99 A146 295 PHLEGM ON WINTER MORNINGS? C* 0 No' 0 1 Yes JL f» Does not apply (Child) 7 Does not apply 9 Not ascertained o ADULT CHILD A147 296 PHLEGM DURING WINTER DAYS OR NIGHTS? C* 0 No 0 * 1 Yes 1 *> 6 Does not apply ( C h i l d ) ft 7 Does not apply - * 9 Not a s c e r t a i n e d 9 * A148 29 7 PHLEGM THREE MONTHS EACH YEAR? C* 0 No 0 * 1 Yes 1 « 6 Does not apply ( C h i l d ) * 7 Does not apply - * 9 Not a s c e r t a i n e d 9 ft A149 29 8 PHLEGM TOR 3 WEEKS IN LAST 3 YEARS? C,v No phlegm f o r 3 months each year and: 0 No 0 * 1 Yes 1 •* Phlegm f o r 3 months each year and: 2 No 2 * 3......Yes 3 * 6 .Does not apply ( C h i l d ) ft 7 Does not apply - ft 9 Not as c e r t a i n e d 9 ft 299 BRONCHITIS ( A d u l t s o n l y ) * * 0 Normal 1 Morning w i n t e r phlegm 2 Simple w i n t e r b r o n c h i t i s 3 Compound w i n t e r b r o n c h i t i s 4 Chronic simple b r o n c h i t i s 5 Chronic compound b r o n c h i t i s 6. Does not apply ( C h i l d ) 7 Does not apply 8 Not c l a s s i f i a b l e 9 Not a s c e r t a i n e d 100 Algorlthlm: (1) If.(295) » 6, code 6 (2) ' If Cl) is not true, and (295).(296),(297), or (298) =9, code 9 (3) If (1) and (2) are not true, and (295),(296),or (298) =7,code 7 (4) If (l ) , ( 2 ) and (a) (295) 00 0,1 ,2 ,or 3, code 8 From: WHO/lCS-MCU Manuals 2 and 8, Questionaires and Tape Layout Manuals, 1970 . . 101 5. Dyspnea^ Shortness of Breath Questions 161. Are you troubled by shortness of breath when hurrying on level ground or walking up a slight h i l l ? No Yes Disabled (other than heart or lung disease) 162. Do you get short of breath walking with other people of your own age on level ground ? . No Yes l62A.Do you have to stop for breath when walking at your own pace on level ground ? . No Yes 163. Have you had this complaint within the last three months ? No Yes Coding: 102 A161 314 SHORTNESS OF BREATH WHEN HURRYING? C A 0 No 0 ft l......Yes 1 ft 2 Disabled (other than heart or lung disease) 2 ft 6......Does not apply (Child) ft 7 Does not apply - ft 9 Not ascertained 9 ft A162 315 TROUBLED WHEN WALKING WITH OTHERS OR HAVE TO Cft STOP WHEN WALKING AT OWN PACE? 0 Not troubled when walking with others 0 ft Troubled when walking with others: 1 Does not have to stop when walking at own pace 1 ft 2 And does have to stop when walking at own pace 2 ft 6 Does not apply (.Child) ft 7 Does not apply - ft 9 Not ascertained 9 * A163 316 HAD THIS COMPLAINT IN LAST 3 MONTHS? Cft 0 No 0 ft 1 Yes 1 ft 6 Does not apply (Child) ft 7 Does not apply - ft 9 Not ascertained 9 »'< Q NO. COL. CODE ON SHEET ADULT CHILD 317 DYSPNEA (Adults o n l y ) * * 0 Grade 1 1 Grade 2 2 Grade 3 3. Grade 4 S*. Disabled 6 C h i l d 9 Not ascertained 103 Algorlthlm: fl) If (314) « 0 and (315) -.7, code 0 (2) If (314) = l , and (a) (315) = 0, code 1 B 1, code 2 => 2, code 3 B 9» code 9 (3) If (314) - 2 or 7 and (315) - 7, code 5 (4) If (314) and (315) = 6, code 6 5). If (314) « 9, code 9 (6) If none of the above is true, code 9 From: WHO/lCS-MCU Manuals 2 and 8, Questionaires and Tape layout Manuals, 1970 . 104 Appendix D> Physician U t i l i z a t i o n l n the Last Two Weeks Questions Hithin the last two weeks, did you (talk with) (consult) ( v i s i t ) & doctor about your health at any of the following places? 1. A doctor's (private office) (surgery) (clini c ) ? 0N0, Tea, How cany times? 2 * A hospital outpatient (department) (clinic)?.<••< .....................No, Yes, How many tiees? 3. A work or an industrial c l i n i c ? .....No, Yos, How many times? k. Any other clinic?........................No, Yes, How many times? 5* A school?............. ...No, Yes, How many times? 6 . A hospital (emergency rooa) (casualty department) ( f i r s t aid station)? ..No, Yes, How many tiaes? 7* Homo? No, Yes, How sany times? 8. Some other place, other than over the telephone?. No, Yes, How many times? 9. Through someone else? No, Yes, How many times 10.Over the telephone, except to make an appointment? No, Yes, How many times? Coding! For the purposes of this studyi Total Number of Doctor Vi s i t s • 00 none 01 +*o.............number of v i s i t s 99*.. ....not ascertained Algorlthlm i The answers to "how many times" were added together from 1 through 10. Front WHO/ICS-MCU Manuals 2 and 8, Questionnaires and Tape Layout Manuals, 1970. 105 Appendix E. The Meana and Standard Deviations of the Socioeconomic Index . Variables Used in the Ten Separate Faotor Analyses to Produce  Factor Score Coefficients f or the Computations of Factor  Scores f o r the Heads of Households of Each Study Area TheMeans of Socioeconomic Index Variables by Study Areas GP LIY R U HEL VAJ VAF SAS LOP BAN BA Years of education 9.63 10.0? 6.85 9.69 9.?8 9.56 10.33 6.83 6.19 7.37 Total family Income group 3.66 I.89 O.96 3.67 2.41 2.33 2.74 1.45 0.68 1.20 Available income I.63 0.91 0.49 2.13 0.99 0.91 1.25 O.67 0.31 O.59 A b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense 0.80 O.56 0.47 O.76 0.79 O.76 0.79 0.40 0.28 0.46 The Standard Deviations of Socioeconomic Index Variables by Study Areas GP LIV RLJ HEL VAJ VAF SAS LCD BAN BA Years of education 3.16 2.05 3.93 4.33 3.34 3.30 3.38 3.71 3.91 3.93 Total family Income group ' 1 . 9 3 1.69 0.98 1.95 2.20 2.19 1.94 1.27 0.97 1.30 Available income 1.33 O.95 0.58 I.36 1.17 1.07 1.09 0.69 0.48 0.74 A b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense 0.40 0.50 O.50 0.42 0.41 0.43 0.40 0.49 0.45 0.49 GP eq. Grande P r a i r i e Years of Available LIV eq. Liverpool education eq. 01+ Income eq. 0-6 R U eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki Total family A b i l i t y to meet VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey income group eq. 0-6 an unusual VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser expense eq. 0/no, SAS eq. Saskatchewan l/yes LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat (for the construction and scaling of the BA eq. Buenos Aires variables, see Appendix B.) Appendix F i The Correlation Cpeffleienta between the Socioeconomic Index Variables and the F i r s t P r i n c i p a l Component Produced  by the P r i n c i p a l Component Analysis Without Iteration f o r  Each Study Area Tears of education Total family income group Available income A b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense GP .60346 .80102 .72838 .58822 LIV .58428 .86172 .86686 .60351 R U .69971 .67989 .85463 .68146 HEL •55237 .80837 .70466 .6528I VAJ .5^758 .87354 .85868 .53318 VAF .49756 .85742 .84109 .60003 SAS .61977 .839^ 1 .77097 .60324 LOO .68147 .86095 .84457 .55345 BAN .66454 .89719 .89432 .61653 BA .66438 .87748 .84828 .6098O GP ' eq. Grande P r a i r i e LIV eq. Liverpool R U eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires Years of education eq. 01+ Total family income group eq .0-6 Available income eq. 0-6 A b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense eq. 0/no, (for the construction and coding of the variables, see Appendix B.) 107 Appendix Gi The Percentages of Total Variation of Socioeconomic Index  Explained by the P r i n c i p a l Components Extracted in Each  Study Area LIV R U HEL VAJ VAF SAS LCD BAN BA 47.1 55.0 61.5 47.0 52.1 5U3 51.2 55.7 60.7 57.6 GP eq. Grande P r a i r i e LIV eq. Liverpool RIJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey YAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires The input variables of the p r i n c i p a l component analysest (1) t o t a l family income group (2) years of education (3) available income (4) a b i l i t y to meet an unusual expense (for the construction of variables,see Appendix B) Appendix Ht The Percentage Dlatrlbutlona of the Five Socioeconomic Status Groups, and the Number of Cases ln Each Study Area Number of cases Socioeconomic Status Groups l n the study area Low 2. 3. 4, GP 4.7 23.0 49.2 19.9 3.2 1465 LIV 13.5 56.7 23.9 5.3 0.7 1177 RU 29.4 36.6 25.8 7.2 1.1 1102 HEL 9.5 ' 45.9 34.8 9.5 0.3 2360 VAJ 12.7 43.0 35.1 8.4 0.9 1161 VAF 8.8 36.4 33.2 17.6 4.1 1122 SA3 7.4 46.0 34.7 10.1 1.8 1281 LCD 21.6 45.0 26.3 5.3 1.9 1665 BAN 47.7 34.8 13.5 3.0 1.0 2176 BA 23.3 53.7 16.2 4.9 1.9 1660 GP eq. Grande Prairie LIV eq. Liverpool RU eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver f Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires 109 Appendix It The Percentage Distributions of Wale and Female Household  Heads by Socioeconomic Status Groups ln Each Study Area Socioeconomic Status Groups The sex d i s t r i b u t i o n s of heads of households in area Sex Low 4. High Number 1. 2. 3. 5-GP M 3.8 19.9 52.0 21.4 2.8 81.7* 1197 F 8.6 36.6 36.6 13.1 4.9 18.335 268 LIV M 6.6 55.4 30.5 6.8 0.6 68.2* 803 F 28.3 59.4 9.6 1.9 0.8 31.896 394 R U M 24.3 39-3 28.0 6.9 1.6 64.2* 708 F 38.6 31.7 21.8 7.6 0.3 35.8* 394 HBL M 3.5 43.3 40.9 12.1 0.2 61.9* 1461 F 19.4 50.1 24.9 5.2 0.3 38.1£ 899 VAJ M 11.1 39.6 39.4 9.1 0.4 82.9* 963 F 18.7 59.6 14.1 4.5 3.0 17.1* 198 VAF M 7.9 30.7 37.2 19.9 4.4 79.9* 897 F 12.4 58.8 17.3 8.4 3.1 20.1* 225 SAS H 5.7 41.7 38.8 11.9 1.9 77.0* 986 F 13.3 60.2 20.7 4.4 1.4 23.0* 295 LCD M 19.5 47.9 25.5 5.2 1.8 65.3* 1087 F 25.4 39.6 27.9 5.2 1.9 34.7* 580 BAN H 43.5 37.8 14.1 3.4 1.2 76.8* 1659 F 62.0 24.8 11.3 1.8 0.2 23.2* 517 BA M 21.0 52.0 18.1 6.3 2.6 68.3* 1134 F 28.1 57.4 12.2 1.9 0.4 31.7* • 526 GP eq. Grande P r a i r i e LIV eq. Liverpool R U eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires H eq. male F eq. female Appendix J: 110 The Numbers of Reported Cases of the Five Indicator Diseases by Each  Disease, and the Rates of Reported Cases of Diseases per A Head of Household ln the Twelve Study Areas and On Overall The t o t a l number of reported disease cases/ the number of heads of households in the &2 464 526 299 317 study area GP 339 485 514 344 365 2047/1465=1.40 BAL 372 434 404 320 323 1853/1189=1.56 LIV 352 475 355 396 308 1886/1177-1.60 NWV 228 389 311 298 285 1511/ 995=1.52 R U 432 805 370 354 362 2323/1102-2.11 HEL 1083 798 1113 508 494 3996/2360-1.69 VAJ 287 414 355 252 277 1585/1161-1.37 VAF 322 417 382 277 279 I677/H22-I.50 SAS 422 467 499 353 358 2099/1281-1.64 LCD 700 1202 799 445 691 3837/1665-2.30 BAN 936 1748 1255 690 847 5476/2176 "£.52 BA 490 1064 313 336 260 2463/1660-1.48 The t o t a l number of a l l reported cases of a l l diseases in the twelve stuiy areas » 30753s the t o t a l number of heads of households in the twelve study areas - 17353J the Overall Rate of Reported Cases of Diseases per A Head of Household - 30753/17353 - 1.77 . GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e BAL eq. Baltimore LIV eq. Liverpool NWV eq. Northwestern Vermont RIJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires (for the scoring of the diseases, see Appendix C) 569 eq. the persons with any bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days,or health problems i n the l a s t two weeks, 464 eq. the persons with the anxiety index greater than the lowest score, 0, 576 eq. the persons not "normal" in the angina pectoris index, 299 eq. the persons not "normal" in the bronchitis index, 317 eq. the persons with dyspnea score higher than the lowest score, 0 . I l l Appendix Kt The Percentages of the Study Area Populatlona by the Numbers of Reported  Physician Contacts ln the Last Two Weeks No physician One physician contact in the contact in the l a s t two weeks l a s t two weeks Two physician Three or more physician contacts in the contacts i n the l a s t two weeks l a s t two weeks GP 88.2 10.0 1.3 0.5 BAL 79.5 14.5 4.1 1.9 LIV 81.4 13.3 3.8 1.5 NWV 85.9 10.5 1.7 1.9 R U 87.8 7.3 3.2 1.7 HEL 87.9 9.4 1.7 1.0 VAJ 84.8 9.9 4.1 1.2 VAP 85.5 10.8 2.7 1.0 SAS 84.5 11.1 2.7 1.7 LCD 84.9 11.3 2.5 1.3 BAN 84.7 8.7 3.9 2.7 BA 80.2 14.2 3.5 2.1 GP eq. Grand P r a i r i e BAL eq. Baltimore LIV eq. Liverpool NWV eq. Northwestern Vermont RIJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver,Jersey VAP eq. Vancouver,Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires (for the numbers of cases,see Appendix A) 1 1 2 Appendix Lt Multidimensional Scalogram, in two dimensionsi The U t i l i z a t i o n of Physicians by the Socioeconomic Status Groups Types 1 1 Grande P r a i r i e 2 - Liverpool 3 • . Rijeka k a Helsinki 5 » Vancouver, Jersey 6 Vancouver, Fraser 7 - Saskatchewan 8 Lodz 9 » Banat 10 •3 Buenos Aires Variables and Itemst 1 " Zero-order correlations 2 " P a r t i a l correlations, c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and health problems ln:the l a s t two weeks 3 - P a r t i a l correlations, c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the anxiety index k m P a r t i a l correlations, c o n t r o l l i n g f o r angina pectoris Coefficient of Contiguity; Was set to reach 1*0 before the i t e r a t i o n would stop; the default number of i t e r a t i o n s i s 25 Dimensions; The program always computes f o r three unit vectors, two dimensions, M«2, was chosen to express the configuration since the two f i r s t etas were very high and close to each other. (The f i r s t eta was not printed because i t was p r a c t i c a l l y 1, and the Fortran Unit 6 writes up to three d i g i t s . ) For the programming, see The Guttman-Lingoes Nonmetric Program Series, 1973, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Mathesis Press. VAR. 1 FRECUEUCY DISTRIBUTION FOR F. ANKfcO COUED DATA ' .5 6 7 8^  ? 10 11 12 13 U VJ 16 17 18_ Vi 20 21 1 2 1 * 2 1 2 3 1 1 4 2 1 1 4 1 1 2 2 2 2 J i u » t 5 r u n t « u i L C J t u I LP. t tLfc V t LT UK VECTOR i u e j a c r 1 e 9 1U 5 7 . 24. -S 15 26C . • 15<. •274. C. 21 S. -4 6. - e . 5 ? £7 . -1C1. 7C6 S i . -24 7 . 81 57. 5CS. -6C t I . 57. 582. -246. •211. -t'Jt. i A c j ; « ii j o •I' '• \ '° i i ° i © I • ! o !° j-.o ! O J I O I I o o O { I 1 C C C v. i. * f l * « O tt « tt -tt » tt tt tt =tt tt tt Q < • a A tt IU m a tt tt i i - ' a tt tt a tt tr « « -a o -» a tt *• t- *— « « a »» i—. t - « tt a tt •c —• » -a tt ». O tt a tt w tt ttt t — o "a tt ta tt « tt X tt a LV i / i « tt u tt >—• ~< a tt « X X » tt % tt -S •— a tt tt a a -a - J * « -L> L L a. -tt ' t t tt O a « tt tt tt tt -a « i a , ! * a ^ U J a « i .» •a - J o tt tt ' •Tt tt tt ! -a tt <C UJ tt tt ! -tt tt <i ct: tt tt ; r « tt QC OC « « [ t *- "5 * tt !tt tt at o « « : tt tt O u -tt % i tt t. L L O a at I tt tt -a *a j 3t tt - Z U J ^ •* i 3* tt O OC "tt tt> | tt tt « tt i* tt U J 1— ^ •>* -tt I - Z> tt « -» -t  —• a . . * -tt a : =* tt JC _J % « ; tt tt _j tt- -« j ** tt a < « tt * tt L U tt «t tt tt « tt a *~ z a -a tt a « l < & a; « •a a: • a -« i t tt: CH L O tt tt -tt <J -4 tt « -tt L L X a tt tt tt xa tt tt -< tt tt « tt a: tt » a o a tt tt tt '« ^ L L tt tt *e -a »: -a tt T* • « »: tt Z) as tt tt « tt o m *» tt tt tt o Ct tt tt tt tt « tt « tt L U UJ tt «a ' tt vt .*» « % « 'tt tt » tt tt tt a >tt tt O Z « a Itt tt o « tt tt CJ Q tt tt ; '« » a: tt tt ' ,tt tt. a tt tt Itt tt o u tt « i* tt — UJ tt « |>% I* *— t t tt tt i a tt tt tt jtt ' t tt tt tt tt <l t t: •* tt tt 4£ * tt VJ _» tt tt tt - » < •tt tt tt tt • —• • ' tt -tt tt - J t— tt tt « tt — ' Z LU tt tt tt * <* uj a tt CO (J — tt; tt tt •s UJ Ct •tt tt -tt L J */J J i | tt tt tt -tt tt 4« •m »— Ul LU tt tt tt -« HI J •* -1. j r a JC -tt *— U J —J «« tt tt *r O h- tt « tt •*x —i —• — -tt tt •c x a: JV •« tt tt 4K tt •tt * i o tt tt -tt - J OJ • tt tt. «-U J . * •« t tt •—• (— -1 •* « LL *C -tt !•*£ tt • •a «c —' i t a. LL UJ •tt _J LO —. tt « •tt L_l * - tt tt tt tt tt tt JX * tt a -* -tt -K tt. tt •*• a a o <* tt •a -« !* •« •a « 1* * -£ *C tt •tt •» <x a a- < tt tt-m tt * « tt tt tt tt tt « tt * a a * « a "•~r I I < —< rg ml «U u \ O u> >X i l 03 "> N (NJ — . L/« <J  >r j's ^ —• r -—H i\< m «NJ | U I J O i j t I M l ' £ O Q O iU U t -UJ < Hi cu m . LJ <f >J I ••u INi >T < • ^ •*) C l -JJ 1 >r o o • Oi 1 u » < 116 u u u o . o n o cj> L > U ' U L > L J t j o t j j w o <_J < I U U J | L I ; I I I I I I i I 1 I L U U J i i . U J O J LL ' L U UJ |'.> fO "1 -rj -n iu* v -T *r >t -j-_ J J O <J o; o o u> o o o , ( J O W O VJ O j O (O O <~» O 0;<-J j o t i t j o u ok) <i u u u o ; t > ( J ! ' 1 <J j u i j U o u v j )—< tfc. O i UJ IJJ UJ UJ IU UJ 11J l U Ul *~ j - m i u m s ^ i/> —« " > j - \ r— r*.; o I D J » K / > u*v  vj* u» '.r y a* | o i f j 1 i ? \j"jcr y ^ 0 " j < y l i j UJ Ul UJ UJ IU — <M IM O J l u n i o m i n <C -J - X: -j- 0) - r j » \ r j - cr ^ y u» y u" g> / T y i f u 1 tuJ IU UJ U> IJJ U> ID UJ r » "1 *J U3 f ) J 1 ' * '. > C l -J* i i »r l A o - r ir\ i j - r T> -T n •j* IJ> u» a* -j* u* y» u* :i 'O o r> cj cjk> o o o o o o o o o o o o G L : * S A 1 I N L L 1 IL I C t K S I C N A L S C A U G R A K A N A L Y S I S ) bY U 5 4 " Jikl I?J^- . . L JMI.E ?_ci JE K - F C I IS I S C A LCGJ^W__AN_A L Y S I S C L G R O I N A J E S _ F O R _ H = z. D I M E N S I O N 1 2 TYPE 1 KC.CCC - 9 1 . I t t 2 "-ict.ccc -41.0? 5 3 .sss -.2 17 4 9c.. 9 9 9 - 1 i . 1 f. 2 5 s 9.9c. 9 -91.5J2 6 1CC.CCC -d2.71£ 7 s <. 9c. 9 -91.742 8 S 9 . 9 9 9 4t ~.t Xi 9 99 .998 t 2 . i c e IC 1CL.CGC -1CC.CCC COEFFICIENT CF CCMIGLIIY •= C .9 99 t 51E • C C FCR 25 ITERATIONS. C O T E R - P C I N T MATRIX f TYPE = l ( -i - 2 TYPE = 2 ( -1 -i TYPE = 3 ( -1 -I TYPE = <. ( •4 - 5 - 2 - 2 TYPE » 5 I -i i TYPE « 6_( - 5 ^ - 3 TYPE = 7 1 3 - . TYPE = 8 ( TYPE = S ( 6 -<. TYPE •= IC 1 too V E C T O R P L C I : V E C T O R 2 P L C T T E C A G A I N S T V E C T C R 1 VECTOR 2 1 G C 9 6 _ 9 2 ' 3 8 04 ec it 72 6£ ~6 4" 6C 5o 5 2 4 8 4 4 4 C 3t 2 £ 2 4 2 C 1 6 1 2 b VECTOR 4 I - 4 - ; g -•it - 2 C - 2 4 - 2 8 ~ " - 3 2 " - 3 6 - 4 C - 4 4 - 4 8 - 5 2 - 5 6 - 6 C - 6 4 " " = " 6 T " - 7 2 - 7 6 - a c - 8 4 - E E -92 -St -100 -ICC -SO -8C » » » » • > » » - 7 C - 6 C - 5 0 - 4 0 * » - 3 0 -20 -10 * 10 » » * 2 0 30 40 50 60 • • » * 70 8 0 9 0 1 0 0 • » « * ~nnr 9 6 9 2 " " " 8 8 " ' 8 4 8 0 7 6 7 2 " 64 6 0 5 6 4e 44 4 C 36 3 2 "28" 2 4 2 0 16" 1 2 8 t r - i c e - so - e c -» « * » * » « 7C -60 -50 * * * -40 -* 3 0 - 2 * * » 0 -10 » * * * * 10 » 4 2 0 n » 3 0 4 0 « * 50 * » * * 6 0 70 80 90 13 * * * 100 * -4 * - f * -12 * -16 * -24 » -28 * -32 " » -36 * -4C * -<,e » -52 • »-"_5t --* -6C * -64 ~» -6t * -72 * -76 « - e c -» -64 * - 8 8 - * ~ 9 2 — » -96 *-102 O 5" 5» VECTOR FLC1S VECTOR- 2 PLCTTEC AGAINST VECTCR 1 FCR ITEM 1 VECTOR 2 VECTOR PLC IS VECTC* " 2 ' F l C I I c C - . /UNST VECTCP. 1 F CR 1TEK VECTCR 2 - I C C - s a - 8 4 9 * 4 •7C - 6 C - 5 C -AO - 3 0 4 4 4 4 * * * * * * * * - 2 0 - 1 0 10 20 • * 30 40 50 60 70 80 50 100 9 9 9 4 9 9 9 ICC 4 * * IOC < 56 * * 9 56 52 4 9 9 52 r-E£ " ~ 4 * 9" "88 e4 4 * * 84 80 * • 9 ec f 1 76 • 9 76 j 72 * * 9 72 1 j 6 6" » * 9 68 r i 64 * - 4 4 64 6C 4 » 9 60 j 56 4 » 9 56 r- j 52 * 9 • - 5 4 52 f 46 * 9 9 46 \ .4 » « 9 44 r- | 4C " » "V" * " * 40 36 * 9 36 j 2 2 * * 9 32 r 26 * 4 9 26 f 24 ft « 9 24 2C 9 9 9 20 «' j I t * "9 16 12 4 * 9 12 6 « 9 » 8 r 4 * 9 - 5 * 4 VECTOR 1 * » 4 * 4 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 4 4 * 4 « « 4 9 4 * 4 9 9 * 9 * 9 9 4 * 4 9 * 9 9 9 • « * 9 9 9 9 * * 9 * 9 * - 4 * • 9 - 4 i - E ft 9 * - 8 ! - 1 2 4 9 9 - 1 2 - 1 6 4 * 9 - 1 6 s - 2 C » 9 9 - 2 3 • f-t - 2 4 * 4 '* - 2 4 \- 2 E * 9 4 - 2 8 - 3 2 * » 4 " - 3 2 1 * - -36 4 * 4 - 3 6 - 4 C 0 * 9 - 4 C i i - 4 4 4 - 1 9 4 - 4 4 f - 4 8 4 * 4 - 4 6 - 5 2 4 9 4 - 5 2 i - 5 6 * * -•- "» - 5 6 " - 6 C 4 9 4 - 6 0 k - 6 4 4 9 - 3 9 - 6 4 I - 6 6 4 9 4 - 6 E f. - 7 2 4 9 4 - 7 2 ! - 7 6 4 « - 2 4 - 76 1 — - E C 4 9 ' _ . . . - - - - ' 9 • - e c • 1 - 8 4 4 9 4 - 8 4 i - 8 6 4 9 4 - 8 8 | - 9 2 4 4 - 2 4 - 5 2 - 5 6 4 9 4 - 5 6 i - 1 0 0 4 9 2 4 - ICC ' " 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 - 4 4 4 4 9 4 9 4 4 9 9 * 9 4 9 4 * 9 * * • 9 * * * 9 9 9 9 * * 9 9 4 9 9 " 9 . . . t - I C C - 5 0 -EC - 7 C - - 6 0 - 5 3 - 4 0 - 3 0 - 2 3 - 10 * 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 s r v & - . ... • - — - . . ~~ - ™ . — , . <s>  VECTOR PLCIS VcCTOR 2 FLCTTEC AG' INST VECTCR 1 FCR ITEM VEC TOR 2 -ICC -90 -ao * » * » -?C -6C > * • 4 » -50 -'.0 9 9 « * 4 * •30 -20 * * * * -10 * 10 20 30 40 4 4 * 4 50 60 70 80 * * * * ICC 92 8 6" 64 80 90 100 » » » » » « . 76 72 6b 64 6C 56 52 4£ 44 ~4C 3t 22 28 24 2C l t 12 e VECTOR 1 — g" -12 _r J6_ -20 -24 -26 ~ -ll" -it -4C -".4 -46. -52 • _ 5 f -6C - t 4 -e£ -72 -76 "-EC -64 -86 •J J -92 -96 -100 IOC 96 9 2_ 88 84 EC -5 76 72 68 64" 60 56 -6 48 44 ~4C"" 36 22 I F 24 2C "16 12 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 » 4 4 4 « * « 4 9 » « « « * « » 4 4 » » * e e » » e -4 - . e -12 -16 -1 * -24 * -28 * -32 » -3 6 4 -AC *"~-4'4"~ * -48 * -52 » -56~ » -60 » -64 » -72 » -76 » -8C * -84 * - s e -ICC 4 * 4 * -9C -6C •7C » 4 4 4 -60 -5: 4 4 4 * -40 -30 -20 t » • 4 * * * - i o * i u * 4 20 • 4 4 30 « * » » * 50 60 > * 70 4 60 » » * 4 90 ~3 -2 « 4 1 00 ~ 9 Z " -96 -IOC r t f ro ro VECTOR PLC1S VECTOR 2 f-LCTTEC AGMNST VECTCR I T E M ~3 Appendix Mt The Distribution of the Five Indicator Diseases by SESZ N569 eq. The composite bother-hurt-worry Index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d daySj and health problems l n l a s t two weeks, 10- no disease, 9~ the lowest severity, 0- the highest severity, N*»64 eq. The anxiety index, 0- the lowest severity, 10=» the highest severity, K576 eq. Angina Pectoris, 0« no disease. 1- the lowest severity, 6=> the highest severity N299 eq. Bronchitis, 0= no disease, 1« the lowest severity, 5= the highest severity N317 eq. Dyspnea, 0- the lowest severity, 5 B the highest severity, SESZ eq. The normalized SES scores of the individuals in the study area, GP eq. Grande P r a i r i e LIV «eq. Liverpool RIJ eq. Rljeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aires NWV eq. Northwestern Vermont BAL eq. Baltimore the disease eases and sev e r i t i e s appear as * j i f there are 2 or more in the same spot then they are numbered 2-9 125 o 3C f--J a. UJ 0C ro o o » l o • t I I I in • • I o I i I I o O o •32/i'iny PAGE 10 • File IJVMCU SU)* 1 IE GP ItkEATtCN CAT L » 03/0B/77) — —— >— SCAITfcKGPAM c f tCOWN) N569 - 2 . 7 4 - 2 . 1 2 - 1 . 5 0 (ACROSS) SESZ - 0 . C 7 - 0 . 2 5 0. 37 1. no 1. 62 2 .24 2.87 10.00 * ' * • • • * • • • • • • • -* *3**6 24 27* 9529t4969289599»99999999999V99S999999999999995993897 • I I *9 2634869*35 *2 2* * 2* 10.00 « I ' I » I ^ • J J * * * « 1 * * a 2 » I » * ! . . . 1 } 9.00 d. oo • • * 1 i i i * i * * * » • i • ft nn J ' i ' i i i j 7.00 • * 2 * 2 1 " i *l * »* 2 4 2*** *» • I I * * * I 7.00 I I 6 .00 • L I I C £ " w 2 « v? o t>« t « « « i) J i . i ' I a » 2 a I 6.00 5.00 « . '- . i • ' i 22»32 2"* 3 aa » » 3 j 2 » « 3 a » » „ 5. 00 I I . I I I „ j 4.00 » « * » • ' . • I •* 2" • • 22 3 » 2 *3 2* 23* 1 I • I 4.00 { - " - - , - , . i.nn * a I I J ivU +M * * * * a o 2 4 » 2 43 * 422 i » 3 2 » 4 2 * * » »* •' « 2 i— I I aa* « j « 3 .66 — .. - . j . . . . . I 2 ,00 • » * • « 2 * 2 2 i i - -' I 2*2«2 222* • 2 4 «2 ** 2 « » 2 J* 3 * * J i 2.00 { -' I I I I 1 i 1.00 + * ** » 2 * 3*1,* I j I 2 a «*• o 2 23*2 a *2 « j * 1 I 1.00 0. 0 ' 1 j »• i i i j • >-. •— - 3 . 0 5 —• 1 1 + 1 1 — - 2 . 4 3 r l . 8 1 - 1 . 1 8 a * aa 3 *o a ea a I * » '"" —• • • • • • +.— - 0 . 5 6 0.06 0.68 1.31 * — + +- +• • 1.93 2.55 • . 3 . 18 0 .0 ro ON f— Ulti) nY !>l/it J-/1./77 PAGE 30 '-\ ' . . 1LC IJVMCU iUor lLE LIV iCATT EKGR.AM Ol> (CREATION DATE * 03/CH/77I >— (CCWNI N569 - 2 . 0 2 (ACROSS) - 0 . 6 2 0 . . 7 0.77 1.47 SES 2. 16 2. 86 3.56 4.25 • • — 10.00 •* • 3 6 . 5 93 9349939999995999955953999394*9239494 97 86 23 42*2*33 **3* 2 2 * *•• 10.00 \ { i { 9 . ) 0 « 2 0 I 9.00 8. 00 • * Z * 2*** I v* * » * « * « * * 8.00 I ; i 7.00 • « 4 * * ** . 2 * » * 2 ! 2 j ** * » » * » « « * . 7.00 6.00 • ; * • 4 2 *» 2 *» 3 i* * » ** « » . « * • * * * 6.00 5.0} • » * 50 4 2 42*2 *2*222 2 *•» b » * » » * * 5.00 J j 4.00 • 3 9 3 2* i. Ill 4. » » • » » » » * 22 » * 2 1 * 4.00 1 1 1 I I [ 3.00 • » » 6 6 2 6 * * 3 » » 2 3 2 2 » « * 2 « « 0 » o « 0 j 3.00 2.00 • * 3* 5 » * » 2 * » *** .3 2 ** * * 2 • * * 2.00 j J 1.00 • * 5 4 63 22 3 * 1 * » • »** * 1.00 } { \ 0 . 0 • - 2 , 3 6 * 6 - 1 . 6 7 " - 0 4 2 5 4 2 4 1 2 » 0 » » « 2 .97 - 0 . 2 8 . 0.42 1.12 1.81 2.51 3.21 * 3.90 4.60 0.0 F I L _ I JVV .CL ' S o a H l L E P I J ( C F E A T I C N CAT f = 0 3 / U d / 7 7 l • SC A T T E^GR AM C F I V O M K ) f . 5 6 V ( A C R O S S ) S E S Z ' - t . 4 e > - 0 . 9 3 - 0 . 4 0 0 . 1 3 0 . 6 6 1 . 19 1 . 7 1 2 . 2 4 2 . 7 7 3 3 0 1 0 . 0 0 t S * 3 2 0 2 9 3 2 5 2 4 9 * 5 9 9 9 5 2 9 9 8 9 9 9 4 9 . 5 8 . 9 5 9 7 5 4 9 9 * 9 9 9 2 9 5 4 9 5 5 7 4 8 2 3 3 7 * 5 3 * 3 2 * * 5 3 * * 2 * » 2 * 2 * * 2 * . 10.00 V • J J • * * 2 * " i * « ; • j — — } 9 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 • • i • * • * * ! * • . * 2 1 * 8 . 0 0 J ; j • j 7 . 0 0 * 5 2 3 * 2 3 * 2 I-i » » * * » 2 * • 2 * 2 • • I * * « 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 • * • _ 2 * • * * • « 4 2 * 2 * * " " « j - » V — " " " * 6.06 ' 5 , 0 0 * 2 * 2 » 3 5 4 5 » • * * * « 2 * 2 * « 2 2 2 « » * * 2 I » » 4. 5 . 0 0 j { [ ' r 4 . 0 0 » 7 4 5 » 5 » * 3 * 3 2 » * » 3 * » » 2 * * * » » • » • * » e » * t i. 4 . 0 0 1 I j 3 . 0 0 « 3 • 3 * 9 2 2 2 4 * 5 2 4 4 4 « ; > _ 2 2 i * • 2 * » 3 * * 3 2 * . * * 1 _ » » 2 . * « 3.06 2 . 0 0 2 * « 3 a 2 * * 2 * * 2 2 « « * # * * * 3 » « , « . * 2 . 0 0 ' _ _ _ _ _ I I 1 l . - ' J * 5 » * * » 6 2 * * » 2 * 3 * » I * 2 2 * * * * I 1 . 0 0 0.0 • _ - I . 7 2 j i I * * 2 9 ' 4 * 3 2 * 2 2 * * 3 I 2 * • « 3 * 2 2 * * ' I " "" " * ' " -1 .19 - 0 . 6 6 - 0 . 1 3 0 . 3 9 0 . 9 2 1 .45 1 .98 2..1 3 . 0 3 + 3 . 5 6 0 . 0 co ~ Ntl.J U r Sr SZ • — M L . I JVVCU ( CP E IT ION CATC = 0 3 / O U / 7 7 ) 5Uill I L E H ^ L "" SCATTEKGRAM UF (CCWNI M 5 6 . -2.27 -1 .CO - 0 . 0 3 . • 1 , 1 • — — T A T E 5T" (ACRnsS) SESZ 1.08 1.76 2. 43' 3 . 10 9 . J J • a. oo » 7 . 0 0 • I »•* * « * * « - 0 . 2 6  10-°° r * 2 *• " a I I I I * 3 » ** »« o 5" 1 v 1 0 . 0 0 i ** * 3 *2 ?** « 3 » * » » *2 3* 2 * * . 3 *j " 9 . 0 0 8 . 0 0 i -I I 6 . 0 0 4 I I I 1 5 . J 3 • 1 1 i _ I l 2 * . - - 5 . T . _ 2 _ 2 _ 3 4 . M M J f M t o W ^ n JliZ_3J± * * 2 3 _ 5 2'2* 2 2 . • — j i — 1.00 4 I . . . . 2 . 7 . 2 . . 2 . 2 * 6 3 5 2 3 * 2 4 . 6 * 3 . 6 234**423 2 232 *» 4 5. 00 4 . 0 0 3 . 0 0 1.00 I- 1 i ro c Ml LO n* Si ii 0 3 / 1 ^ 7 7 PACE 70 • FILE IJVSICU SUnFILE VAJ SCATTERCRAC TF ( CR F AT ICN CAT L' = 03/08/771 > — (UCvlM N569 (ACROSSI SESZ • -1.99 - 1 . 3 9 - 0 . 7 9 -0.19 0.41 1.01 1.61 2.21 2.81 3 .41 10.00 • 6 2 3 9 9*9* 9 9 * 9 9 * 9 4 9 9 4 9 6 9 8 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 7 3 4 55*34643*2 532*3* *w * 2 * < + iO.OO } i ~ ~ ' i • i ' • • i \ 9 • 0 ) 4 • 2 * * * i * „ « 2 i i i . .. . i . i ' i - - -* * 2 » * « » * **• *« » e j «, 9 .00 8.00 • • 8 .30 I ' 1I I 7 .00 • » * * * * * . 2 2 * 2 2 * * 2 23 * * 1 * * * I I • . 7 . 0 0 6.00 • ' I . I I j * * * I I 1 ' I + 6.00 • 1 1 5.00 •» ' 1 2 ** 4 2 * *2 • 22 * * ** 2 * 22 * * * I a «* • 5.00 j 1 I I 1 I J 4.00 • 1 I « * 4 * * * **« 2 2* 3 * 2 * 2 * i * , .- I I • 4.00 J 1 I I - — -1 | 3 .00 •• 2 » 3 5* 22**2 3 3 * * * * 2 *** * * 1 S I I . . . . . . . . ' I + 3 .00 . I \ 2.00 «2 I I * * * " 2 22 4** **2 **2* ***2*2 * * * • 2 I ** z • 2.00 i I i ' " ' I I I I 1.00 •* • I 1 2 2 * * * * 2 2 * I 2 » »»«2* 2* *• *I I 1 • 1.00 0.0 *2 . . -2.29 I I I I { * * 2 2 2 *2 4 * * * *!»»* 2 2 *22 * * * » " ~ — " — -< • • • * • • • • • • + + +  - l . o 9 -J.09 - 0 . 4 9 0.11 0.71 1.31 1.91 2.si 3 .11 3 • 0.0 • . .71 33/10/77 f I L S U V f C u (CREATION C AT E • 03/00/77 1 SUiiF I LE VAf-PAGE 80~ SCATT tHGftAH Of (I'.OWN) N569 - 2 . 0 2 - I .SO - 0 . 9 8 - G . 4 t 0.06 (ACROSSI StSZ 0. 59 1.11 . • — , — t — 4 — t — , ( — ; — 1 , 6 3 2 . t 7 10.00 .2 7 2* 3" 7 * 6 5 . 3 9 - 9 *94995992 97299999,999999 7««99Vg99^9«999«9"J«555 ^ ^ ^ T r ^ n " " ^ , " 9. 33 6 .00 7.00 6 .00 5 .3 3 4. 00 3.0<j 2 .00 1.03 0 . 0 2 » 2 4 » 2 » 2 2~3~*2 S—s ** aa <, 4 ae o»2 2* 3 * *2* 2** * 2 3 aaa«* * 4 • • 3 2 * *3*' 2 . » *» 2aa I »*3»» a* 22 * • I "2 2 » eaa a" "*2" "* * , "2" 12* ~*~~ I I i »2 • 2 »4 » »3 *22** 4 » 2 H * va * * 2 *2* 2**a 202 aa a {a aa 3 *2 * J » * 2~2 *~~» 5—5 , SR I *2 »*« « a a 2 * * I aaa* a a I I I _ . . . . . a* e*a 1 * 2 2 2~2" * 2 *2 *** * ** * 2 ]<• t = 2 i 2 J — = l i 2 £ — — _ 2 i Z 2 — - 0 . 2 0 o . i r"*"".*; ;"*" I . * » ~ * - ~ T . * : ; " " ^ i " * " " . * ^ 10.00 "9.66" 8.00 7.00 6 .00 5.00 4 .00 3.00 2.00 1. 00 0.0 •Ntrl) :ir SESZ — MLC IJVMCU (CKfcATIPN CATI = 03/08/77) S U D F I L E S A S S C A T T E R G R A M L F ( COWIJ) N569 -2.25 -l.f-3 -1.01 -0.35 0.22 ( A C R O S S ) S E 0. 84 1 10.00 . * 3* 2 "5 8 »4*7**929 695.» 79995 .0') .<; . 9999.9<)•)<) 959.599 99559297304 03/10/77 PAGE 90 2. 08" 2.70 3.31 60*6345*4436 2>36****3 * *+ 10.00 1 **-8.00 * * * ** * *2 * 2 * 9.66 8.00 7.00 2* *22**3**22 224** * * * * 7.00 6 . 0 0 • « ** 3 2*2 • *3* 24*23 3*" •"•"_"*"• 6.00 5.00 *2 3 *2»* * 2** 2*3*2*4 * 2 •* * 2 * 5.00 4.00 * 2 3 «2** *3 4*2*42 3**** »*3 ** »** * * «* * * « 4.00 * 5 i - * *2 r - — 5 * *.2*3 *A «: *3*« 3 23*«2 4* 2* _2 * 3.00 2.00 **» * »3* *324 •* * * *• 3* 2*22 * *» * * 2.00 1.00 * 2* 3 *» a 2*»* e*2* 2 * 3* 2* * 22*2* * . *** 1.00 "0.0" • 3"**2 2 » * » 22~22 **I* » *2* * 3» • *o 0.0 -2.56 -1.94 -1.32 -0.70 -0.08 0.53 1. 15 1.77 2.39 3.01 3.62 V_0 133 l O !° I » I <\l i -I rg I PM 11 m • 11 -o •O 4 IN fa I? I « l« i* o o o • NEL.) DY siT7 * • fllz IJVMCL (CREATION DATE = 03/06/77) SUBFILE EAK SCAT* ERGR AM UF ( DO«M N569 (ACROSSI SE -1.20 -O.LO -O.Ol 0.59 1.1B 1.7a 2, 10.00 *9 6 394 5<} *9 69 99*999499799599499b7999992997972996949944935733 9. J J 6.00 7.00 6.00 2 * 3 » * * » *3 5 4 »8 *32» 3 22 3 * • 2 3 *5 *B 3 2 *3 **~ * 2 * 72 * * •»2 »»»« 5 3« *2 2 2 2* • • 2 03/10/77 RAG"?—ITT 7 2. 97 3.56 4.16 2 4*32 * *32 i * **** ** 2 • 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 6 * *3 8 *5 *7 243 33*36 ** 2 32** * 3*3 ** * * * 5.00 4.00 6 * 4* *2 *9 t 59 *42 5 *4 * * a * 4.00 3.00 2.00 9 5 3 2 2 9 29 9 49 *94239**4 32 63» * 2 "323 **» 3 i~T" 3.00 9 * 2 9 9 49 45 39*6* 23* <:* »3 *2 3 3 * * « « 2.00 1.00 9 * *32 8 *9 27 9 *64*63*25 24 »2 «6**2 2 * * 1.00 0.0 *9 5 »9* *3 9 5 29 "*48*36**4 *8 I * 3 2 » 2 • a -1.50 -0.90 .-0.31 0.29 0.88 1.48 2.07 2.67 * 3^6 * 3^ 86 + 4^ 45 0.0 VoO -(=-135 i i I 'I j N i • j i o o o i i o o O ° i o o o o o o o O o: o o jO • • 1 • • ! • o cr CO r- VA ^ i rg 'o * i" i i i + rg 1 > I 1 » i i 1 * 1 » j i ! i 1 j 1 t ! | ! 1 r- I 1 1 i o • i 1 t i * tM m 1 ! | I 1 I 1 1 rg i i 1 n 1 i t i 1 -I-JJ ft • • 1 i> | i , 1 m < 1 IN ! 1 0 . 1 ft I I * j . , 1 | 1 • j i . 1 • * m 1 ro * » i 1 1 rg i I 1 1 <> | i ! 1 « \ » » ! 1 -O + rg * i . 1 * ft i | 1 PM i >r I » i 1 — . o i « j i ! i m i « t i « i 1 *> • • m | j * rg 1 rg ; i l *A | j m I m I i I p--> i m I j * 1 1 PM * m | i + . 1 1 1 j PM I PM i * 1 I ! • i : • S3 1 cr j ! i i i - 0 • • IM | | j i i * _| —« 1 t j j • i i i 1 *> 1 'tf * 1 i 'a 1 1 rn I I 1 a 1 i ' I o> 1 tf 1 1 1 i i a i o • J - 1 1 j i » * * cO 1 -A « t i -« O t IA 1 I 1 j 1 a. O I ty » 1 rg * i i • 1 1 o ft 1 | * 1 i a 1 < • • cr • 1 » * : i * i cr rg I 1 <r 1 | « 1 i ft * 1 1 | lA * *; j 1 -* i a* tf * i !» t « t ft 1 -• • SJ » i i « ; » ft • 1 3* ft i » ; tf i ft 1 -• 1 cr » i » i i M * PM a 1 m I cr rsl i « ! * i » | 1 1 J » i * j i * »  * •*- _r rg rg j • i * * o 1 » a j rg * « i » ft 1 ' £ > i rg » i ft 1 i j ft 1 * 1 -7" 1 * i -n • i » s 1 "f> • a* If i tf i •g * « 1 U» i # * ft i •jr i •n It PM I a 1 -** 1 tf i i ft » I i cr ft i * j * i * • rg i J> i » tf •g j -r a * 1 « • ' ft « i V i * 1 * 1 <J* i i II rg « ! 1 I cr « i fi m !M n 1 M-I cr * i i ft « tf •>i 1 1 o • cr rg I tf i M PM IPM + • 1 cr tf i rg m m i JT» ft ^ 1 O — . t cr | i j PM PM 1 1 r- rn i rr- «• m j rg CO t m m m PM | r» 1 o • rg i m rg « !.•» I •v. • + *»• j n t ,PM • •x o 1 Cr * m rg j rg j rg •r :PM 1 O 1 1 c- ft ft It 1 jft i n j » * 1 1 1 rg i > j ft | CM 1 cr m * 1 1* cr cr 4- •0* 1 -o C • y 1 !* rg| i • .* + • 1 rn I j i PM I o II I cr • l i rg' l i * ft • m l l —> t cr fi • tf ! i rg cn rg •J\ 1 i i - i * i h- * - j" « l rg rn i 1 g^ •N g* J\ * , < J> o i a* l * 1 PM | ' <-. O 1 1 j 1 1 »A 1 tr » l ft •N 1 y\ 4- 3 1 O _f __ 1 #\ i ft • 1 * 1 PM c 1 | i • • i ir • (Nl i m rg * 1 m rg <n | —• H- i *• i tf > | I 1 1 t- O -J" t a* 1 r\i rg rg • | m rg <n 1 U. t_l • • * ft j j 4-_J — — I j i j I — 1 i cr tf l m I ft m i l 1 i | 1 * l 1 1 t u. • cr * j m i A rg IA _) O •vl 1 - 0 x _D _c UJ > s o *-i o o O o ' o O O -> C- o a o o o o - o o o o ~ o • • • >• LU QC cr CC o IA g^  m IM —« o _ _l UJ —• 1 — r i • .u —> — _> O i j j j >^ _ - O i/| i i j * 1 1 • i • f l L t I JVFCU (CREATION f AT E = 0 3 / 0 8 / 7 7 ). S U H U L t CP SCATT LitGRAM Ur ( DOfct I N464 - 2 . 7 4 - 2 . 1 2 - 1 . 5 0 - 0 . U 7 - 0 . 2 5 (ACROSS) SESZ 0 . 3 7 1 . 0 0 1. 62 2 . 2 4 2 . 8 7 1 0 . 0 0 9 . JO • * • I I 9 . 0 0 ! 8 . 0 0 + * * I * I 8 . 0 0 I j { 7 . 0 0 t • o » » « * * ^ * i 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 5 . 0 0 * * • • 2 « * * * * * * * * 2 » * I 5 . 0 0 I I s . 00 • 0 * 9 « 3 2 * * • « • • * * » * * * 2 2* *2 2* 4 . 0 0 / -- -I I 1 I I 3 . 0 0 • 2 2 » 3 * * » 2 3* 2 « 3 2 2* » 2 * » 23 * * * * * * *2 * 1 * * 4 * 4 * 3 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 • * * * 2 2 » * 2 <,« 3*2 426 4*2323382*4*34266* 3*33*22 I* 3 3 2 * * * . 2 . 0 0 i i 1 . 0 0 • » » 3 J 42*22 6*6*26*28*042235544329469329349*3966235 .252 272 4 3 » » » 4 * » * * • 1 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 « " 2 » » 3 3 o 4 » 9 » 3 - 0 4 9 5 9 " * 6 ^ 3 9 9 3 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 ^ 2 2* 0 . 0 - 3 . 0 5 - 2 . 4 3 - l . f l l - 1 . 1 8 - 0 . 5 6 0 . 0 6 0 . 6 8 1 . 3 1 1 . 9 3 2 ' 5 5 3 . 1 8 137 o o o g o o o o o r » . r\j r » O V. JO ; o o 1 \ m o ft rg UJ t— <1 «r Q <o 1 •j-7Z -r C. r- •s <; •a: •y l Li u o U. • w •SJ 1 —• > L- — X > < -> M•ar —* UJ r— >— — D o ». -n \n m rg ,» + I*' ! i : » i +• i i • — ; H rg M L !. I ;r0 | ;rg • Im | I * ' I » I rg I I I •n i — \ I'M + 0> I - I I • ~ rg _ I I I l rgl rg l o- I i rg * a i I : « i ; I « I I ! I • I * I I 3 l i t -!• i>Y V . b/. 0~J7TJ77T PAGE 44 FIL: UVf'CL <Cf!ATICN CATF = 03/0B/77J SCATT EKGRAH OF ( CUWN I N464 (ACROSS) SES I' ~l ^ ° f ^ -0.40 0.13 0.66 1.19 U_7l 2. 24 2.77 3.30 . 10.00 • * * 4 a* * a 9.0 3 8.00 7.00 6 .00 * • 5 5 7 a—5" 2* 2 3* 2 2 11 »2 ** 2 * 2* 10.00 • a a a aa a 1 9.00 8.00 2 • 7.00 ** *~T * 2 2*2~~• »* 1 I 6.00 5.00 . * • 7 »7 35 2«* 4*2 2* 3**2 * * 2 5.00_ 4.00 •2 22**4 ae 24***4 23 6 3*» « 2 2 * * 22 * ** 2 * I* 4.00 I •» 56 5 9 98 **4 226 2 2 j .22 *2 *32 a22**a 2 *" 2.00 3 « 4229 »7 59 490 635424 4332* 334*55 624 2 *« * * T*' I I I I a 2 * "2 37oo 2. 00 1.00 I I I I ' 7 «2 4 9 9 **9279 999 935547275*347 633224264436 7*3426 23** I aa 22* * * a 0. 0" ' • 4 .• -1.72 - j I •1.19 . -0.66 -0.13 0.39 0.92 1.45 1. 98 2.51 ,3.03 3 3**9 »29" 99'99528334T72 1. 00 0.3 3.56 CO 139 f3i m r-"S. CO o O 1 m o u o o • < •4" <o 1 O •— < _c f-UJ CJ ct w • U 1 a. 3 -« J •vl l_> U.' -° ^ r 5 -J > < "? Of — O o o o I • j nl i ! M :-0 I '• I ri > i • i > I o-| » I o| 1^  * -I •1°" 1 -;f- i ;o> * i f ! I lo* I . I " J O I -*| .o» + 'CT- I :co i i0> I 0- I JC • :0* I O I ,o> I m| o> I 1°* • - i > i :o> i lo I :» • lo- I . ;o. 0> p> I m| .0> * jo» I ol 0 I I 0> I |0> I !> • !* • I •A I IJ 01 | •O I CM | o o o 111 u. -I c «» -JO H. *rt 1/1 ' 0 3 / 1 0 / 7 7 FIL.- UVPCu (CREATION LAT r. = 03/OU/77) SUbF I LC VAJ SCATT £PGR AC OF ( DCWN ) N464 PACE 64 10.00 • -I oq , , o „ , „ ( A C R O S S I S E S Z . . . l r " . , -<>•" -o.is o.4i 1.Q1 1 - 6 l 2 . 2 1 , . 8 1 3 > ^ TTTT 8.00 7 .00 6.00 5.0 3 4.00 3.66 2.00 1.00 " 0.~0 • 2 * 2 * ** ** 2 3 2 • 34 * * 2 « * *~2 * 3=23 2 *"r~4~ * 4 2 5 9 6 32 4 3* 4*3 34*3 » 2 « 4 * 4 2 » 22 * * « 2 i i o * 2 * 2 5 3 4 3 9*84 9 9328*9 5 8 3 6 * 7 6 4 9 3 5 8 3 3 4 5 4 * 3 * 4634322*2 3 * * * » « * « * * * * 10.00 "9.60 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4 .00 TToTT 1.00 - - - - - ^ — " i - f c 9 - 1 - 0 9 * -o-^"'""o!u"*""o:7r""";ir"*""i;;r"'" ini ^i^-*"-;:?! 0.0 ! o I M U I U V ^ , C f t A T , r N l ; A T F 'n'«»m. SCATT t«GR AM CF CfcCWN) N464 — -2.02 -1.50 -0.98 03/1 J/77 PAGE 74 „ , ( A C R O S S I S E S i '"•••fc 0«G6 0.59 i . u 0.0 •* 4 '2'** 6 5 47 39*T~*9~9V£ff9799 • • • < 1 • * t  ~ 2 , 2 f > -1.76 -1.24 -0.72 -0.20 0.32 0.85 • — — 1. 37 4 223423 " »4»~3 "V" • «. 1 ^ 1.69 2.41 2.93 .y.;u i> r ii- s2 •— • F H E IJVMCU (CREATION DATE = 03/08/77 I S U J f l L E SAS SCATT ERGRAM CF (OOWN) H464 -2.25 -1.63 -1.01 -0.39 0.22 (ACROSS) SESZ 0. 84 1. 46 •53/10/77 PAG~E 84" 2. 08 2.70 3.31 10.00 • 9.00 8. 00 7.00 • 2* 1 0 . 0 0 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 2 »*2*»»**« 5.00 4.00 2 2 *2 3»* ** 3 * 22 * » » 4 .00 3.00 2.00 • 3 4 3 * 3 2 ' 2* 3" 4 *232 2* 42»» 2»» *~ 3 . o o • » *«2 * •* 42* 36»4 »423 4' 2244 3 6 * 3 2 » 4 » 4 2 2 2 * • • » • 3 » * • * * 2.00 1.00 4 * 2* 2 7 *4*325479285 6998747296835286*733*24233 *22. * * * 1.00 0.0 • 2* • '22 7 »2»3 2929 3929 5 9 9 9 5 9 9 9 9 5 9 9 9 9 5 9 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 9 ^ 9 ^ - V • » 1 1 » + 1 1 1 1 ^ 1 ^ ^ + ^ + + ^ ^ r 2 ' 5 6 ~ » ' 9 4 «-1.32 -0.70 -0.08 0.53 U 1 5 1_77 2.39 3.01 3.62 0.0 NE-;L ) IJ V SI l l F I K IJVrXU (CFEITICN DATE « 03/00/77) S U H H I E ino S C A T ! LRliR AM Uf ICCWM) N464 ( A C R O S S ) S E S 10.00 - t » 5 " -1.03 -0.48 0.06 0.63 1. 16 1. •• • • • • • • . • • • • • , 9.33 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 2 « » t t » l * * 2 * 3 2* ** * 2 27* * • 2 S — 3 »2 »3 « •>« g 2*22**** *2* 3 * 3 3 *2 **2**224» »»*2*»2I » 2 * * * * 2* • »* I 4 * 25 43*25* 2 4 5' 4 22**81 * * *23~**~2 »'2 2"""3" I I 6 * *4 5 » 5 2 4* 5 3 J 3 262** 32*42* 22 3* 3 3* *22 • 03/13/ 71 PA~GE 94~ 2. 28 2.83 3.38 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 4 * *5 7 » 2 4 * - 6 432227**3*864*4«.i 7 3 4 4 tb2 4242** * 2 3 I 4. 30 r « * *22 25 4 9 * * , 2 » 2 2 4 3 5 4 4 4 4 37-3549 5 « « 2 2 4 t 2 5 2 2 3 * * 2 * 2 * 2 ^ *3 *» 2 .00 ""» * 2~*T~ * v 3.00 23 35* 6226 53333929 736824 96 524336 * 5 7 3 6 5 2 5 4 3 2 4 * « 2 * » 3 4 1.3 3 7 5 *8 34252*63*989358399*698974769234549354523662338323 2 I ** 3 *2 <t * 2 I.00 0. 0 ; , I J 5 22 28 44 98 76*769 99"49979~999<.999996993998798^ * " * » 1 • B 5 -1.30 . - 0 . 7 5 -0.20 0.35 0.90 1.45 . 2.00 2.56 3 . 1 l " + + 0.0 3.66 " J i / 1 0 / 11 pjxn— SCATTfcrtG^AM Cr (DOWN) N464 (ACPOSS) SESZ' J:-:* U 1 B 1.7a 2 . 3 7 10.00 « 9 »** 2 9 2 *2 22 * 2 3 ] * ~* * * • * • — -3 « 5 6 4.16 d.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4. 00 3.00 2.00 1.00 J f" 9 3 2* »7 9 « 3 » 9 22 »S 32 9 2 3 »2 »9 b 9 2* 34 34 ** 2 9 * 6""" 7 '9 « 4 29 SIFTS* 2* 32 9 3 242 *4 9 ^5 » 9 66237 3 *4 9 « 5 » 9 *9 *9 59 65 56< 8 34 * 7 «9 9~59 6/2»9 *9 53 2 «73229 9 « 9 99 499 59299*59209 3 » 4 « 27 *9 55 59*9992 592 592 79' ** 2 *2 ** ** *~ ** 3 3 ***2 4*2*3 2 *2* » • » » • 27*22 32 62 23* **2* 2 « 3 » 792399394249572 9334256234323324 2*2 * * 2 * » — — — ^ — — o I m * ~-»"*"~:;r-~:;;r —i : ; r : * : " r . 10.00 9.00 8.00 7 .00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 2 2 . *• OTO" 45 i . u u it r M 5( 0 3 / 1 0 / 7 7 pKol TiT" F l U i 1JVCCU (CFFATJCN DATE • 0 3 / 0 8 / 7 7 1 S U H F R E bA ~ SC ATT ERl>R AH CiF ( CCiWM ) N464 ; - 1 . 4 9 - 0 . 9 1 - 0 . 3 3 0 . 2 5 (ACROSS I SE 0 .83 1.40 1 98 1 0 . 0 0 • « 9 . 0 0 8. 00 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 5 . 3 0 » 2 » 3" • 2 3 * * 2 « * » a 2 2 4 3 * 2 * 8 2 32** 2 » »2 2 " » 5 2 7 2~*2~*~2»" 2 * *6 *7 5 fc *9 *4 *3 2 ** 2 « one** a a » a aa aa aa 2 Z- 56 3 . 1 4 3 . 7 2 1 0 . 0 0 9 . 0 0 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 5 . 0 0 4 . 0 0 2 • 4 3 26 25 34 9 27 7*3**52 4 » 3 * * * 2 2 22 3* * * 2* a 4 . 0 0 3 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 7 3 6 7 26 »3 22*39 37*5623 2 * 2 2 3 6 3 b 3 4 2 * » * 4**2 2 3 ** *T" 2 6 9 9 *9 59 29*3938927*296 « 9 » 2 9 5 4 » * 4 4 222432 3*23 * * • 2 * a a a *2 a 3 . 0 0 1.00 4 »2 *9 *8 49 69*69 69*99499587 <.9666i»48466346 5**2233*2*3**23* * 2 2 * * * * 1.00 0 . 0 5 "' 4™* ' 9> 59 "V>399*9T39929"99599d959993659675SV4T236^T7y24 *44*Y5"~**Y^ aaa* JTO" - 1 ' 2 0 - 0 . 6 2 - 0 . 0 4 0 . 5 4 I . U * " llll"* 2.*27~~* ~zTi'~* T.IV* V.'QI 03/1 J/77 • F i L c - IJvKCU (C^FATICN CATC « 03/08/77) SLBFI Lc GP " -SLA7TEHGRAM Cf (CCVN) l<576 ? 74 -3 13 , c, . (ACkOSS) SESZ' - I - ! - - 4 - • -1.50 -0.87 -0.25 Q.37 6.00 • 1» 62 2.24 2.87 5 . 4 J 4. 80 4.20 3.60 3.00 2. 40 1 .80 1 .20 0.60 * «•* e ** 3 » * ** * 4 *2 5* 3 *2*3526 43*5 0.0 • 22*2 * « 4 *3 2**2 * *» «* » 2 «»»«»2 »«• 3 3 * « a « « 752 75566 94399999 994499999953 24 • 34* 6*** 242* 4 * * * t * _ * f f ^ _ * 3 J 5 * J 4 4 9 7 5 9 4 9 3 9 9 3 9 9 2 9 5 9 9 9 6.00 5.40 4.80 4.20 3.60 3.00 2.40 1.8Q 0. 60 0.0 F1LF-. IJVMCU KSFATIflN CATc = 03/0J1/77) SUtlH Lt LIV SCATTEaGSAM CF (DOWN) N576 -2 .02 -1 .32 -0.62 f « H C £. ti (ACfiOSSl SESZ °'"7 °' 7 7 2. 16 2. 86 3.56 6.00 • s.4) r~ 4.80 4 2 3 * * 2 •* 2 4.25 * 5* 3 32 33 2 * 1 I I I 4.20 * I 1 3.60 • I I 3.00 • I I I » » * *« • I 2.40 • . I " 1 I-I 1.80 • 2 222 ** 4 *' I I I I 1.20 » 0.60 » I * 3 4* 9« 9 55 93699798 6.00 2*3 * * • * * *2 • * * 372.69*455*93 6 *3 64 43 32 «» * * *3 ** ; I I .1 I 0 , 0 *" * 3 6 9^^939999999^ -2.36 -1.67 -0.97 -0.28 Q.42 ~ * * ' ' * » * 1.12 1.81 *• 4.60 5.40 4.80 4.20 3.60 3.00 2.40 1.80 0.60 0.0 - O FILE. I JVTO (CKFATICN CAT L = 03/0d/77) SUrlFJLC P U • S C A T T E R G K A M FF I tCwNJ N576 : - 0 . S 3 - 0 . 4 0 Q.13 0 . t 6 J3/10/7T" P AG E 48~ 6 . 0 0 »2 3 • 3 * ** * (ACROSS) SESZ 1.19 1.71 2 - » ' 2.77 3.30 5 . 4 ) 4 . bC 4 . 2 0 3 . 6 0 3.00 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 2 *3 5 *3 3 22 *3 • _ . . * . . . J 2 . 7 • S * »* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 » * « 6 . 0 0 2 . 4 0 5.40 4 . 8 0 4 . 2 0 3.60 3.00 . * 9 - J ^ l _ : 9 5 l 9 + * 3 9 3 9 9 °9V2969^999994999499T9W9W7T8T633T9V3^ , - L - 0.0 00 1^9 o ac <B o o — 1 m Cr o oi 1 "s. • r*v O B • o LU o I-< -o —I f - 1 m U z < -r r-UJ o rg J: UJ •NJ 1 u. • IX. ^ I r > < UJ _l UJ •—• ill _ —J 33 <  J O I 1 - 0 u o •o I I I <*i + • I m I I 1 I Ml .0 - I •0 I • —,<n l o> • ;<M I i » I I ;3> I • £T» • 0> I ,°> I O- I > I ;0> • ,0> I 0 - I * . j r*l| rg | I <0 • rg •0 a O o FILE- IJVFCU (CREATION LAT F * 03/08/77 ) i U o F J Lfc VAJ SCATTERCRAM OF JCCMW) N57t -1.99 -1.39 "03/10/77 p-AGT" 6"T -0.79 -0. 19 0.41 6.00 (ACROSS) SESZ 1.01 1. 61 2. 21 2. 81 3.41 5.4 J 4. 80 4.20 » * * * 2 » 2 * 3 2 » * * 2 2* 6.00 5.40 • •4.80 4.20 3.60 3.00 3 2 *3 ** * .3.60 3. 00 2. 40 2.40 1.80 1 .20 *»2 ** .» * *2 * **> 1.80" * 2 2 3 2 2 6*9 83 9 68*7 6 9 933626<r585435633«*69322262 *2* 1. 20 *3332 4 2 * ** 0.6] 0.60 0.0 '•™-^i_?jisr* ^ — * l ~ 0.0 o 151 o o o rg o o •o o o u. J -3 rg J 1 * > i UJ OC - J UJ -I c < — 3 J u> */l O fl j —* (M 1 -J* » V • 1 rg ft jrg m rg 1 O 1 33 m » • * 1 —* ft o ro rg ; * r -c rO ;tn • :©> ;o» a» 'co ^ IO ;o* tn :«> < • o* o m t°* lo> 3* rg 0* « • 17" o .3 CT* 43 I 0* 4 0* 1 0* 1 a» I o *r I rg -> 4 • O* 1 o J» 1 1 J* 1 CT» 1 .1 ( •FILE- IJVVCU S U H F R E SAS SCATT ERGRAM OF "03/10/77 (CREATION DATE = O 3 / 0 B / 7 7 I "TOTE e x i I ' 1  0 , 0 llllltl^ll*1"™?™ — — — ^ — . - 1 - 3 2 t " " o . o r " " ^ : ; r t " ' T : r r " " " T : ; r " ~ " — + — < 0 . 0 3.62 153 o o o 41 1/7 o •C U | < ^ o — 0 o 1 J 5 . -I 33 < ~ J O U..I/1 v> I I • rg O O «1 | ; » I ,N 4. I - 0 O •o ! m l ! ~ l ! >M| I rg| I I rg| I f>l I PM I CM ! 1 1 + 1 1 1 o ;» 1 o + • 1 "M 1 1 + 1 1 •O. 1 "A . r - 1 * irn • • 'f\l lo* 1 J O f 'o 1 o • cr 1 'CD I 'O* 1 <= t> 1 0 -Cr +• • icr 1 o ICf 1 & 1 + 1 1 •3- 1 3- 1 <*> j - + • 1 o 1 J* 1 1 | » • 3" 1 !o - 1 0- 1 o |0> i rg Ic *• • IS' 1 o j*> i i i 0 - i * ! 3 - i 3* i 'O- 1 IA a: - 3 - * • 3- 1 o M I I 3- 1 I lA * J* I I 1 -3 •  <*» IA 1 — 0 -1 1 1 rg 1 . 0 - 1 o • o • F I L E " I J V r - C U S U b F l L f d A N . 03/13/77 I C F E A M r C ' CAT E = 0 3 / 0 6 / 7 7 1 P A G E 1 0 6 S C A T T EKGKAM t F } — !C5"'N» N i 7 t ( A C R O S S ) S E S Z - 1 . 2 0 - O . M i - 0 . C 1 0 . 5 9 1 . 1 8 1 . 7 6 2 . 3 7 2 . 9 7 1. 5 6 4 . 1 6 6 . 0 0 » 9 • 2 * 2 *B 5 * 5 " 3 2 2 ** * 3 | » * , j * _^  6 . 0 0 5 • 4 0 • ! j i 5 . 4 0 17 4 . t i o • j 4 . 8 0 j } [ I 4 . 2 0 • | Cl — i i . 1 4 . 2 0 3 . 6 0 • - * 5 * » J 6 - » 9 - 3 7 - 4 9 — 6 5 * * 9 - 3 a - 2 3 " - 5 - « > - 2 * - 2 - - i - 2 — • » « * - * • « » » _ j j I 3 . 6 0 3 . 0 3 » 9 2 2 « 6 9 5 3 9 * 6 4 * 2 9 * « 3 * * * 2 « 2 2 * j j 3 . 0 0 . J I I { 2 . 4 0 • J J I 2 . 4 0 j 1 I I ' l it it A. * » 3 » 2 9 6 4 9 5 * 2 4 * * * 2 * « • * 2 * 2 * * » • t>2 » I * 1 • OU + i i I 1 . 8 0 1 . 2 0 • I j " j. 1 . 2 0 r * 2 * * 5 9 « 9 7 9 , 9 9 * 6 9 2 4 8 3 9 * 6 6 2 3 6 2 2 5 4 7 5 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 7 3 3 * * 2 2 1 * * 2 * * * 2 t 0 . 6 0 • I } I - 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 + 9 i \ i 9 3 9 3 5 9 2 9 8 9 9 9 * 9 9 9 5 9 9 7 9 9 5 9 9 3 9 9 8 6 9 9 9 9 9 3 9 9 7 9 5 2 9 9 6 9 3 9 4 6 3 9 4 7 6 3 2 6 1 3 4 * 2 2 * * 3 3 \ 2 » * » * * 2 • 0 . 0 > - 1 . 5 0 ^ 9 0 , - 0 . 3 1 0 ^ 2 9 0 - 88 1 . 4 8 2 . 0 7 2 . 6 7 3 ^ 2 6 «, +  3 - 8 6 4 . 4 5 • , r i L L D UT b c S / — — 0 3 / 77 •—PMTc ITS ~ • M L I r I J V M C U ( C R F A T 1 C N DAT F - 03/06/77) S u n M l S L A • — -•• — _ i C A T T K3GR AM llr f r . f u n j h 5 7 f c " - . . _ r, , - v -» , » : « . »•« ::r s i sf?„ 2.„ ,„ j . ! ... | • 7 .00 I 1 I 1 6 . 3 J • - — 1— T 1 . I : — j — I | 1 j * 6.30 J" 2 • 2 4 2 2 3 ~ • - j i ' — • - » ! " - » - ' _ , 5.60 • J I 1 t ' — 1 i — . * 5.60 • I . I ~ • j I j I **90 :3 • • * J a • . 2 2 „ 2 ~ . ; ! . — • - • 4.20 • — ' . I . j J . 2 . . , ! \ • w o 1 • 1 ? j . _ 3 . 5 ) • J I 1 ! I , . • . . 3 . 5 0 • " - } •• 1 j • 2.80 ~ TTlO i" 1 . . I J j * * * 2 *6 * *2 * " j • *• . 2 . * I * • . * "~2TT0^  1.40 • j I 1 j 1 7 9 25 39" 9247 542232.6 .722 2.3*24333 * 2*.* , J „ * 1 o . 7 j •» j i • 1 — « — = 1 * — M — H M — — r ; : — - — - - — n , H L L . l l ;r 1 1 - 1 / "03/ 10/77 TOTT •FILE. IJVMCU (CPE4TICN DATE = 03/08/771 SUBFILE GP " ' " SCATT ERGR AM CF «CCWN I N299 -2.74 -2.12 -1.50 -0.87 -0.25 (ACPOSS) SESZ ' 5.00 • « 0.37 1 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 »» * 2 2 * . * 21222*2 2 3* 6» * 2 3 2 * * »»2» *2* 22 32 2 «23 4235* 2» 452 » 00 1.62 2.24 2.87 2 2 * 2 * 5.00 4. 50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 2.00 2 •> 2**2 *52* **»2 5**223*2 2*4 25248**3*34382*** 2* ** 5 *«• 2.00 1.50 1 .00 1.50 2* * 2 2 2»* 2 * *2 4*3 25*52 36* * 62*3* 2 3*** *4 2 2 * * 0.53 0.50 "0.0 3-^5 r l i * i , - i . B i - u s -0.56 o!o6 " 0*17'" 777~* 1^""" 7.7s"* 7.1a 0.0 O N TJ7T5?7r ""PACTE HT FILE- IJVMCU (CPFATICN DAT F * 03/ce/77| SUllFILE LIV SLAM fcH (iv AM ul ICCWM N299 ' - 2 . 0 2 - 1 . 3 2 -U .62 0.07 0.77 4 .50 4. 00 3.50 3.00 : 2 . 5 J ** » »» . • • 1 • • , , f + t - -5 . 0 0 • * * 2 u» E* 24 2 2 * 5 2 2 4 2 * * 2 * 3 3 * _ _ I _ • j - — - -I I (ACROSS) SESZ i ' ' " 7 2 , 1 6 2 ' 8 6 3.56 4.25 •• • • - » < «. , f < * * * 2 » « 6 2 *2 23 52** 1232 23 3* 2 2 * « « 2 1 8 "*' 22*3**2 Z2'2*ST»» * « * — * — I I 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2. 00 2 4* 92 9 28**76 68*6632 5 47 52 *2 * ** 6**3 3* 2 1 2.00 1 .00 » 9 4* » 3 2 6 « 3 2 2 »33326 4 26 22 2**7 2 ** 0.50 0 .0 •* . • - 2 . 3 6 3 6 53 9 » 9"*399*5W999999995559499949529»"2^^ -1 .67 - 0 . 9 7 - 0 . 2 8 0.42 1.12 1.81 •2*234 3'*3'*"2"« ~V~ 2 » * * m*~ -• + 1 + «. + > 2.51 3.21 3.90 . 4.60 1.50 1.00 0. 50 0 .0 • F I L E I J V M C U U'F ' fcATIL'N OAT f = 0 3 / 0 6 / 7 7 ) S U B F I L E P I J S C A T T ERGR AM C F ( C C W M N 2 9 9 - 1 . 4 6 - 0 . 9 3 - 0 . 4 0 3 3 / H / 7 7 ~PTCz 4 6 " I A C R 0 S S ) S E S Z 0 . 1 3 0 . 6 6 U 1 9 1 . 7 1 2 . 2 4 2 . 7 7 3 . 3 0 5 . 0 0 « 7 2 * 2 7 * 5 * 5 2 3 4 * * 4 4 2 4 . 5 J 4 . 0 0 3 . 5 0 3 . 0 0 2 . 5 0 2 . 0 0 1 . 5 0 1 . 0 0 2 » * 4 4 2 3 » * » * " » ' » » " 2 6 * 2" 4 5 * 2 2 * 9 « B * 5 3 2 2 2 3 * * 3 •6 * 9 * 9 5 6 4 3 9 8 2 * 2 2 2 3 2 3 * * * * » • « * e * 2 * 2 * 2 2 2 * 2 2 * 2 3 * * 2 2 * * 2 4 4 2 3 2 * * 2 3 3 3 * * 3 * * 2 9 2 2 « * * 2 * 5.00 4 . 5 0 4 . 0 0 3 . 5 0 3 . 0 0 2 . 5 0 2 . 0 0 1.50 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 1 • 0 . 0 * 9 » * 2 9 ' * * 9 3 2 9 - * 5 9 - . 9 9 * ^ ^ ^ ^ . • « + 1 + 1 1 + ^ 1 1 + ^ + + ^ ^ + ^ ^ • 1 . 7 2 - 1 . 1 9 - 0 . 6 6 - 0 . 1 3 0 . 3 9 0 ^ 9 2 1 . 4 5 1 . 9 8 2 . 5 1 3 . 0 3 3 . 5 6 0T5~ 3 3 / 1 0 / 7 / P A G E 5 6 •fill- I J V r - C U ( GREAT ION CAT E = 0 3 / O J / 7 7 J S u b F 1 L c HEL " S C A 7 T E R G R A M OF ( CCWN) N 2 9 9 - 2 . 2 7 - 1 . 6 0 - 0 . 9 3 - 0 . 2 6 0 . 4 1 ( A C R O S S I S E S l . O R 1 . 5 . 0 0 • 2 * 2 3 * 2 * 2 2 * * 5 * 2 * * 2 3 3 7 2 4 2 2 2 * 2 » * * ** 2 2 * * * i ; i i i 2 . 4 3 3 . 1 0 3 . 7 7 5 . 0 0 4 . 5 0 4 . 0 0 » * 2 * * » * 2 2 " * 3 » 2 2 » 3 4 3 5 » 4 2 » » 2 * *_ * 3 4 . 5 0 4 . 0 0 3 . 5 0 3 . 5 0 3 . 0 0 » * I I 3 . 0 0 2 . 5 0 2 . 5 0 2 . 0 0 2 2 5 2 * 2 2 * 4 4 * 5 3 * * 3 4 * 7 3 7 4 7 3 7 6 * 6 5 4 5 4 4 2 2 4 4 3 4 2 2 4 * * 2 2 2 2 4 * I * 2 * 2 2 . 0 0 1 . 5 0 1 . 0 0 I I * » 4 3 4 3 3 2 * 2 5 3 4 4 3 5 6 8 5 7 4 6 5 4 9 3 7 » 4 3 9 6 2 * 4 * 6 2 2 « * 2 * « 4 * 2 * * * 2 * J . 5 J 1.50 1 . 0 0 . 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 • » * * 4 » 3 4 6 B 9 7 9 8 5 5 5 U 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 < • • • • • • • • • • - «•— — • 9 5 8 7 * 9 * 9 4 * 4 * « 2 o" - 2 . 6 0 - 1 . 9 3 - 1 . 2 6 - 0 . 5 9 0 . 0 8 0 . 7 5 1 . 4 2 2 . 0 9 2 . 7 6 3 . 4 3 4 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 3 / 1 0 / 7 7 . P A i f i E - 5S "N • F I L E - I J V M C U S U B F I L E V A J SC ATT ERGR AM O F > j 1 CR EAT I C S HATE = 0 3 / 0 B / 7 7 I (DOWN) N 2 9 9 - 1 . 9 9 - 1 . 3 9 - 0 . 7 9 - 0 ( A C R O S S ! S E S Z • 1 9 0 . 4 1 1 . 0 1 1 . 6 1 2 . 2 1 2 . H I 3 . 4 1 * 5 . 0 0 * » * « 3 a » *o a »nu 2 " * * * * * * a a «. "S 5 . 0 0 { j I I 4 . 5 0 I .. ..... 4 . 0 0 * a a a a 2 2 * * * ' 2 * * * * I 2 a 2 a a a 2 * 2 * * 2 • * 2 2 I • 4 . 0 0 I . I 1 i 3 . 5 0 • I I 3 . 5 0 i i i ! 3 . 0 0 * a a a a j * * 2 I • 3 . 0 0 2 . 5 0 • i i 2 . 5 0 { i l 2 . 0 0 » 3 2 • 3 2 2 3 3 3 4 * 5 2 * 3 * 4 4 2 • 5 * * * 2 3 * 3 3 3 * 3 4 * * * 2 4 3 2 * 2 ** a a a » 2 . 0 0 1 I I I , - I I 1 . 5 0 • ! j 1 . 5 0 1 . 0 0 •* 3 2 * 2 36 3 * 2 * 2 2 * * I « * * 2 2 2 * 2 2 4 4 2 * « • « » I 2 - * • 1 . 0 0 : \ j 0 . 5 0 • .1 I 0 . 5 0 i i i \ • 0 . 0 • « 4 2 3 9 9 * 9 * 9 9 2 9 9 « 9 6 9 . 9 3 9 5 9 7 9 9 ' j - 2 . 2 9 - 1 . 6 9 - 1 . 0 9 - 0 . 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 5 4 7 * 4 5 * 5 6 6 5 2 2 2 6 3 3 * 3 * * * * 3 a a * 0 . 1 1 0 . 7 1 1 . 3 1 1 . 9 1 2 . 5 1 3 . 1 1 3 . 7 1 0 . 0 ON o •Flic- IJVCV ICPSATWt. CATt • 03/08/771 A J u t " I Li VAr SCATT EAjRAM U F (MWN) N299 \ -d.Oi -1.50 -0.9B -0.46 0.06 (ACPOSS) SES 0.5V K 5.00 •» * » 4 *3*2 * 4 . 00 3.50 3.00 2.5 J 2.00 1.00 * »2 * • » 3*« 2 4 9 3* 3*4 * » »» 4 4 24 3 2 * 2 » »» » ,» 5 352*** 5*2 **43232 * 333 **3 » « . » « 3 Z 3 33 3 » » 2 4 3 1 1. 63 2. 15 2.67 *2 ***22 « * * * • '* 2 2 5.00 4.50 3.50 ~3~.00~ 2.50 2.00 1.56 0.50 0.0 -^si* Z°l22 -0.20 0^2 * OIBS"* U37~~* ITHV* V.l'l"'* 0.50 0.0 ; c )3/lJ/77 PAGE 86 •FILE- IJVMCU ICREUIGN CATE = 03/08/771 j J U u r 1 j A j — — ... — — — SCA7TEKGRAM CF (OCMr,) N299 (ACROSS) SESZ * -2 .25 - 1 .63 - 1 . 0 1 - 0 . 3 9 0.22 0.84 1.46 2. 08 ? . 70 3.31. » . 1 + 1 1 1 ^ 1 ^ 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 5.00 • * 2 • »»•**** a**2* • * a* 2242 * » » * 1 , * — • • 5.00 | I'-TI r 1 I -i *> • i j • | . • J 4.50 < " 0 0 * ** * * 2 » 22*2****33o* 222 353522*5*2**2* *2** **I * a i 4.nn 1 j j 3.50 • I ' 1 3.50 { _ | \ i J . U U . * 4 * * * I * 8 v * a * a a * » * I I 3.00 2.50 • 1 'j j 2. 50 j i j [ 2.00 • 3* *» 2 « 3 4* » » 2 / , 34**3527»»67*285*4332324 423 22»22»* *•* a 2 90*2* a 1 2.00 1 ' I i — 2 T n : • — — — • — _ ' 1 | 1.50 • j — — T — • — — ; f 1.50 ••00 • » 2 * 4 * 2 2 * 4 4 *22* **I32 432**2 **4 4*3 5 • * * I 2 * ' * * 1.00 \ i 0.50 • I } I ' 0.50 { j j | 0.0 +2 * 3 24*9**5*4*2529 6 965»9999499959559999999995999999996959539^7 569*6457**332 . - 2 . 5 6 - 1 . 9 4 - 1 . 3 2 - 0 . 7 0 - 0 . OR 0. 53 1.15 1.77 2.39 3" 3.01 * *• 3.62 0 .0 O N ro NtfcU UY iLSZ •F IL f IJVKCU (CREATION CATE » 03/08/77 1 03/10/77 PACK 96 N SlitlFILE LOU $CATT CKijRAS OP (LT.WM N299 (ACFOSS) SES - 1 . 5 8 -1 .C3 - 0 . 4 8 0.08 0 . t 3 1. 10 1. 73 2. 28 2.83 3.38 —i >- . •-5.00 »3 * 22 ti 34» fc*22 324»24*B4»*322 **2 » 33 »*2*2* * » • » [* e o 5.00 \ 4.50 « « 4. 50 4 .00 *2 » •« •* 3 2 • ' « 2 2 * » I * 2 * * » * « 2 2 « * i 4.00 j j { [ j 3.50 • j 3.50 j ; 3.00 « 2 » * « *22 » ' » » * » » » * »12 2* * * * * * • } 3.00 2.53 • 1 I 2. 50 j j 2.00 « 6 2 5 . 6 » * 8 » 2 * 47 427*46 77*3933232253463 92* 42 4232 ***• • a s * ** * 2.00 I 1 1 1 . j i 1.50 • j { 1.50 1.00 +3 * 2 *3 33 3**222233*5* 34 3243*5**22*3*2 3 * *2 ** 2 * « * 12 • * * * 9 • *• 1.00 j J \ 0.50 • { 0. 50 j I 0 .0 *9 . • - 1 . 9 "39 B9 «995992'99b999 69999999999999999999999999999979993862 84 85 - 1 . 3 0 - 0 . 7 5 - 0 . 2 0 0.3b 0.90 1.45 39*242 ~44o"3" *3"i4V*32** * 3" 2.00 2.56 3.11 - 2 » « • 3.66 0.0 ON U J • F i L C I J V M C U ( C F F A T I C N C A T L « 03/Ub/77l i SUdFILE UAr, SCATTER&PAM OF > — ( D C w N I N299 (ACROSS) SESZ - 1 . 2 0 - 0 . 6 0 - 0 . 0 1 0.55 1.18 1.78 2. 37 2.97 3.56 4 . 1 6 . • — 5.00 « 9 * »32 7 9 9 9 * <7 23 36 3 6 * I » * » 2* » * *» 3 * 1 • 5.00 4 . 5 0 • i i J 4 . 50 4.00 * * 4 • 23 2* 2* ** 12 • * « I * • 4.00 • 1 } } 3.50 • I 3.50 j J I 3.00 «3 i 2* 3 »7 3 2e » 2 2* ** *21 I 2 • • I » * 3.00 2.50 • i | I 2.50 ; ; j | 2.00 * 9 * « 3 * » 9 9 39 9 9 »97«59349 * 9 » t 2 » 2 3 * 2 5 » 3 7 3»2 »2 • I * 2» 2 • * * » 2.00 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1.50 t i . • i 1.50 1.00 « 9 * *62 2 * 9 39 e9 295239 95 56 35 « 5 » 3 * 2 3 4 32 23 3 2» * * » « *I *2 * * • 1.00 \ i 1 0.50 t- * 0 . 50 I 1 1 I o.o * 9 — - 1 . 5 0 9 294289 39 59 99 999599899599499689999929989629999S96559377538I4«»*2« - 0 . 9 0 - 0 . 3 1 0.29 0 . 8 8 1 . 4 8 2.07 2.67 « *23 4 * * » * » 2 » » • 3.26 3.86 4;45 0.0 C N r ,Nt t l J M V St SZ 03/10/77 PAG£ 116 N • F i L f IJVMCU (CREATION CAT E = 03/C8/77) >-SUHFILS BA SCATTERGKAM OF CCCWM N299 I ACROSS) SESZ • - 1 . 4 9 - 0 . 9 1 - 0 . 3 3 0.25 0.B3 1.40 1. 98 2. 56 3.14 3.72 a • 5.00 *3 a 3 5 *4 2 * *7 ** * ** **• 2 2 * * * * * 5.00 <l i I I 4 .50 • i 1 J 4. 50 4.00 • * 2 2 * 2 2 » 2 **• 21 * » * * 3 1 4.00 3.50 • •{ - | • - { 3.50 j 1 j 3.00 • * 2 « « aa » 3 a aaa 2 13 * ** » * * I j 3.00 2.50 • I I | 2. 50 { 1 I { 2.00 +2 * » I 2 *5 *4 q e 26*244551*5* 5 ***2»*2 a a * 2.00 1  I I I~ I I \ 1.50 • I . 1 \ " 1.50 1.00 +2 a 2 ** *4 5 4 t * » 7 63*892*22253*9 *54* 2* 2 * 223 * *I2 2 a a tt 1.00 { I I I 1 0.50 • I \ * 0.50 | { s 0.6 "• • 9 . • — - 1 . 7 8 9 29 *9 49 99*994993996999999999999999999999999998799795552494*5722323423**4236424 *2 * 2 » « * • - 1 . 2 0 " - 0 . 6 2 - 0 . 0 4 0.54 I . U 1.69 2.27 2.o5 3.43 4.01 0.0 ON U i N=i-| i>Y SLSZ 03/10/77 PAGE 2 > • f 1 L~~ IJVMCU (CFEATICN DATE ' 03/08/77) Si/HMLE GP iCAITERGKAM OF (DCt.r.'l N317 (ACROSS) SESZ ( - 2 . 7 4 - 2 . 1 2 - 1 . 5 0 - 0 . b 7 - 0 . 2 5 0. 37 1.00 1. 62 2.24 2.87 ; 7.00 • I * I «. 7.00 . O . 3 0 • I I » 6.30 5.60 • I I • • 5.60 } j j J 4.90 • » » 3 2* I • 4.90 j 1 ' 'l I 4.20 • I I 4.20 3.50 » I I • 3 .50 1 I } { I » •* * » • * 2* *42*2** **I *2** Z • ** 2 * *• I I 2. 80 • I 'I . 2.80 2.10 • 1 1 + 1 * » 2 3 2*223 4 * 2**24*3*2*22* 4*44* 3* 4 * * I * * * *I 2.10 1.40 • I I + 1.40 I « 20 1* * *3 « « * • 3 6 *546 3 * 782 7728*32 5943 97 47 329*296576 7*22 44 *2* 4 * ** * * I 3.70 • I I • 0.70 I I I I 0.0 • * *227 *2 *6* 9437739292693993999999999999999999999999999999993996*9*36*6949*47* 2* 2* * « • - 3 . 0 5 - 2 . 4 3 - 1 . 8 1 - 1 . 1 8 - 0 . 5 6 0.06 0.6B 1.31 1.93 2.55 3.18 0.0 > . , • • FIL= IJVKCU SOitFUF LIV 03/10/77 (CPEATJCN DATE * 03/CU/77) . PAGE 22 St ATT ERCRAM L F - 2 . 0 2 - l . j 2 - 0 . 6 2 0.07 0.77 1.47 2. 16 2. 86 T I , 6 . 3 0 •" ~ * * I I • - - - ' t j i - - .. .... _ \ I — _ J I — : - -+ 7.00 1 I J I 6.30 •5.60 • 1 I ' I J I l 4.90 • 1 1 ' I • • 1 1 * • . J- ; : I I { J . 0 J 4.90 4.20 • 1 I . - - . . . . ' I ' I 1 I — — } 1 i 4". 20 \_ r 3.50 . 1 I 1 . 1 - - - . . . 1 I j 3.50 i 1 I ' I 2.ao . 3 5» S« 3 52 2 2* 2 1 2 * * * *i j J I i 2.80 { 2.16 * I I 1 • 2* 9 7 » 4 3 32*33 22»242 3 • * *2 I « * • r 2.10 1 .40 4 ! • , 1 I I J 1.40 i 1 . I .. • „ « J " ? . . ? 2 . < 5 ,*l7296*933535325 <,* 4 » 3 *2 2* 3 «4 I • * • * j 3.70 « ' I 1 I J I . i 0. 70 0 .0 •» 1 I 1 I • 2 4 92 9 » 93499'3999~999999999799499T49~9*9^ * • 0.0 - 2 . 3 6 ^-^1 -Q .S7 - 0 . 2 8 Q.42 1.12 1.81 2 . 5 l ' 3.21 3.90 4 . A n PACTE 42 . . . Fl Lt IJV'.VCL (CKATICN CATC ' 03/08/771 > SU3FILE PIJ SCATT tKGR AM LF (CCWNI N317 (ACROSS) SES -1.4b -0.53 -0.40 0.13 0.66 1.19 I. 71 2.24 2.77 3.30 5.00 <* ** 2 » I * I •• < 5.00 { 1 4.5 J « | j J 4. 50 4.00 • { I I 4.00 \ J i i 3.50 « j 3.50 1 " 3.00 «7 •" 2 3 5 29" . . 5 " *TJ'V23"3^"*V"S« 2~3"**~ '*"""» * i * + 3.00 2.50 • { ; I 2.50 J i ; j 2.00 t 2 * * 3 *2 *» *»** 1» *• * * • • 2.00 1 i I I i } 1.50 • { • j 1.50 1.00 *9 • *4 *72*5 *»9 89 687 7743342735**2 533*33 2 7232 333** *2*3 « * 2*2 * * ** • . 1.00 J r i 0.50 } • j • 0, 0 • 9 *2 *9 »29335 *593'99*9992939999599d999696949929995955958969335"92< 2*542*65**2*22«2** * *• 0.0 Is -1 .72 -1.19 -0.66 -0.13 0.39 0.52 1.45 1.98 2.51 3.03 3.56 / M l H - oY HSl 33/13/ V? PACE' ' 52 • ' FILE uvrcu SUuFIL S HH L SCATTErfGRAM CF (CPEATION CAT E « 03/OU/77) > — ( r C i u h l N3W (ACROSS) SES - 2 . 2 7 - 1 . 6 0 - 0 . 9 3 - 0 . 2 c 0.41 1,08 1. '6 2. 43' 3.10 3.77 5.00 • * ** * * » 2 I »* *2 • * » • 4 5.00 j ; I 4 .5 J • j j 4.50 4.00 • 4.00 i 1 j 3.50 + ! • 3.50 3.00 • • •••22 37*925*5 323 823'3* -2l4*3^22"4*'3*22 "* * *2*2 * *~ • * i - - - ••- -j 3.00 ' 2.50 • i j j 2. 50 j i j 2.00 • » * » 2 2 5 43 32553242332524 525 5* **2*« 4*2*3**** 2 * 2 1 * * I 2.0 3 1 ' I ' 1 I • i { 1.50 • \ • i 1.50 1.00 • **42* 5*62424662664855679989597592925257 2*322*33 2 42 6 * I ** 3 1.00 j { { j 0.53 • i ! | 0.50 " ~ ~ ' 0 . 0 •» * 1 j { 6 *32553 S9 ,;t (ii* d 9979 S 9999^999 9 9 VV99^ 9987*9*9 5*6 ** 2" * * *• 0.0 - 2 . 6 0 - 1 . 9 3 - 1 . 2 6 - 0 . 5 9 0.08 0.75 1.42 2.09 2.76 3.43 4.10 O N N O -VOL:.; **•"•• •»«»»*•-r.tE.) UV SCSZ 03/10/77 ' PAGE 62 —> , ' FICE IJVMCU SUbFILE VAJ SCATT ERGR AH OF ( — ICKEATICr, GATE » 03/Ob/77) (DOWN) N317 (ACROSS) SESZ' - 1 . 9 9 - 1 . 3 9 - 0 . 7 9 - 0 . 1 9 0.41 1.01 l . o l 2.21 2.81 3.41 5.00 • * * 2 • • l « j • 5.00 — < 4.50 • i i 4. 50 4.00 • 4.00 3.50 • - . . . . . . j - - j - — - — 3.50 3.00 «2 * j * 4 * 2 2 * * 3 2 * * * » ' " ' * " -j * 3.00 1 2.50 • | \ 2. 50 j I } 2.00 • * * * 2 **4*i 2 2 4*2 12 *3 * 2 * . i* i 2.00 j . . . — i •-1 it A ! , 1 • 3 U • J j • f 1.50 1.00 • 3 * * 3 2 5 9 95 9497*945 5526423 2445 542 73 44 53*5**2* 2 2** * » * *+ 1.00 j i ) | 0.50 • 0. 50 " 0 .0 » 4 3 i ; j 3 9 b*9* 9 9*"99*9499592989999&999999999999999499999997747*453356522 *2 *~ 2 * * 0.0 - 2 . 2 9 - 1 . 6 9 - 1 . 0 9 - 0 . 4 9 0.11 0.71 1.31 1.91 * 2^51 3.11 • — + . 3.71 o M i l l 11 r iiil FUz IJVr-CU (CfbATJCIN CAT 6 « 03/Cb/77J_ SUMFILE VA SCATT LKGkAM 1,1 (DUViN I Hill (ACROSS) SES -£.02 -1 .50 -0.98 -0.4(, 0.06 0. 59 1. -Tm~TTTi p-KcTtr—rr I 1. 63 2. 15 2.67 7.00 7.00 6.30 5.60 6.30 5.60 4.90 * » » » » 4.90 4.20 4.20 3.50 3. 50 2 » 2 2 5 22* * *'' 2. 80 2.80 2.10 1.40 * * * » * 6 3 * 2 3* 2 2*2 * * • •* * 2.10 1.40 3 * ** 5 t 44 24 9 *5 88*46 7 73322*4*4622*2223e4*35** 543* 22 * 2 * 2 * ).70 0.70 0.0 • 7 *« fc* 7 *2 73 49*9 "3^2996994982995597999999959999999959999999999 8935653*323373 5 223422 *3 3** . «. « * . + * • • 1 • • • • - • • + + i • • • • . -2.28 -1.76 -1.24 -0.72 -0.20 0. 32 0.85 1.37 1.89 2.41 2.93 0.0 1^1 -•.TTUJ-TI'WI "J37T0777 PAGc 82" FILE UVNCU (CHEAT1CN PATE « 03/UH/77I 'SUoFILG SAS ' SCATT EHGk AM CF I DCKN J N3 1 7 • - 2 . 2 ? - 1 . 6 3 - I . 0 1 - 0 . 3 9 0 . 2 2 (ACROSS) SESZ 0. 64 1.46 2. 08 2.70 3.31 7.00 • 6.3 ) 5.60 21 7.00 6. 30 5.60 4 .90 4.90 4.20 4.20 3.5 ) 3 .50 2. 80 • 2 • 4 » » 2 •» *»**4 22 2 * 2 I ' I 2 * 3 2.60 1 2.10 1 .40 * * 3 2 f » 5 4*« ** * **3 <*32***2 3 2 4 ** * 2 . 10 1.40 3 . 7 3 ** 2 6 9*4 36* 5*4 9372393943 9646565995 7*9 5 4*62*23* 6*2 32****2 *2* 0.70 0 . 0 " • 3**3 25*7 *223**939""59T929~9995"9"99~9^9999999W . • • «. + t + 1 1 „ 1 1 1 + + - 2 . 5 6 - 1 . 9 4 - 1 . 3 2 - 0 . 7 0 - 0 . 0 8 0.53 1.15 549' 736625336 3436****3 1.77 2.39 3.01 * *» + , 0.0 3.62 173 o o r O 2 5 7 < s rr OJ cj in a. LJ • u — — ac . : i u. K — Z> ul r - l r-! » 1 rg | ? i n | rg rg | « I I " I r- + <*> I i * I I I •*• • rg 1 ,rg 1 1 1 * . •-»• 1r- 1 rg | m 1 r » * • •*> f -ro 1 o> 1 •3 1 r- • .u» 1 o» 1 0> 1 o J" * • .3" 1 o Is ;r- I •M I I I I m i Nccu ur i t s ; 33/13/77 PAGE 132 FILE IJVMCI (ChEATICN CATf. « 03/08/77) SUBFILE BAf. ~ — SCATTERGRAM CF (DOWN) N317 , , (ACROSS) SESZ — 0 , 5 S u i 8 i - i a ? - 3 7 3 . 5 6 «.i 6 5 .00 • » * * 3 4.53 4.00 5.00 4. 50 3.50 3.50 3.00 "J 4 273'*9 *9 «9 29 76 39*39~*T 2 * 2 * * * * 2 "*' 3.00 .2.50 2.50 2.00 2 • »** 4 9 9 49 65*27*32 22 * * * * * * * .i 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 9 6 82229 29 39 99 499*79379 69* 92*49 65*28393*6324223**4 *2 ** 2* * * « 3 « « * * 1.00 ) .50 0.50 0 .0 *9 9 294 69 29 89 99*99^~99Y99599499ut99999299695*9^ 28 3*3* * *32 ~4 3 * * * * *2 2 O . Q '±^2 - 0 . 3 1 0.29 0.88 1.48 2.07 2.67 3.26 3.86 4.45 rttiJ rfY SLSZ 03/1 j/VV PAGE 112 -> 'F.ILE UVHCU Sum-ILL IU SC AT r ilkGK AM Or V : (CFFAT1UN CAT F «= 03/08/77) _ (CUrfr.) NJ17 - 1 . 4 9 - 0 . 9 1 - 0 . 3 3 0.2b 0.B3 (ACROSS) 1.40 SESZ 1. 98 2. 56 ' 3 .14 3.72 - / , .._ . . . b.00 • * 2 r 1 • — \ 5.00 I I j 4 .50 i i j 4.50 4.00 I 4.00 j j -3.50 I 1 | 3.50 ; i j 3.00 • 3 4 3 3 *7 3 32* 8 *4 * 2*1 *** ** * I * j 3.00 2.50 | j j I 2.50 j i | I 2.00 • • 2 2 2 ** 7 *2 *2 2*22*1 * * * * * * I I 2.00 1 1 1 1 I I i 1.50 « I I 1.50 1 .00 • 3 * 6 *6 g » 5 *9 »9**3252543135 28***24*4 3*53 * 4***2* *2 *** * * + 1. 00 1 i i 0.50 ! J i 0.50 i i j • . . . . . _ - 0 ^ 0 • 9 9 - 1 . 7 8 29 '29 49 - 1 . 2 0 99*9949939979V9y9~9~0~9VV9'9"^ **2«.* 2 - 0 . 6 2 - 0 . 0 4 0.54 1. 11 1.69 2.27 2.65 3.43 * 2* 4.01 0.0 176 Appendix Ni The Distribution of the Five Indicator Diseases by Age N569 eq. The composite bother-hurt-worry index f o r bed days, r e s t r i c t e d days, and health problems in l a s t two weeks, 10- no disease, 9" the lowest severity, 0- the highest severity, W*6k eq. The anxiety index, 0« the lowest severity,. 10« the highest severity, N576 eq. Angina Pectoris, 0« no severity, 1- the lowest severity, 6- the highest severity, N299 eq. Bronchitis, 0- no disease, 1- the lowest severity, 5"° the highest severity, N317 eq. Dyspnea, 0« the lowest severity, 5" "the highest severity, Age eq. from 18 to 90, GP eq. Grande P r a i r i e LIV eq. Liverpool RLJ eq. Rijeka HEL eq. Helsinki VAJ eq. Vancouver, Jersey VAF eq. Vancouver, Fraser SAS eq. Saskatchewan LCD eq. Lodz BAN eq. Banat BA eq. Buenos Aire3 NVV eq. Northwestern Vermont BAL eq. Baltimore the disease cases and s e v e r i t i e s appear as * j i f there are 2 or more i n the same spot then they are numbered. 2-9 *\ / >— NEED BY AGE FILE .JVf'CU SLHTILF: GP SCATTERGRAM OF (CREATION DA TF » 03/OE/.7I (CCWNI |\565 22.40 29.20 3' .CO 42. BO 49 .60 03/13/77 (ACROSS! S20 56.40 63 .20 70.00 PAG: 76.80 " l O d3.60 • • — 10.00 *<<, 95 95 55 55 59 99 55 599 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 999 99 99 99 99 59 99 95 949 99 99 36 66 45 53 •* 2 • 10.00 i J \ j' 9.CO • * * « « j * 2 ** * * J 9. J) B.OO • *? * ** I • * *I * * + 8 .00 } • j i 7 . 0 0 *»3 22 » * * * » » • * 12 * * * * I * • •* • . 7.00 6.00 • 2 j } i * * 3 * 2 2 1* * * * * * * « * ** * 6.00 5.CO + 42 2* ** * * ** 2 2 * 2 1 * * 2 ** * * 3 ** I * * 2 ** * * i 5.33 J { i 4.00 • ** * 22 * 2* 2 * • *2 ** ** * * * * * • l * # * 2 * * • i 4.00 j 1 I i 1 I 3.00 »2 2 ** «2 2* 2 *2 4* *25 2 ** *2 •* 2 2* 2* ** 2 • .*•)•• *a a* »«• j 3.00 2.00 *22 j,* ** * . 2* ** *2 * 3* I * •* 2 2 • * * 2* *I * * 4 * ** * 2. 00 1.00 » 3 • * * * 2 * * 2* 3 1* * 2 3 * * *2 * I ** • * ** « * * • 1.33 { i j 0 . 0 • * 19.00 * * * * * • j 2 25.H0 32.60 39.40 * 46.20 * * « * 2 53.00 * 22 32 ** *** * 59.80 66.60 73.40 30.20 * 87.00 0.0 NEED RY /ce . ; • ^J._FILE_ IJVHCU (CREATlCiN TATE » C3/0E/77I 63/13/77 PTITJE 2TT SUEFlie BAL SCATTFUGRAr* OF «rCWN) |\5*9 (ACkOSS) S2C 22.45 29. 35 36.25 43.15 1> J . 35 56.95 63 .85 70.75 77.65 d4.55 « •. 9.CO B.00 2 • * » * 2* * **r 2 3 ** 10.C0 » 5 9 59 59 59 559 99 59 59 79 -999 99199 99 99 3 99 99 69 55 579 99 99199 996 96 76 7(j 72 363 •* +* * 2 « » 1J.33 *.J0 8.00 7.00 • *2 *2 « * 3 »* * * ** * • * « 7.00 6. CO 4 * « * • 2 * * * *2~~* •'»'"» " «" * * * * 6. )J J«.°.°... "3 2* 32 * 2 2 * 3 2 2* • * 2** * * * * * * * 2 * ** * * 5.00 4.00 2 42 *• <4 *** 4 * * * ** • » * • 4.00 3.00 * *• 2* 2** »* ** 3 3 ** 2* »2 * 2 » »3 » * * 3 2 3 — r Z.CO 3 »* » 23 * * • ** * * * 3 3.00 2.33 I 1.00 ** • *2 22 *** ** *• 2 * * 2 2* 2 * * *4 1.00 0.0 *2 2 2 ** * » 2 2 * * 2** *2.«* 2* 2*3 *2 32 45 3* 2* * 132"" 23* 2 ~* 2 *2 «""'•"*" .4 « 4 4 • 4 4 • 4 • • * • 4 • • • * 4 4 19.00 2J.5C 32.eC 39.70 46.60 53.50 61.40 67.30 74.20 81.10 83.00 0.0 •  CO N E E D BY « 0 E ' " ~ [ 'flit IJVMCU CCSMTICK. CAT E - 03/OB/77I SUBFILE CIV SCATTERfiRAP CF (CCWN). K 5 A 9 22.45 29.15 TiTTiTTT PACE 3 0 " IACPOSSI S2C . t-f:;:!-- t.-!-;^..,..^;!!.. f..^;iL., 50;?L 4 7 7 . 6 5 B ^ S 10.00 . 9 9 9 9 9 9 99 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 S S Q ^ r M ^ r w r B r a r s r j r T ^ ' z r ^ ^ r ^ : 10.00 8.00 • * » » * * 2 2 I * 7. CO 2» *• * * « *2 • •** • I I I '""I * 22 3* 2 *I* 9 . 0 0 8.00 7.33 6 .00 5.00 •2 ** 2 2 * * 2 *— •2 2 2» • * 2* 22 • * * •2 2* * • 2""" 21 *2"" 3 ** * I _4_2*l* *»__*2 *2 * » * 6 . 0 0 5.00 1.00 4 »« 2 2 ** ** 2** 3 4* I • 5*3 * *2I * * I _ 2 *• •* * A . 0 0 3. CO 22 *2 33 *2 2 *3 2 *< I 2. 00 ** * * * 2 » * • * _*_*** 2 * ** * *• 2 » * * 2* **I2 **"*"" I I i i 3.33 * I * • • » ** «<• 1 2 . 0 0 1.00 * * * • 2 *2 ** * • *2 ** I* 2 2 *2 *2 1.00 0.0 * . 19 • 3 2* "* *~* * • — • * + 4 *•*_ *2 * »* * * * *1~2 2* *~* »—S* ^"2 , «. 070" 2 5 — — 3 2 ^ — 3 9 . 7 0 * " / ^ o *""n!ir^"iot;r"*""^!3o~^'K!27"*""6r ! i7"*~an-jj Si o Z l_J if* o ~- rj 3 > O i i : r > «t ~> DC o u i re •_1 LO - J It 1 J ' I O O O — — ~ i •o o 180 « _ i .-I M M I o I o 4> • I in I f I i I I i i i i I - r I NEEO BY AGF. TJT7T37T7 P'AGE': 50 \ r _ . F I l F IJVMCU (CPFATICN CATE « 03/Oe/77l SUBFILE RI J " SCATTERG9AM OF (OCWM K569 I ACROSS) S20 10.00 • 99 99 99 •59 998 99 99 99 99 997 99 199 99 995 34 39 99 b5 979 99 98 199 I . . . . . . _ 598 89 84 24 32 3 * 4* ** 2 **•• I 10.00 i I I 1 I I 9. CO • * » ** * * * * I I I * * * • I I 9.33 I t I I • B.OO • • * * * ** * * 1 I * * 3.00 I I I 1 . I I 7.00 • 2 22 » 2 2 * 22 * * 2 * *• ** 2- 22 * I * * 12 I * * * * • " I • I 7.00 J I I I I 6.CO \ "* " ** 2* •2 * * 2 2 *2 ** 3" * i I I 22 * * • I I 6 . 0 0 5 . CO • * * 2 »* • * * 24 2* *2 » 4 22 * 23 I I •* 2*12 ** 22 • * * ** I I • 5 . OJ I I I I I 1 4 .00 »» 4 * 2 23 * *3 * * 4 22* * 2* » 2 I 2 3 13* I 3 • ** 2 * ** * 1 + I 4.00 ~ I ! I 1 3.00 t2* 2 * *z 4*3 2 * » * 4* 3 •4.6 I 2 3 33 j * *i '22 **I2*' I I *2* « **- * t I I J.OO 2.00 • ** 2 ** 2 * * 2 •23 * 1 * »2* • • 23 I I * 2*1 • * 2 * I I » » 2.00 ! | I I I 1 I I l .CO * • • • * * * 31 * • *2 * •2 3 I 2123 I * * * 2* * * I * I 1.0) 0 . 0 • * » * * * »23 • . • • • • • * 19.00 25.90 32.80 39. 70 ---» - - » - - - - « - - - - • - — « - . — - t * • ^--~ — t - - - - T - - — , 46.60 53.5C 60.40 67.30 74.20 81.10 86.00 * *"2 *""3 2" "** *2~*"* »*2 ** *i*'2 '* "»T"*4 — »»"• 2* * 0.0 CO NEED P.Y *GE ,J:<_!fILE IJVr-.CU CCPEATIC* RATE « 03/06/77) SUBFILE HEL SCAT1ERGRAM OF (CCVM K5A9 03/13/77 PATJ^ 5TT (ACROSS) S2C llt±2 29. 2S 36.00 42.BO 49.60 5ft.40 63.20 7 ) . 00 76.BO B3.60 10. CO • 99 99 99 «9 99 99 99 99 999 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 9 99 99 99 99 99 59 I 97 99 867 66 45 *3 *4 42 a « out 1 J.3J I I I 9.00 • * 2 2 * » * a a a a a a * •I I I a 2 2 a I 9.00 8.00 • 4* 4 2 2 2 2 *a *3 a . *2 2 * * * I I *1 « * 2 a 3 8.00 1 I I j 7.00 • 66 54 64 65 *2 54 a* 2* 22* 35 *2 3* 22 2 2 3 3* 2 32 3* *2 I *2 I 5 * 2*3 * a a * a • 7.00 6. CO • 53 23 •3 2* 34 *2 I I I 33" "~a **3 2 " Va" aa 2 33 >3 1 " » » T ? "a'a" -*3-"aa" "4 3" I I ~V a~ aa - 2- a j 6.13 5.00 • 97 59 7* 6* 3 * 92 32 45 6 3 32 24 44 29 3 5* 42 4*4 * * 24 42 36 t I 43 3* •2 22* _3_ a j«2 2 * • 5.00 ""I I I 4.00 • 4* 62 23 23 £2 3 2 a 2*3 32 22 14 2 22 2 3* 3*5 *2 23 3* 2* ! 3 I 52 3* aa 2 4 22 3* •2 * • 4.00 ...... ' I " .. -. . . ! J 3.00 • < 3 »3 22 33 32 a 3* 224 24 83 *4 a • 4 3* 4i> 553 84 72 86 84 23 I I */, 23 4 2 »2 32 3 tt 3.00 ' " 2. 00 • * • 5 *2 2* 4* 3* a 2* * 6* 35 *2 4 2* »* * *22 2 3 *2 24 I I *4 43 * • 3 2 * 2* aa I 2.3J I I I \ t.00 • 2* 2 4* 2 * 3 24 •a •32 * 22 24 * *2 22 • 3 34 4* 5 22 *3 I *2 I ** 42 **5 2 2 a 2 • * • + 1.00 i i r — j 0.0 I I * 3* »• 22 2* * ' * " 2 " * " ~ * 2 * 2 *"2 "'32""* 33" 2*"* 8 62~2*"54~«" 43'22* 4 "" 5 4 * a + 1 1 , + , f 1 » , 1 „ 1 ^ + f ^ 1 1 ^ 19.00 25.EC 32.60 39.40 46.20 53.00 59.80 66.60 73.40 80.20 87.00 0."0 CO ro N f . F.D UY /G = . fllf IJWCU KPFATICr. CAT£ « 03/08/ 771 SUUFIl 1: VAJ SCATTFRGRAC CF ICCfcN ) K565 22.45 20.35 36.25 03/13/77 TOTS 7TJ-(ACROSSI S2C 43.15 50.05 56.55 63.85 70.75 77.65 84.55 f — 10.CO + 59 99 99 99 999 99 99 99 99 999 95 89 9 5 999 99 99 59 55 599 99 95 [8.9 959 67 99 98 59 44o 55 t5 »* 42 + •• < 10.00 { } 9.00 * « •2 * # « 1 5.6u 8. JO • t » * * ** * * ** * * * * 2 8.00 j . •j 7. CO • 2* 22 * * »* • » 2*2 2 * * * 2 * « * * I 7.0) \ 6.CO f * * * "*"" ' 2 * * • "*' "~"'* ~ 6.00 5.00 • * * 2* < **» * * * • •* 2 * 2 * 2* * 3* 2 2* * * » i 5.00 { 4.00 • *» 2 • * • ** *2 ** * • 2 * * • *• «* 2* * * * 4.00 1 I I 3.CO 4 * 3 » » * ** 2 32 » * 2 « * • * * *•> *2 ** ** ** 4 * * J . ) J 2.00 • 2 2 *2 * 2* « * * 2 * ** * 2 22 * 2 2 221 2 *2 * * * * 2.00 1 1.00 • * » » » * * * * * *2 2 * * *3 * ** 2 * * * 1.00 j -—as-46.60 -2*~ { 0.0 • *«• * 19.00 * " "*'"' * 25.90 • • 2* 32.80 2" *3 39.70 '*"»" ~"S 53.5C ~S* 2" 60.40 2 67.30 • 74.20 * 01.10 * » 80. OJ 0.0 CO NEFO hV AGE l l J . F I L F IJVMCU (CPFATICN CAT E • 03/0e/77l J3/13/7/ CAGE dJ SUBFILE VAF SCATTERCRAM OF IDCV.NI i\!65 22.50 29.50 36.50 43. 50 (ACROSS) S20 50.50 57.5C 64.50 71. 50 78 50 35.50 . • — 10.00 499 99 09 899 59 95 869 99 99 999 99 99 599 95 99 559 99 99 999 99 79 999 94 83 785 65 77 223 32 *• 3 • 10.00 I I { { { } 9.00 • • * { * * I * 9.0a I I I I 8.CO •» • • * « * I * * * * * 1 * • * « 8.33 ; 7.00 + 3 * * • * 2 *** } • * *'* *2 2** * »* * 2 * . 7.00 ; I \ 6.00 *i * 22 * * { ** 2 ** ** 2 3 3 I * » * * * *3 + 6.00 __..5.00 4 2 * • 2 *2 * 33 2 * 46 * 1 2** * 2 * *3 2 ** 3 « 2 * * 2 2 • 5.00 { | | j • A.CO 4 * 3 2 » 2 » * * * » *2 2 2* I 32 * ** *• 22 * * 2 * * j 4.33 1 1 1 J t 1 1 { 3.00 **3 • » * *2 * ** } » 4 • • * 2 * 2* *2 ** 2* 2 23 * * 2* • 3.O0 2.00 • * * . » * * * * * * 1 * ** * * * 2 * I * * • * » » • * { 2.00 j 1.00 •** * » 2* * 2* * * * ** * 24 * 22 2* I* * * * * * t 1.00 j ! i 1 o.c *** . 4 — 19.00 * 2 * 2 26.00 33.00 40.00 * [ 2 47.00 «» * 2 4 * * * 1 * 2 * 2 * 54.OC 61.00 68.00 75.00 82.00 • 69.00 3.3 I 185 o 1 • t o 1 fi + •n 1 -M X 1 >V 1 -0 1 '0 o 1 - r in I .•<> • fr 1 CO 1 ~-1 o> [ 1 <M + r » 1 Nf o 1 O • m 1 r -• > a r -i ca 1 <o j * o> ! 1 <J> i ° t CD • in o • * IN ^ . I 4/) <0 i or I - * 1 o> ! vr> +> r -1 c r i t_) 1 ! ct O l o » ' O vT» 1 UJ i *"* * * 1 c r i *  cr-t j 1 <7> i 1 <f o 1 3> tri 1 J> 1 • • o 1 O m 1 CT> ( 1 > * O I cr o ! o> m 1 c | 1 i 1 0 » 1 * c-i 1 =r • I i o i o> ! m 1 c r fr -** 1 V r~i 1 0* \ 1 n 1 <T> o fr r -•y .N O u> Ui in 1 c r »- « cr cr >o r g o o o • o o o o I o • • I <M I CO I I o CO -o •* ~ » c r c r « IM r g * cgl rg r g r g cj < I I I > < -) ct — o o § o o o + • 1° • • . ;o — 3 O u, i / i m C " . F U F . IJVMCU (CRFATICN CAT E » 03/08/771 SUBFILE LOO SC ATT FRGR AM OF ( CCV.N ) N56S ., 22:*° . It:™ !?•!!? ?!'*g„ 5*^°° s s > " ? 2 o 7 0 . 0 0 76 .ao 3 3 . 6 0 1 0 . 0 0 '99 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 I I " " I I 9 .00 • * • I I I I 8.00 • ** * I 9 99 99 99 99 999 99 99 99 99 99 99 76 996 55 33 22 ** « 32 d \ I I I 10.00 s i *- " 9 . 0 0 " 7.00 «*3 . »* * 3 » » * » • 2 ** 2* r * * 3* *< * * * * * * * 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 • * * * * " 1 1 * 2* *2 2 * *2 * * 2 * -2*" 3 * * *7*T 6.00 . 5 . 0 0 *'2 * 2 2 » *2 » 3 2 * * 2 I X I 4. 00 * 2 * 3 2 22 *2 2 ** ** ** 3 2 I I I *2 2 » 2 23 2 • ** * 2 2 2* »2 « • * » * * * * , 2 * ** 2 *2 2 * 5.00 4 . JO 3 . 0 0 • 4* I I 43 2 » * »2 42 * * 3 3 *32 ** 32 11 53 2* 2 2 * 2 **2 34 + 5 2 7 « » I 4* 3 2 +2 2 B— 2 I i. * * I I 3.0O 2 . 0 0 1 I • 3* t 3 • 3 3 2* 2* ft* 32 2 *2 * 7 * ** 52 2 22 •4 33 3* ** *2 4 3* 2* 2 2 • « 2 1 I + 1> A r t 1 I I i I 1 c • U U I " . 1 — — — * I 1 . 0 0 • 3 3 I I »* * 3 ** 2 4* *2 * 32 42 4* i 3 *2 4 *2 *2* 2 43 *2 54 1 2 * *4 *4* 23 4 • I • • I 1 . 0 0 I I 0 . 0 + *2 3 • *2 2* 2* » « 3* 2*2 2 32" . • • • • • - 1 1  19.00 25.80 32.60 39.40 34 3*" *" 0* 3*3 4"5"S>7"26_4F"93 46.20 53.0C 59.80 5* "35 '47'" 4 4 2 2 * « ' « • 66.60 73 . 40 80.20 87 0 . 0 • . .00 >-r NFEO BY AGE \ * . F 1 1 F IJVMCU (CPEATICN CAT: • 03/08/77) 03/13/77 PAGc 110 SUBFILE BAN SCATTFRGRAM OF (CCV.N'1 N569 22.50 25.53 36.51 43.53 5 3.50 (ACROSS) S2C 57.53 64.53 71 .50 78. 50 6'j. 50 . • — IO.CO + 59 59 99 599 99 99 *99 99 99 999 99 99 999 99 65 999 99 99 999 99 99 598 77 94 944 65 46 532 * u ** *2* 10.33 J j j } 9.00 • * * * I * J 5.03 fl.00 • » • » * * j 0.00 J i 7.00 • 3 3 *• *• 3* 2 3 * * 33* 2 1 3 2* 2* •2 4* * *** ** * **2 * *2* j 7.00 \ j { \ 6.CO * 3 3*3""2""'*""* 2 » *** * 3* * 2 21 3 «* * •33 2* ** ** 3* * 3* 2 ** * * } o . 13 5.00 **2 2* » *** *2 " 3 * ** 55 3*2 * « 32 632 •2 »• • 2 **3 *3 I **2 *2 ** * • ** J 5.00 } { { ! 4.00 »*3 • 2 • ** * *34 *2 24 *22 43 22 **2 22 • 2 * 42 *3 2*2 52 3** 2 32 23 * ** . i - 4.00 J I I i 3.00 « 2 » 22 2* 3* 34 4« 532 52 52 672 24 46 730 44 > •23 63 58 4 3 7 5" 45 65 33 335 s 2 *3 i 3.00 2.00 » » •4 *2 * 3 33 » 2** ** 34 43* 3 « 33 25* 6* 3* »* 43 3* 3*2 *2 13 *23 22 23 *35 • 3 *« •« 9 1 2.3 3 J [ { 1.00 +22 3* *3 2 2 » 3 33 *3 *64 2* 27 523 63 * 3 2 6* *3 444 25 I 2 * 3 * * 3* 22 * • 2 1.00 0 .0 *3 *3 «* *2 2 3 19.00 26.OC 4*V"i» *3"42"4~23 33.00 40.03 "2 5 2*5 34"" 47.00 2"" *25'22 4"5 3*3 44 2 532 2* 2 "222" * " 54.00 61.00 68 .03 75.30 82.00 89.00 0.0 CO -o N EEC bY *CE •S-j.F.tlF. IJVMCU ICPEAT1CK OAT E - 03/08/77) 03/1 "j/ 7 7 PTCTJC nnr 5UBFILE UA SCATTERGRAM CF <CCWl\) N569 (ACROSS) S20 22. 50 29.50 36.50 43.50 50.50 57.50 64.50 71. 5) 78. 5 3 85 .5 ) 10.00 »99 99 99 599 99 99 599 99 99 999 99 99 599 59 99 559 55 59 999 99 99 999 95 96 997 44 33 *3 2 10.00 9.00 8.00 • * • *2 * » * * * * » * ** 2 *2 * • 9.30 a. oo 7. CO *3 2* *2 ** ** 2 2 22 * 2* 3 v 2 * 3 - * * * » » 2 * 2 7.3) 6.00 32 ** * 2 ** * 3 * "* *3 2* *~*"* * * *~ 6.00 5.00 24 3* 2 2 *2 * *2 * 23* 2* *23 ** 2 * 22 2* 2* 2* 5.00 4.00 * 22 ** *** 34 2 ** * 2 * * 2 *2 2 *• 22 2* 2 * *»* 2 * « * * « 4.00 T " 3. CO *3 43 3* 22* * 2* * 2 * 32 * 3 ~TF~l 2 3 1 < » 2 * 2 * — 2 * ~ 3 *** * 2 S * 5~ 2 . 0 0 3 22 « * * 2* *4 * 3 ** 2 * 2* * * *4 • • 2 * * * 3 . 0 ) 2.00 1.00 3 * 4* . * « * 22 *** 2 4* * 2* 2* * * * » 3 * *• * ** * * 1.00 "6.0 • » * " ' 3 "•*'•* 2" '"'2 " 2* *2 ~*5* 2* * 2* *'5 * "' 4*"** ** 2** 2"** 3*"' * *3'**2 ** 2 • 0.0 • « » • 1 • 1 • 1 1 « 1 + f 1 + «. + 1 1 > 19.00 26.00 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.00 82. )3 8y . )0 CO CO NEEO BY AGE '•FILE IJVMCU (CRFATICN OATF. » C3/C6/77I PAGE 4 > > SUBFILE GP SCATTERGRAM OF ICCUN) K464 22.40 29. 20 36. 00 42.80 (ACROSSI S2C 49.60 56.40 63.23 73.00 76.80 83.60 IC.CC • * { ; • 13.33 < i J \ ~ ' ' i 9.00 • { 9.00 8.00 • * • | ) * J 8. 00 ; j . i 7.00 • * i * * *i * * * * * 7.00 i \ { 6. CO • • 2 i • j 6. 33 5.00 • • 2 * * | • « * *2 3 •* * * * + 5.00 \ \ 1 — -4.00 *2» » • 2* * *• • * I « * * * * 2 21 ** *• *** • * * + 4.00 I i 3.00 +33 2 * • ** * 3 « * * ** I 2 » 2* » 2 * *2 2* * » * 3 »2 22 • »* » 3. OU 2.CO »62 23 2 *2 42 2J 24 3* **2 24 24 16 ** 2 »• 3 » **3 * 3 3* 2* 23 *2 * 2* 33 ** •« « *2 « . 2.03 1.00 *89 77 46 85 3 *9 84 48 448 66 95 35 35 23 65 42 48 2 23 2 4 « 2 *2 42 5 * 3 32 • • • 2 3 * • 1.00 j i 1 0 .0 »99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99"999 99' 99 99 99 99 99 99 9 99 89 99 99 9Q -99~97"" 77 959 47 69 46 35 35 33 2* 3 • 0.0 19.00 2 « . 8 C 32. 60 39. 40 46.20 53.00 59.80 6 6 . 60 73.40 80.20 87.00 V CO NEED BY td oj/i3/#"7 PACE—rr F H F IJVMCU « C » E A T K N CAT E » 03/08/771 SUBFILE HAt SCATTERGS AC CF ICCWNI i\4t4 (ACROSS! S2 C 29. 35 36.25 43.15 SO.05 56.95 63.05 70.75 77.65 84.55 10.00 1* I 10.00 B.OO 9.00 E . 00 7.CO 7.0) 6.CO 6.00 5.00 * 2 • 2* * * *» » * • * 5.00 4.00 * * * 2 * 2 2 * * » * * * * »* * * * • 4.00 3. CO 5 43 ** 2* * » 2 » • * » * 2 2 * * 2 2 » 2 ** * 2 3* 2* 2 • **• » 3.03 2 3 » 2 43 * « » 24 *2 * 2 « « 32 *2 * « 2 * 22 * 3* ** ** 3 5 * 2* 3* * 2 ** * * *« 2.03 1.00 4 5* 84 *5 324 22 4 22 <4 *46 43 3 75 4*7 52 95 23 22 232 *7 23 35 232 3 * 22 23 322 * * 1.00 0.0 » 5 9 99 99 99 555 99 95 55 69 "959 99199 99 999 99 99 59 99 959 79 99199 994 78 ~75~ '"83*62 2 4 2 * 2 * 2 * 0 0 „ , f , « 1 1 , 1 « + f „ + • — • f , + . 19.00 25.50 32.BO 39.70 46.60 53.50 60.40 67.30 74.20 81.10 Bfa.OO NEFO BY ACE 24 \ 1F.ILE IJVMC'J SUBFILE LIV ICPE*T ICS' CATE » 03/0e/77 1 .. - - - - . . . SCATTERGPAM OF ( ' ~ (COV.NI N464 22.45 29.35 36.25 43.15 50.05 (ACROSS) 56.95 S20 63.85 70. 75 77.65 84.55 10.00 • I I * * I 1 • • — - < 10.00 ! I I I I "" I I 9.C0 * • I I 2 I I I i 1 1* 9.00 I I 1 ! 1 '- .. . . 1 8. CO • * * I I * 4 | 8.3 ) ! I I I 1 1 1 i 7. CO • * 1 I I 2 * 2 • 1 1 1 * * * 2 7.00 "5.00 • » .. . . . . _ I I 1 1 j * 1 I I *# — • * 2 • 1 «" 1 1 » « » 6.00 5,00 »*3 * * I I I 2 2 1 1 2 I * » * 2 » • *2 » * • 5. 00 i I I I . T t 1 4.CO » * » ** • • * » » * I * * 2 I 4 * I * * 33 *» 4 4 4 « » I * l 1 * *ft 4 0 • * •+ 4 . 3 ) 1 I I 1 - - - 1 I 1 1 3 • CO • 4 j 22 3 * 3 2* *2 4 4 t 2 * 1 I 2** * * « 2 3 * 22\IT I I « * » • •» * * « 2 3.00 2.00 *23 35 3* 3 » * 2 * *3 ** *3 *2 I 1 * 2 * 1 * 2 *33 ** 23 2* *2 2*4 22 I I 221*2 32 24 32 * 2 * ft *« + 2.00 | I I I I I I ""I { I i * . — — - - - -1.00 »£9 77 74 {5 » 3 » 46 44 5 52 333 41*5 2* I •34 4* 23 22 2* 345 3 33134 I 365 *3 23 * •* 4 3 2 ft* ft V t 1.00 I I I I I I 99 199 I 0. C •99 — 9 9 9 7 S 9" 9 99 9 9 " 9 9 " 99 "9 9~ 99 79199 99 "99 9~96"7tr «9~ 99 "999" "99" 997 59 79 56 24 334 * 2 « V V 0.3 19.00 25.90 32.80 39.70 46.60 53.5C 60.40 67 .30 74.20 01.10 Ud.00 MD r " NEED OV AGE 0J/IJ7/7 PA3F 34 *> FILE IJVMCU ICRfATION CATE « 0)/Oe/77) >-SUBFILE NV.V SCATTFRGRAM OF <DCl>NI N464 22.50 29.50 36. 50 A3. 5C 50.50 (ACROSS) S20 57.50 64.50 71.50 78.50 8 5.50 9.00 • * I • 9.00 < 8. 10 • j * I 1 0.11 7.20 • j I 7.20 | ; 2 I* »* i 6.30 • ! j : " 1 6.30 i { j 1 5.40 • j { •j 5.'40'~ 4.SO • • * 2 * * I * »* Tf * I r$ j 4.50 I * * ** * * i * * * * I * * 2 j 3.60 • j j i 3.60 I 1 " ~ • i I 3* *2 »• 2*3 * 2 * I ** * • 2 * * 3 *2 22 3 2* I 2** *2 * ** * * c . ' U • J J j 2. 10 123 1.80 • •4 5* 53 ** 3* 22* *3 32 ** *2 2* 2* *3 2* •» *» ** 3 * *2 1 322 * * •* 2 *• •« 2 ) l . sn { j' 1 I C.90 *62 74 92 922 *3 2 423 26 4* 25* 33 44 43* 4 2 422 6 44 422 *4 * 236 6* 22* *2 2* 32 * * * f 0.9) J | j 0.0 *96 99 99 999 59 99 999 66 99 B99 99 99 557 89~99 T59" 7'rW~71ST~52"97 593~92~7* 5 73~~66~2*~ * * * *• 0.0 19.00 26.00 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.00 82.00 89.00 . 1 NEED HY ACE F.ILF IJVMCU (CRFATICr. OATg . 03/0F/77J SUBFILE RIJ SCATTEKGRAH OF (TCWM l\464 "03/13/77 P~AG"C W - , , - c JACROSSI S2C !!;.3; it'll 'I'll 56.95 <>3.o5 70.75 77. b 5 a^ . ss 1C.CC • 9.00 2*1 * **< I * * * I 13.30 * 2 * * * * I * ** * I I I " """" " ~ I » * « * I « 3 » 2 • *• * • * 9.00 7.00 • » ft* T I I " I ' " " ' 2 * * 2 * * * » » » 2 2*12 » * 2 7.00 6. CO 2 * *** * * * 3* 2 *3 2 * * "* 2 * * " « 2 *"" * T2* - ***'"**— 6.0 3 5.00 * ..* ** * *• 222 ** 22 *._2__*_ _._*_** 24_ * 234 *2I2* ** _ * * *2 ** * * • 5.00 4.00 3 » * » • » 3 * ** 3* 2 2* *43 * I * * * * * * » * » » * 3 ** , 2 2 * * * « I 2 *2 3 •* *2 * * « I 4.00 3.30 2. 00 3 » • » » 2 •* 2* 32 2* 23 *3 *•* 24 3 42 » 2 3* 3*« 32 34 22 72 9*2 63 I *3 33 352 * » 2 33 * 322 2* *3I22 3* 42 2* *• 2 ~ I I 2* 54 52* « 35 25 *• 937 22 52145 23 2 52 *2 • * * « * « • ~T ~ 3.03' 2.33 1.00 64 64 63 55 44* 79 59 67 54 644 65 44 57 754 2 6 43 52 6*4 47 6 133 424 55 4* • *2 2 * 2 * ' I 1.00 0 .0 *99 99 56 59 777" 56 59 97 95 975 76 . » • • «• * 1 +  19.03 2J.9C 32. 00 39.7 ) 7 34 5T2 v T6"~*&~ 3'4r'76-24Tvr"233 --2-3"»'~%—* * 2* *2 » ' 0.0 46.63 53 .50 63.43 67.30 74.20 81.10 lid. 00 V j J NEEC BY /CF ' ~ • •I £ I LE IJVMCU (CREATICK C AT E • 03/0B/77) SUHF11= HEL * — SCATTERGRAC CF fCCWN) M6A " 0 3 7 0 7 7 7 " >* A G E 5 4 (ACROSS) S2C It'™ , 4 2 < f l ° ' * 9 ' 6 0 5 6 ^ ° 63.ZO 70.00 76. B, 33.6) 10.CO • 9.00 8.00 7. CO 6.00 21 I * 10.00 9.00 •2 * 7.00 * * * 2 2 6.00 5.00 * 2 » 2 ** • 2 2 2* I I * *__» * » » 2 » * 2 « i' i i 5.00 4.00 ; ** *2 2* * r 3 •* 3 22 * 2*3 2* ** 2 •* ** * •* I "I " " 3. CO • ** 42 3 4* * * 2 *2* 3* 42 I 4 * • * 4.00 2.CO 7 5 » 6 « <4 3* 53 32 3* »23 « * 23 2 * 2 2 * *2 42* • 42 4* 33 J *3 * — » » 3 3* » 2 — * — * — Z — 5 — I I ,_ - - I 5 » 4 « 43 53 ;S3 43 62 22 54 34 *2 4 222 » 2 2 « 3 *3 « •* 1.00 9 99 99 99 57 75 57 58 654 45 94 1 s.-ir 2.00 49 25 66 67 642 56 79 84 55 59 59 53 632 45 23 3* 3 22 *2 * 2** -\ • : \ l .oo I 0.3 • 19 99 99 99~99~ 99 99 99 "59 999 99 99 99 99 99 99 99"T99 _99~99 -99 _9"9~99 "99~9S~9"99 "9'6" 57 "3 7" 24 6 2 - « - y " *52 25-10 32^60 39.40 46.20 * 53.00 ^ " s ^ B o " * " " ! . 6 o " " * ~ " 7 3 ^ o " ' " ^ ! ^ " " * " ^ ! ; ) 0 0 . 0 " (-1 o o 195 ° o ! o o v i *c L~~ 1 . I U. r "» o X > X > < -J ct UJ U. H -J CD < ~ Z2 <-» JJL V I V l * i o o •o i <M •1*1 1 TO 1 O 1 i * ' ' * ; M 1 1 o J - 1 ,co * • l ••O 1 ,r*\ t ,cn i 1 * * ' 1 1 o |H9 1 ;0* * • > 1 r-i"° ! « i r° ' c l ;o i o lo- + • • i :C7» fr 0 I o iO I HO ,o> I 1 I o> • lo> I ! » cr I <-> !<.-• i m • CO I i I ,C7> t L ! cr< I vJ> I Cv I cr I o* * io< I |0> I o i O • < |U> I <M| I I m !<7> I i !<J> | • w< i w> i i o l 0 - I OI cr * • cr NEED bY AGE 03/13/7 7 "-PA-Ccr " 7 4 > — F.IIF IJVMCU SUBFILE VAF SCATTERGRAM QF < CR FAT ICN DATE » 03/OE/77) (DCkN) F-464 22.50 29.50 36.50 43. 50 50. 50 t ACROSS 1 5 7.50 S20 64.50 71.50 78.50 8 5.50 10.00 • I * I * * 10.00 < { { . . . .. I 9.CO • * \ j 9.00 n.co • * | * J 8.00 ; j 7.00 • * •{ * « * i * i 7.00 j i 6.00 •* * i * * * * * * * * 1 6. 00 5.CO • • ** • * * - * * * 2 ** i • » I ; | ! . A.00 • *• » ** * * 21 * • * * * i ** * *** • 4.00 J 1 1 I I { 3.00 «42 • * 2* • « « . « • z* * ** * *« « 2 * * * ae * * ** 2 * » ** •» v * » . 3.00 2.00 *96 »* 4 2* { 22 **4 * 21 ** *22 * *2 22 ** 2* 2* 24 I* 2* *2 22 ** *2 *3 2 * t 2.00 l.CO *9t 53 22 424 3* 35 225 24 85 27 32 42 652 32 24 33* 4 95 223 22 13 346 5 6* 2 2 34 32 * 2 32 * 2 • I.00 | { j 0.0 «-99 19,00 59 99 589 57 99 "699"99~~9~9~99ir 26.00 33.00 40.OC 97 99 559 4 7. 00 99 99 579 54.00 55~55T 899"" 61.00 99 ~W99 7~S'5~ 59 —874 ~3*~ 7 3 22 5 68.00 75.00 82.00 32 2* • 89.00 0.0 NEED PY *0E _ l _ ' , F ! L e IJVMCU (CPFAT1CN OATC . 03/06/77! SUBFILE SAS miZf.±U 19.00 2t .CC 33.CO 40.00 47. 0 .0 00 54 .00 61.00 68.00 75.00 82.00 69.00 I-* o o o o i i ~* O . » » I 1/1 -O • CO fr o a: o <J vf * •< • A — -O m O' c z X 0| I ; I ; + • w • D fi C <J O o i r - J x O > <r o - » — » a o o • >- L U of £ • - J L U O LUU. H L U _i C  < Z - U . V> */> i i i r g ! r g ! ret Irg 198 » • ~ — i r g i I l I O * • £> ' r g + !•>• I |« ! ;0 I cr m | a I l co i<o fr . r i - ! c r I ! o I cr :o> i i i cr C7> cr C7> l mi I o> i o cr fr • • • • cr o o , — 'rr : l N F c n n v Arc . s - : S u e , J V S ; N u ^ . ^ < m l 3 i n " " " w t l w " ~ — ) — 22. 50 ? « : . = . n V | M (ACROSS) S?0 io.co ; , ^  t ^ : i :: f::_,__^_ T_ Iu5o ^ d 5 . M ' - i - L"l "* * i *2 * ; r - r r - ; ^ ^ — • V' 0 0 * • "~ =-7—t „ ', „ , ; , • 1 ' ... ! ^ ^ - ^ r T ^ r j ^ ^ — f 57013 1 • . — - ----- ! i 2-i2 * * 432 J ** 6 - 3 7 ? . , , - 1 f ' • 1 i£_£ L_3 2* *5 i 2 • » 3 5 * « ' I 1 2 3 2 2 * » 3.00 . 1 1 I I ' - ; - I I 7'00 f * • 2 • *2* » 2 2 . 2* 2 . 2 534 . 3 , 1 '". { — - -~ j 1 2 2 2 2 * 3 * 5 <*3 2 *22 . 2* • *2 I 7 1 ~ ~ - > 0 0 T " « ^ r ^ u - w r , - * . 2 3 - , v „ ^ r i . - 2 i 2 . . ^ v . 2 i i , . . , i — — — ' T I • 6.00 -^ p - j i - , . ^ ; , ^ • 1 r - — — •" • 5.00 i J ,• : " . " - !""""' ..... 1 — - — 3 ' 0 0 34 4* 353 52 73 353 4? 5 4 ^  J. t-, , . . I 1 \o , — » 0 3 / 3 « . J t l 74 i4 4 3 4 - ? 5-l } 4 - : » 3 U 4 j 2^-3 J . > . . - 2 | , , •"-I j ^ - ^ - ^ ^ ^ ^ - ^ " » 69 9 3 , „ --^l^^l^, 4* 332 2 *2 . « , 5 I ] : " 1 * 3 : 1 2 2 * 2 * 4 * » 4 ** ** 2.00 p w } . , „ , „ „ „ , „ „ M , „,. - M M — 2 - — j 1—• J : — _J N EFC HV AGE — . H i I E I J V M C U (CRF AT ICK C AT E = 0 3 / O R / 7 7 I SURF i i >: BA -SCATTERGRAM OF CCCWN) N46 4 Trrrrm P-XGS—rnr , C „ (ACROSS) S 2 0 jl'50 3 6 , ' J 0 4 3 , 5 0 5 0 , 5 0 5 7 , 5 0 FC4>5° 7 1 ' 5 U 7 B . S O d 5 . 5 J 1 0 . 0 0 • 9 . 0 0 a. oo 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 5 . 0 0 4 . 0 0 3 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 1 . 0 0 I * * * * * *2 * 2 » 2 * * ** 31 * 3 * 2 * » * * 2 3 » *2 2 * * 2 * • 3 2 I I • « « » 2 * 3 * * I I ** 2 _ * * 2 * * 2 5 » 2 » 2 » 2*3 * * 3 *2 2 » 5 2*2 3* T t I 4 2 2 3 5 2 * 3 * * 2 2 3 * 2 2* * * 3 2 6 * * 52 5 • 4 * * 2 4 * • 3 * I _ I 23 4 3* 2 3 2* 244 4 3 2* ;i* ii * * * 4 * *6 I 5 58 9 6 3 6 9 36 33 3 6 5 46 3 5 2 8 3 8 9 34 853 5 6 42 344 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 53 9 8 3 89 7 6 5 5 9 9 3 2 5 6 4 5 55 6 9 8 98 4 8 8 3 9 9 3 8 8 2 7 8 3 5 5 9 7 4 6 6 5 I 1 0 . 0 0 * 2 * * * 2 2 2 * * **w 2** * « » 2 2 2 2 * » * * * 2 3 2 • ~S *2 *** TT * 3 4 3* 2 * * * *2 * * * 4 8 7 63 5 4 2 * 2 * *2 3* 9.00 7 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 5 . 0 0 4 . 3 3 3.JO 2 . 0 0 1 . 0 0 O O 0 . 0 • ii 55 9 5 9 9 5 9 9 99 55 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 " ~ 9 9 ~ 9 3 9 _ B ^ -^5 2 6 . 0 0 3 3 . 0 0 4 0 . 0 0 4 7 . 0 0 5 4 . 0 0 6 1 . 0 0 6 8 * 0 0 * ~ ~ 7 5 . * 0 0 ~ " " F "IT.OQ' * * 8 9 . 0 C 3 . 3 S U 8 F J L E , J V C P U K R M T K N C A T E ' 03/OB/77, SCATTERGRAM QF (CCWNI N « 7 t ' — 22.40 2S.20 u . n n 6.CO • 5.AO • 42. BO 49.60 • 1. , 1_ * » * (ACROSS) S20 56.4C 63.20 70.00 - • • t 1. *I 2 * 76.60 83.60 - • • 1 — . — 6.00 6.00 • * i . 40 4. fO 4.20 3.60 3.CO 1 .80 1.20 0.60 * » • <2 ** « 99 76 54 59 428 96 44 33 64 525 99 0 . 6 *95 99 99 59 999 95I 99~<9~89~999 * » * * * *2 * 2» 2 2 3* : * 2 - * ~ » -2 * * 2 * 2 ** 8 62 929 76 95 26 32 55* 46 34 7 c on i-> o r o o . _ . * * * • f • * 2 * * * 5 26 23 32 2* * ** « * o. 00 5.4 0 4.80 4.20 3. 60 3.0) 2.40 l.d'J " 1.20 0.60 0 .0" 88.00 ro o NEED HY *GF — — " f lLE IJVMCU (CREATICN CATE » 03/0E/77I SUOFILE LIV ~ SCATTERGRAM OF (CCV.M l\576 "TJT7T3T7T" , . , (ACROSS) S2C " . 3 5 36.2S 43.15 5 1. J5 56.95 63 .05 7) .75 77.65 84.55 6. CO • 5.40 4.80 * * 2* * 3* • 2 * l * _ ' _ I I "' I I 6 .0J *2* * * »2 • 43 * I 3* *2 I 5.40 4.20 4.20 •2—>-3. tO 3.60 3.00 I * 3.00 2.40 I 2.40 « » « » 3 * • 2* * 23 • » I « * * 1.20 1.2 J 46 66 67 84 723 63 39 7* 32 734 24 58 42 245 5* *3 *2 35 548 32 36134 42 *4 32 ** 22 2 « » I 0.60 0.60 o 0.0 »99 99 97 59 959 99 99 99 99 ~959—7"5 • • + + 1 +  19.00 2J.5C 32.8C 39.70 <iTS<TiW"57-5rmiftl9~99T99~90 T W 9 9 • ' bV57"~6"36' 24 22 t • f + «. 1 f + 1 + 1 f 1 46.60 53.50 60.40 67.30 74.20 81.10 *J 2*« +. 88.0C 0.0 NF'EO uv *GE 03/13/77 PAGE" 3b >-KIIF IJVMCU SUHFILF. NWV SCATTERGRAK OF • CPEATICN C AT E • 03/00/77 1 JCCWM N576 22.50 29.50 36.50 43 (AC ROSS) .50 50.50 5 7.50 52 C 64.50 71. 5) 78. 53 85.33 6. CO • j * * ! ! ! I ! 2 » * * « 2 A * T .. . t. • { 6.00 5.40 • 1 I I 5.43 _ . 1 ! r ** i « i *.eo • * * ' 2 • * I * 2* » 2 3 » 2 2 * * * j 4. 83 i i i i i i i . j 4. 20 • I 4.23 'j i i 3.60 • i i i I 3.60 3.00 • * * • i i i " i " . i i * • + 3.00 i 2.40 • i i i I 2.40 ! i I -I » • * * ** 2 3 * 2 I * » i i.eo • I 1 I 1 1.80 1.20 • I I 1 j 1.20 133 49 63 556 *7 95 435 44 94 276 64 74 34* 48 5* 4*3 25 62 422 I 22 *3 I •23 33 ** ** *2 * * *I 0.60 • I I I I 0.60 0 .0" » 9 9 19.CO 99 99 999 99 59 999 69 W^W'99 26.CC 33.00 40.00 I 1 I 99 997 69 99 999 59 9$ 898 47.00 54.OC 61.00 56 95 797 93 92 792 77 33 34* *3 » • • 68.00 75.00 82.33 89.33 0 .0 t — — — — — — — — — — — — — ~ 1 . N F FD BY AGF J J / 1 3 / 7 7 PTXT J=ILF _ IJVr'CU (CFEATlCr. CATE » 03/0e/77l SUBFILE P I J " SCATT FRGP.AK OF <CChM M57c 22. 45 29.35 36. 25 43.15 50.05 6.00 • IACPOSS) S20 56.95 63. 05 70.75 77.65 84.55 ** » * * 5.40 4. EQ ** * 4 2 6.00 ** * 2 4 2*2 ** * 2 I * ** * 2 • * 5.40 4.20 — — * *— *_ *•_** — *—__„_#_ 22 4.20 3.60 •*-»3-«-*-»—»2-32--»-3*3—2—ft-23-2**-* »--«-» » 3.60 3.00 • 2 * * * *2 * 2 ** *2 * *3 2 » I *2 ** *2 * • 3.00 2.40 2.4) «» *• 2 ««« « » 2 *3 •* 1.80 « » » • 3 » • * 132 ** * « * * I .20 3 4« 2* *4 ;94 !4 *5 59 6* 57* 72 22 26 353 0.60 *2 53 22 4*6 3* *»I2* *2* 2 • * * T T u o 1.20 0.60 ~0.0 *95 55 99 "59 557 59 '99 99 99" 999~99 • + * , f 1  19.00 25.90 32.SO 39.70 I I * i 99" 99 999 24 59 "59 69 999 "59 "55199" 799" 95 9 7 "44 "5* 5*4 52 22 2 '2** 0".""0 * » * * • • • • * • 46.60 S3.5C 60.4C 67.30 74.20 81.10 88.00 O 'OJ/lJ/77 "TTCTJc 5TT FILE. IJVMCU ICRFATION CATE « 03/06/771 SUBFILE HE L ~ SCAT TER (j^  4 M OF (OCWN) K.576 , 27.40 79.20 36.00 (ACROSS I S20 J2.80 49.60 56.40 63.20 70.00 76.80 6.00 • ' » 0 3.50 J.4C 4. 80 2 * * 22 * * * ** * 2 * * 2 * 3 * » » 32 2 2* 24 24 2 » 22* 3* * 4 «2 * » I I • I I 6.00 2 * * *2 2 2* 32 3 42 24 42 4* *2 3 1 4.20 * » - * — » 2 — * - » * — * — * — » _ • _ * _ * — * 2 4.20 - 2 - » * - 4 4 - 3 2 4 - 5 - - 4 — 2 — 4 - 2 2 - 2 3 ~ * - * - 3 -I * 3 » » « 3.60 3.60 3. CO * * * * * I I _**_.*_* *3 *_2 *3 _4_*2 « » * * _ » * _ 2 * ** 2 *2 * I ' " " ' " " I I 3 . 0 ) 2.40 2.40 1 .80 23 33 2 » « 2 77 « » 2 « • > • » » « « • - , » 52 «2 3 » 2 » * I .20 I 99 99 99 59 99 99 99 99 979 99 99 I l .ao 1.20 0.60 99 99 99 99 999 89 99 97 90 79 56 79 545 63 22 22 *3 33 * * I I ) .6J 0 .0 »99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 999 99" 99" 9 . • • • » + • 1 _ _ 19.00 25.80 32.60 39.40 V " " '99 e9'99'"99""9'93 67"68"58 44 6* 2 • "*2 t. 80.20 87. 4,-46.20 53.OC 59.80 66.60 73.4 0 0.0 o ON 207 o , a. in o a o •0 o JC I O • v CM CM o -> o o < r > 2 _ i oa < — D O H i f l a o 1 o ' + • o *M * • 1 <o 1 CO '<M 1 '•» 1 + -O 1 .«r 1 1 o ".O 1 — .If! + • 1 _ « « 3 1 CD 1 1 * 1 1 o 1 IM * * 1 1 I-1 V. + Im 1 ;o* 1 o o 1 <n ;o> • • ! '<J> 1 o •» . 0 . u 1 o j >r 1 !0> 1 r i^ ;o* 1 » 3 jCr 0* |co w 1 o i u-t jw 1 f i .cr- 1 *fi •a cr-o> 1 o cr 1 ~c t sd 1 -st p-0* cr 1 o I r-cr j> • cr 1 CT1 cr I m Cr cr 0-3> i f 1 co 0- •> • 0> t <\J CT 1 H"» 0 -cr CT to 1 «-» 1 v o> + • cr t cr o> cr Cf 1 o cr 1 o cr • • • 1°. I f N E EC flf AGE . ' . F I L E IJVMCU (CFEATICK. HATE • 03/08/77) SUBFILE VAF SCATTEHCAf CF (CCWN) K576 " 0 3 / 1 3 / 7 7 PTJTe 7TT (ACROSS) S2C " • 5 0 . 29.50 36.50 43.50 50.50 5 7 . 5C 64.50 71. 50 78. 50 35.50 6.CO • t • * , + > * » • 6.00 * » » 4.80 422 • 2 *22 * * *2 * *• *« 5.40 4. 80 4.20 4.2 J 3 .60 3.60 3.00 . 2__ 2 » 2 3.00 2.40 2 .40 2 * 1.80 1.20 1.20 87 63 33 355 37 95 208 *5 66 787 94 45 449 42 47 435 45 77 52 46 3 463 5* 3* 3»2 2 *2 *2 ** 0.60 0.60 3.0" » 9 9 99 99 789'56 85 £69 « 99" Y89 "5^_99""599~99" 99 "«<$" 9'9"_99 99"9~9^89-979 "54-"99""8'9r63" 38 3*5 54 2* 3** O.""0' * — + •— — — • — • + + — • • • — + _ . - • —— 4 ^ 19.00 26.OC 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.OC 61.00 68.00 75.00 82.33 89.03 !\3 O CO > • *f ILE IJVMCU (CPEATION C AT E _» 03/0 8/77 ) SUBFILE SAS SC ATTE"CP AM OF > (COWN) Kilt 22.50 29.50 36.50 43.50 (ACROSS 1 S20 50.50 57.5C 64.50 71. 50 78.50 85.50 • • 6. CO • ** I* 2 * * * • 6.00 I \ " " " " " " " ! - . - - - • . . . 5.40 • 5.40 I 3 » 4. EO * 4 ' * » * »* * 2 * » * 3 * » 3 * * * * 2 * I 4.83 } { j j 4.20 • ^ 1 I 4.20 3.60" • " - 1 I \ 3".60~' •• 3.00 • • 2* * 2 * * * • * i » * « 2 t 3.00 j J 2.40 » J \ j 2.43 ] i ' i ' 122 * 2 • * I * 2 * « * * * * * * * * * j 1.60 • ! { i i . d J 1.20 • { J | 1.20 179 95 59 995 95 78 749 95 99 497 97 86 669 77 *9 732 72 52 442 34 42 533 *2 3* 372 32 * 2*2 » * » l 0.60 • J j I 0.60 0 .0 « 9 9 . • — 59 99 T « 9 9 99 97 089' 99' 99"''999 ~99'49" 999""" 99 97 9S9-99""9"5"969""96" 98""'996 97 87' 353 99 43 7*9 32 52 32* I 1 9 . 0 0 2 6 . 0 0 3 3 . 0 0 4 0 . 0 0 47.00 54.CC 61.00 68.00 75.00 8 2 . 0 0 8 9 . 0 0 • NEEC RY *f.F . F I I F . I JVMC SUbFILE LOO SC ATT ERGfl AM 0 3 / u / ; / "T7CTJE 98~~ 6.CO (CPfATICr. CA TE » 03/08/77) . (ACROSS) S20 ? ' . A 0 N > N S2 79.20 36.00 42.00 49.60 5^_L- --"'f---* ** * 2 2 2 *2 *3 •* » * 2 * 6.00 5.40 4.80 • » *2 • 2 - 3 « * » » » 2 * » * *2 * * *3 22 * * 33 » 3 * 4.80 4.20 4 .2) 3.60 , — » w 2 — . — »*-2 »-.«-»»- » - 2 - 2 » - 3 * - 3 4 - 5 5 - 2 4 - 3 2 — 2 - 4 * — -2-44-33-23-42 3.60 3.00 2* 1 I » 22* * 2 _ * _ * 6 22 » 3 • »2» « 2 27 *3 33 I -I I 3» « 2 *2 « 2 ** 3 .00 2.40 2.40 1. 80 1.20 » 2 2 2« « » 3 3» 32* * 3* 42 22 42 3* 22 22 2* 33 2« 22 T 3* 3» 2 • » » 2 3 * l . a r 1.20 0.60 66 69 53 73 53 57 79 78 585 67 98 88 95 34 65 83 359 75 66 47 54 I I 54 33 522 44 * « 2 2 *4 0.60 0.0 j-cj-99—99 9 89 "99" 99 99" 99" 59 99'89' 998' 53 "44"'42 2' 3« 4" • 2» 59 99 99 "99 59 99 99 59'599 99 99 99 99 99 ^ ^ ^ _ + + + + f , , 1 9 : r o ~ t " i 5 : r o ~ , " " 3 2 : ; n " t " 3 9 : ; r " ' " r 6 : r o " * " 5 3 . o o 5 9 . 8 0 6 6 . 6 Q ^ — _ _ » — 5 7 _ _ _ _ "67o 1 i b NEFO BY AGE .FILF IJVMCU (CREATION DATE « 03/08/ 77) SU8FILE BAN. " "" SCATTERGRAM OF (OCWN) K576 Oj/nm pxn—rrr (ACPOSSI S2 3 " • 5 0 29. 50 36.50 43.50 50.50 57.50 64.50 71.i>0 78.50 85.50 • • • 6.00 5. 40 4. BO 4.20 3.60 - + — — t — — .— — * 2 * 2 ** 2 522 22 26 •* * « 2 2 2 2*2 * *3 273 2* •52—* * * - 2 — 2 53-84 -4* -342-3 •* ** 33 2** 32 *2 3 * « *2 I I I * 33 * 6.00 I 24 225 72 * 3 53 32 4*3 *4 22 6*3 *2 2 *2* * * I • 4 6 - 2 3 4 - 2 2 - 2 » - 2 4 3 - * 5 - 2 3 - 6 2 4 - » 5 - 5 4 - * 5 4 - 3 4 - 4 3 — 3 * - 2 — » * - * » - - -5.4 J 4.83 4.20 3.60 3.00 2* ** 2 2 2* *22 _*_.52 _343_2 23 45* •* « 234 63 47 423 23I «* 2 3 _ 5*_ 3 _ J » j4 3 _ 2 I I * 2 3.03 2.40 2.40 *» • *• * 2* » 22 3 3 4* 3 222 « 2 34 2*2 3* »• 5 *2* * 1* *2* * •* **2 • 1.23 1.80 1.20 45 72 55 964 84 64 664 65 79 963 56 54 657 43 53 *53 55 66 323 43 ** **4 ** 2* 533 *4 2 0. 60 3.63 0 . 0 19 99 99 99 599" 99 99 "999' 99 "99" 599 99 99 599""99~"79'5 5 9 ^ • 00 26.00 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.00 82.00 85!o0 0.0 NEED HY AGE , ' .F ILE IJVMCU (CREATION DATE - C3/0E/77) 03/ l J/// PALii l l o SUBFILE BA SCATTERGRAM OF ICCWM F.576 f 22. 50 29. 50 36.50 43.5 3 (ACROSS) 50.50 57.53 S2C 64.53 71.50 73.50 t>5. 00 7. CO • { * ,l « < 7.0) 6.30 • { j 6.3J I * * * » 5.60 • I * 2 2* 2* * ** * 1 3 * * « * * I 5. 60 ; I j 4.90 • * * 2 *3 2 * I I • * * • 4. 90 I ; I I 4.20 • I * * ** « i * « 22 2 2* * I I * * A * 4.23 3.50 • j I I I { 3.50 ) r i i \ I * * 2.80 • j * » *2 i i i > * * + I 2.80 1 1 i . I i i j 2.10 • 12 » * * * * * * *2 I 22 *4 * * * * * • } * 2.10 1.40 • J { j 1 .43 153 45 43 4*3 24 32 224 *4 37 24* 85 43 424 22 42 234 ** 3* 223 2 3 3*3 * 2*4 2 2 j 0.70 • { j * 0.70 J { | j 0.0 »55 99 99 599 99 99 999 99 59 999 99 99 599 59 99 959 99 99 999 99 99 999' 97"99 595" 76 35 "26 * 2 « • 0.0 I 19.03 26.CO 33.00 40.00 47.03 54 .00 61.00 68.00 — T r . • — r 75.] 3 32.00 — • — --<., 89.00 f N E EC EY AGE 03/13/77 PAC. 6 o ; 1, FILE IJVMCU SUBFILE GP SC ATTERGP.AM CF (CPEATICN CATF. « 03/08/77) (CCkN) K299 (ACROSS) S20 22.40 29.20 36.00 42. BO 49 .60 56.40 63.20 70.00 76.80 63.63 • 5.00 • 2 2 * * ** • * * »* 12 2 2 2* « 2 * 3 ** * 3* * 1 * » 2 » 2 * « * » * » 5.00 j | I I I 1 4.50 • 1 I I I 4.5U . . . I I j r> 4.00 » 2 * 22 3 44 2 2 33 2 ** *2 * * 32 ** * 2 I I 2 3* 2 I * 2 2 2 33 * * 4. 00 o | _ 1 I I I 3. 50 + i I I I I 3.53 • | I I I " 3 .00 + * • * * I* • a • * * I I 3.00 2.50 • } I I 1 I 2.50 i J I I I { 2.00 »43 32 * 43 22 25 56 52 * 4 » 4 2 *2 46 3 32 3* 22 I 2 2 *2 32 «2 •* I 2 » 2 * * * « • 2.00 { 1 I ™; -I I I 5 1. JO } I I I 1 1.53 1.00 • ** 2 22 25 • *2 3 22 *3 3 *2 *2 24 22 *2 4 * •« I 1 3 » » ** 22 * ! * * • 3*» 2 * * ** » 1.00 I I I I i 0.50 • i I I I 0.50 j 1 I I 79 « " 9 " 9 "97~S9~"99" J 0.0 » 9 9 99 59" 59 59 '5 5 "99 99""599 "99 ""99'99~" 99^99"~99"~ 99 '9 99™ 98"" 977 «9 99 45 77 45 64 2« 2** 0. 0 19.00 25.8C 32.60 39.40 46.20 53.0C 59.60 66. 60 73.40 80.23 67.00 NEED BY ACE lt_F.UE IJVMCU ICREAT ICN CAT E • 03/0e/77) ' J J / 1 3 / / 7 PAGE nr SUBFILE BAL SCATTERGRAM Of (CfUNl K295 2?. 45 20. 35 36.25 43.15 50.05 lAlhCSS) S20 56.95 63.B5 70.75 77.65 84.55 5.00 4.50 4. CO 3.50 3.00 * 4 * * 4 4 44 4 4 ** I *2 * 2 * 4 _ I _ I I I  j 3 2* * 3* * 2 I* * * 2 * * 2 43 2 «2 * * 2 » * » 3 * I 3 4 « 3 » * *3 ** 2 * I * 2* 2 "* " i * 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 _2.50 2. 50 2. CO 34 7 3* 25 *** 3 52 »* «3 2*2 *3I 3* 424 *3 2* *3 2 2 J3 * * 4 4 * I 4 4 • 4 4 * * « * 2.JO 1.50 I .00 0.50 3 23 »22 •* ** *4 2 42* *3I33 2* **4 53 * 3 I _ I I I I 4«* 3 22132 3 "1 .50-2 ** 1.00 0.50 0. C J_2_ i : i i ' 9 99 59 59 S99 59 "99 _9"9~99 _999^919T"99 T9^ _9"9 _ 9 00 25.90 32.BO 39.70 46.60 53. SC .60.40 67.30 5 8 83 85" • • 74.20 76* 32 22 81.10 *2 **• *. O.J 215 > o - I X cc c. i i j o O 1 1 'O o O j o o o O i n o tn i n o • • • 1 • • rt 1 m o i 1 t | j . o • * i 1 i i * * l i • 1 1 » 1 ' » i fa i i j 1 1 1 i 1 | TJ i n I i i • ! l . t • 1 IA i • I 1 1 1 * • t t i ft 1 j ft i » 1 i i i | j rt i i t 1 ] i 1 o i » * I 1 ft rt i ~ 1 ! -CM * • i • I i » i i fM 1 ;-*• 1 so m i i i i * i •o » i i ft ri r » * i ft * 1 ft 1* 1 r » i * * i * i i <0 1 i j • i t i 1 o 1 l l M rvj * CM j » j i ft «. • | t 1 I •* | ; | * l i ft :cr i r -1 >N ! m 1 * ! i ft jco 1 | 1 | I i 1 • i « m t fM a> * o i ^ s 1 « i i ft | ft \J3 1 r-~- 1 1 i O J ; i * i 1 :* ft V- t o i -t 1 1 j* m • l icr | m 4» ft j j j • l fM p * • 1 j i i 1 r -\ -i- ! » 1 1 * 1 i I !c 1 ^ 3 i n 1 «N 1 m j i '<J> 1 X • * n j ; r l j 1 •st ,v + m 1 * i * [ J j rt » f ! O 1 ! • 1 rO f t 1 » 0> | o i (NJ ; ! * j 1 , m » 1 « " i i » i ft t J ; * fM 1 * •cr | o i * i 1 ft i j fM fM t ' !C-  «. n l <r j fM | I : » ft fM U* j c l j 1 t 1 1 • • rt i * t i i ft w» » o I m j 1 ft ! i m m ff 1 m j i j' | 1 l rvi ; 1 1 . 1 i ft | i ;cr i o ft * fM jcr i i n * I t 1 * • i * ft 1 CM I 1 (N 1 ft rt I fM i n | | | ! I o * I '33 | * ft | CM | ft ju> * o | | j I ! i 1 ft 1 ft m ) lO 1 1 fM rt I ' fM | cr t o . c r , • t rt cr | o 1 * 1 | fM fM r - l 1 * • • j * >r ft co I >r m ! 1 | i m I ; m rt | r - 1 • fM 1 l « rt t rt :cr > | rt i • i , ft | 1 J3> 1 1 1 j l i» 1 | I I03 t O ! ! i 1 r -* i | • I fM i ft 1 (3> * . * « * • j ! l 0 * 1 m j rt 1 icr i cr i i 1 * i i • * i « ! \G> i m tr i i I CM i i fM i fM lo> 1 * i ft i ft cr * m I i i nj i fM 10- 1 i * ft i rt i ft :cr i o i i i i +- fM fM i « i ft :0< * • | r i • . i ft -cr i | i 1 ' i n-> m ft i « rt i rt Icr 1 rO 1 ft ft «, j . * i<r I t r 1 fM • j • ft :cr i rs. i * rt ': t ft •C.r 1 i | * • i * «M ' f ft cr I o | I ; \ i * ^ • ft 1 fM 1 rt 1 t ft cr • • 1 • ft 1 <N rt 1 1 fM cr i i n | i i * 1 r j »n 1 * ft 1 ft 1 n ! i '0> 1 J o* 1 * fM I *r i CM V 1 1 • i. - rsi | 1 * ; m i ft cr i n . i m 1 CM cr 1 | i 1 o | ft CM | j *r » cr i o j r— 1 * cr • • 3 ! : o O o o O O O l o e o o o m O HI o wt o Mt o 5 • • • • • • 1 • • i i ut NT 1 | rt CM o o • i NEEO BY <GE 03/13/7/ PAGE 36 . '_; FILE. ._ IJVMCU . (CPEATICK DATE « Ci/OE/771 ) SUBFILE NWV SCATTERGRAM OF (CCWM K299 22.50 29.50 36.50 43.50 (ACROSS) S20 50.50 57.50 64.53 71 .50 78.50 85. 50 5.CO + • » ** » * » 2 « I I I * * • . » • 2 22 ** 2* * I * 2 * *» * • 5.33 ]' i i I 4.50 • I I I j \ 4.50 I I I I 4.00 • * « » 2* ** * * ** ** 2 ** * 2** * *22 * * » ! * » • * * • 4.00 I I I I I I J j I I 3.50 • I I I \ I 3.50 I I I I [ I 3. CO • * » * I I I I I * " • *'* ' * " * « I* " -• " " 3.33 I I I I 2 .50 • I \ i 2.50 I I I I I I { 1 I I 2.00 « 2 * 45 52 52* 4 • 2 » * *4 •* 3* 41 I I *2 2* 2 2* 3* « 3 24 * » * 32 *3 ** 22 *2» * 2 2.00 I I • i I I I { 1.50 • I I I I I 1 | 1.50 I I I I I.CO » 5 3 2 72 232 5 22 **4 » 3 ** *'.2 32 2 4* 2* «** 2 4* 42* ** **2 * * ** 2* « » 1.03 I I I 1 •— I I 0 .50 • I I I j 0.50 I I I I I • I • 0.0 *98 99 99 599 59 99 999 77 95 599 99 15.00 26.CO 33.CO 40.33 59 556 47.33 69 95 5e9 59 99 978 56 94 998 54 92 '895 68 '43 44 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.30 82.00 * * « » • d9.00 0.0 NtEC BY <GE 65/13/77 P A G c 4 6 • . ' . F I LE I JVMCU (CRFATICr. CATS » 03/08/771 » " S U B F I L E U J SCATTERGPAC CF (CCWN) N299 22.45 29.35 36.25 43 . 15 50 (ACROSSI S2C .05 56.95 63.8 5 70.75 77. 65 84. 55 < t ' , 5.00 • * * * * * ** * * « 4 32I 23 3 3* n * »2 *2 2 * * I 33 *2* 23 3 *2 « * V « «• 5.00 4.50 • \ 4.50 1 j 1 \ 4.00 • * * * 2 * 1 * * * ** 2 * * 21 2 ** * ** • * 4.00 3.50 • 3.53 3.00 • 2 * 1 * * * * 2 * I 2* * * * i 3.00 2-50 • j l 2.50 1 2.00 »4 * » 23 ** 2 22 22 3*2 *3 a* 23 33 * *3 2* 4 6*4 32 42 4 3* 2* ** * * « * ; 2.00 1 } \ i 1. JO • 1.53 1.00 + ** 2 23 3 22 4 23 6 5* 3*5 55 5 33 32* 3* 32 45 3* 2 6 *3 5* *2 *24 2* 23 * * *** ** * * * I.00 I \ j { 0.50 • \ 0.50 i I 0.0 *99 95 59 59 555 95 95 59" 99 999 99 19.00 25.90 32.BO 39.70 199" "99 46 999" .60 *"2'39 99 "76 999" 99 99 53.50 60.40 199 598 "85"9 5" 64" 43 67.30 74.20 2*2 5* 22 81.10 **t 88. 00 0.0 NEED U V ACE PMIJC 56 : : * • ._• MLE. IJVMCU SUBFILE HFl SCATTERGRAM OF (CREATION CATE - 03/00/771 (CCWNI N295 22.40 29.20 36.00 42. BO 49 .60 (ACROSS I S20 5 6.4C 63.20 70.00 76. 80 H3.60 • * ~ 5.00 •* '2 2 ** * * *** * 24 14 .* *2 » *2 4* 22 33 6 4* 21 *2 * * 3 22 < 5.00 { I ' " I I I •" 4.50 • { I I * 4.5'J • I .... I _ I j I I . j - • 4. CO + 2 2* ** *3 2 *2 * * 2 22 * I* *4 * 3 • * ** I ** ** * »* 2* 43 *** * * « 2 + 4. JO 3.50 • - -: {-I I I I I I - - — i -3.50 3.00 » ) I I j * * * * i • * I * I I * 3.00 2.50 • \ t — I I I I I I -• -{ 2.50 2.00 »32 54 54 56 32 24 *5 45 423 23 *4 24 *4 4 32 26 33* 1 43 *3 53 47 24 * I 22 223 2 2 ** * « • 2.00 1 "' I I I I 1.50 » { I I 1 ; 1 .30 1.00 «27 2* 36 23 46 54 43 2* 434 34 84 46 23 3* 63 84 53 I 1 2 4* ** 43 23 24 3 *24 4 22 2 * ** * * * 1.00 ; { • I I I j 0.50 • ! I I I 0. 50 \ } 1 I I \ 0.0 *55 95" 59 95P 59 991'"9959-9V9~95R"""9"9i'W "99"~99~~ 99 99 5"5<; 5"5~"5~9~9 9"""9"9~5 9" 99"" 55~959—59~8"9 49 6 5 73 2 * *2* 0.0 s 19.00 25.00 32.60 39.40 46.20 53.OC 59.80 66. 60 73.40 80.20 87 .00 NEED BY «Gc FILE IJVMCU SUBFILE VAJ SCATTERGPAM OF 63/13/1' 1 ' P A G E 6 6 1 CP FAT ION flATf « 03/Oe/77l (CCVNI r\299 22.AO 29.35 36. 25 A) . 15 50.05 (ACRCSSI S20 56.95 63.85 f 5.00 * * * • * * *2I * • 2* * * 2 * 1*3 » * 2 \ 5.00 \ | A. 50 } 1 "..3) A.CO • « 2 » 22 2 * * *• 2 2 * * 2 * * * 2* 2 * 1 * * 2 * 2 * ' * \ 4.00 j j } 3 . 5 0 i \ 3.50 \ \ """. 3.00 + * « ' " • * • * 1 * * » 3. 00 2. JO { \ 2.53 i \ 2.00 • 23 2A A* 32 • 2 » • 22 2* 3* *3A 2 • 22 >4* * *• 2 22 **3 » 2 551 * 4** *2 ** * v * « 2 • 2.00 I t  | | I 1 1 .50 { \ } 1.50 1.00 * * ** * 2 2 23 *2 *A 2** ** 3* 23 *3 2*2 4*123 * * * 2 * ! 1. 00 { } 0 . 50 \ } 3.53 \ "99" ""9"S9"~«9"95l 9T"999"~99""99_9 B"""79~ 60.40 67.30 74.20 62 7 / 6 35 81.10 0 .0 " »99 99 19.00 99 99 999" 25.90 -99—99 32. "99" 3C ~99~ ~959—99" 39. 70 89 9? 999 4.6.60 - 9 9 — — 1 53.50 32 22* 3 3 . 0 0 0.0 70.75 77.65 8 4 . 5 5 \->-NEED PY ACE 03/U//7 PAGtT 7C p>. * .FILE... IJVMCU. 1 CREATION CATE » C3/0E/77I > — SueFILE VAF SCATTERGRAM OF (CCWN) r-299 22. 50 25.50 36.50 43.50 50.50 (ACROSS) S2C 57.50 64.50 71 .50 78.50 85.50 • »--5. CO •**' * « 2 ** I *2 * »• 3 * 2 * 1 * * 2 * 2 * « • 5.3J i J 1 j •..50 • { | 1 4.50 "> 4.00 ••» •» 2 3 * * ** *2* 3* * * * 3** * 3* * 3 1* 2* ** ** * * »«. 4.00 D j \ \ - 3.50 • 3.50 J j 3 .00 • • * * * * * * I * 2 2 - ~ 3.33 2.50 • j I" j 2.50 ) J { j 2.00 . 6 * 2 • 22* 43 2* 22 3 53 *2« 52 23 3*5 •3 2* **2 *3 34 *23 *2 * 3 *• * *2 * * * • * » 2.00 { 1 ' I I I I ( 1.50 • ; | } 1.50 I.CO • 2* * 422 * * * 2 222 I ** 24 * *3 *2 *• 2* * 3 32 2* 32 2 2 * 3 » • 1.30 0.50 • j ; • 0.50 I i i i " 0.0 *99 19.00 99 99 389 99 99 999 95 59 999 2t.CC 33.CO 40.00 57 99 959 47.00 59 99 9e9 54 .00 99 59 999 99 99 999 95 99 958~67"89 325 04 i'i i * 61.00 68 .00 75.00 82.00 89.00 0.0 •rr NEEC OV *GE 'F ILE IJVMCU (CR EAT I CN CAT E • 03/OB/77L SUBFILE SAS SCATTERGRAM CF (CCV.NI N299 03/13/77 PAGE i n r (ACROSS) S2 C I 5.CO • 2* 2 ** 2* » • * I * 2 * ** * * 2* *• * ** * 2 * ** * 5.00 4.50 { \ ] 4.50 4.00 • 24 2 » 2 2 * 2 * 23 2* **3 5* •2 4 2 2* *2 *2* * » 3 3* ** » « * 2 2 ** 2 2 V • 4.00 J | 1 3. JO I { I 3.50 \ J « 1 3.00 • •• 2 " * j • *« I* 3 » * + 3.00 2.50 \ - { 1 2.50 { j 1 2.00 • 65 46 22 2* 2 64 2* 5*4 33 56 234 22 22 2 * * 2 » 2 * » 32 4*3 * 3 * 223 2 2 * * 22 ** • f 2. 00 1 (  I I I \ 1. JO j \ j 1 i.Si 1.00 • ** 3 3 22 * 4** 22 *» 2*2 * 2 2 3 2* 2* *2 I I * t, 2* * * 2 »* *22 3* * * * j 1.00 J i 1 ; 0.50 * j ; 0.50 i { { 0.0 • 99 99 19.00 99 595 55 26.00 95 959 55" 33.00 99""999~99" 40.00 89 "999""99~99 999~"99" 47.00 54.OC 99 999""9"fl 97'998 87 96"393 99 61.00 68.00 75.00 33 829 5* 82. 0) 42 3** 89.0 0 0.0 NEED UY ACE \.MLF IJVMCU SUBFILE LOO" SCATTFRCSAM DF I CP £ AT I CN nATC 03/00/771 03/13/77" P A u t 36 " ->-(CCKNI N295 22.40 29. 20 36. 03 42.8 0 (ACROSS) S20 49.60 56.40 63.23 73.00 75.80 83.60 5.CO • ** « » * »3 2 3 * » 2 33 4* »3 32 42 **3 25 52 *2 *5 22 2* 5» 32* 22 * I 2 » • 5.03 i | 4.50 * { } I 4.50 4.00 • * ft • # * * * * 12 * * • 2 *2* * 2 2 *I 3 ** * * » * f L. f\t\ | ! { H»UU 3.50 • i } I 3. 50 3.00 • * • "*'» '« « ! . } 2 * * 12 *2 * « 2 2 * * * l 2 * * 2 * 3.00 2.50 • ; j i 2.50 i ! ; 1 { 2.00 *3» 37 3* 22 3* 32 22 8 34 24 6 66 4* 55 44 3* 334 26 54 *4 23 6* 3 33 *33 32 3 * * 2 » • 2.00 { 1 " " " I I I I 1. 50 • { • I t » . ; 1.50 1.00 *3* * • ** 3* 22 *2 2* 5* *2 4 3 23 22 52 » »» 3 24 36 *2 «3 4* 32 *4 * «* « » 1.33 | { ! 0.50 «• J 1 0.50 } J \ O.O «99 19.00 99 99" 59 59' 9 9 "99" 25.A3 32. 99~599"""99" 60 39. 40 46.20 99 99 959 99 99 99 99 59 99 99~*996"~79 53" 53.00 59.80 66.60 73.40 56 32 22 53 * 2+ 80.20 87.00 0.0 NEED KY AGE 03/13/77 "Aut D o " .FILE . IJVMCU ... SUBFILE BAM SC ATT FRCP. AM OF ICPEATION CATE » 03/08/771 (COHN) tillS 22.50 79.50 36.50 '.3.30 50.50 IACPOSS) S20 57.50 64.50 71.5.0 78. 50 85.50 5.00 •* * 2 3* 22 444 23 «2 634 54 * *33 5* 6* 5*2 32 43 54* 33 3 223 * * 2 5.00 4.50 4.CO • *m w ** * *2 * 2 * 3* ** 2 2 *2 4. 30 4.0 3 3.50 3.50 3.00 * 22 * 2* * 22 2 "3 "3 2 * 2 * " "2 2 2* * 2 * * 3 3.00 2.50 2.50 2. 00 27 54 3 4*2 43 33 2 * 9* 66 38 8 89 584 36 32 324 8* 37 458 63 3 653 42 4* **6 22 23 22* ** • 2.30 1.50 1.00 *5 3* 63 623 52 94 67 7 93 59 494 3 56 888 33 * 3 64 6 32 323 46 2 252 3* 2* * 2* * ** * 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.50 6.6" +99 99 99 599 99 99 999 99 99 999 99 99 59y 59 99 999 99 99 999 99 99 999 99 59 999 96 56 444 37 2* *2* „, • + «. • • (, 1 * • •» * • • t « * • «• «• *. 1 9.00 26 .00 33 .00 40.00 47.00 54.OC 61. 00 68. 00 75.00 82.00 89.00 0.) ro ro — r II <_, . vr VI • ~ u <V 03/13/// PAG. H o FILE IJVMCU 1 CP EAT ION OATE » 03/OE/77) C n f l P T 1 C D A " ~ ~* j U U r | L C H A SCATTERGRAM OF (DCV.NJ r\299 22-50 79.50 36. 50 43. 50 1 ACROSS 1 S20 50.60 57.60 64.50 71.50 78.60 1 *4 * 22 *2* ** • *3 * ** » * *«. * • I " " " I " ' I I 5.00 < 4. 50 * J 1 I 4.5 ) ' . . . _ . . . ._ I I 4 .00 * » * * * * ** 22 I ** *2 * * * • » - » * * j •V «00 I J I " 1 I i I i"~ "* ~ i i . _ _ 3.50 • | 3. 50 3.00 *2 • * * * *2 ** • I 2 i i 2 2 » * * * ** ** ' I I * 3.00 2. 50 • ; I — I 1 j 2.50 I I I I „ . . . . . . . . . | I } 2.00 • 2 2 2 224 23 2* 3 2* »4 42 42 *3 336 1 *3 * 32 *2 * 3 * 2* 22* *2 * • 3 * « « I j 2.00 J 1 • "I""-I I I 1.50 • J I I I 1.50 I.00 • 2» 22 433 *2 4» 43 45 *2 343 37 B* 2*2 I I 3* 2 224 *5 *4 222 *2 22 2 2 « 2 * 1.00 j I I I 0 .50 • I I I i 0.50 j j : j — — I I 99 99 555 95 99 999 99 99 999 55 '99"W~76" .*" ' ' }5 " l 0 . 0 *99 99 99 599 99 99 999 99 99 999 99~99 599~ i 3 **«• 0 .3 19.00 26.00 33.00 40.00 47. 00 54.00 61.00 60.00 75.00 02.00 bO.uO -.-rr NEED BY ACE V _ 5 ^ p j L E I J V ^ 1 1 (CP f AT ICN CAT E . " .03/0 c/TJJL SCATTERGRAM QF ICCVNI N317 ., ? ? , A 0 . ?9;™ ?:;°!L..__!?;a°__ 5 6 ^ ° ^.20 7 0 . 0 0 7.CO • * * * ' * * •-• I (ACRCSSI S20 76.80 83.63 6.30 5.60 4.00 4.20 3.50 2.80 2.10 1.40 0.70 * » • »* * « ** 22 2* - 8 - ? r .*4_35_52 33 42 32 *26 35 48 7.00 I I * I I * ** » * * • ^ *2 T~l * 43 2 *—222 * * — * H 2—l—?-I I I 1 3 » 3 * 22 * <2 2 * 3 2 *2 31 *2 2* 4 2 22 « 2 ._ 1 i " ' i I 50 23 8* 63 2*5 _*4_*5_ _ »6_6S__2 33 3 72* «3 3 2 _ 2 j _ » 4 23 2 _ . * I t - - r — — 0 . 0 » 9 9 99 99 99 99 99 99 VT9'" 999' 'W^~^^9^~f^'9~W''^<l<riV~'n~*)<r' , • - t , •• " - " « r - 5 9 58 99- 958 75 0 9 25 54 43 3 ) . ' 3 * * -12*22 2 5 ^ 8 0 3 2 . 6 0 3 9 . 4 0 4 6 . 20 5 3 . 0 0 59 . bl"*'Ta .la" — * — - *. 6.33 5.60 4.90 4.20 3.53 2.80 2. 10 1.40 3.7 3 0.0 80.20 87.00 c\3 ro 3 •> \ i ^ - s T e F I L f I J V . M • • , C R E * T , " - ^ T E . V P . 3 / W / 7 7 I ^ " SCATTERGRAM OF ITfUM k i | 7 " " 1 -}~ _ _ 22.45 ?o.l« ^ ... ., | 1  . ( (ACROSS) S2C .• * • 4 ; 50.35 56.95 63 .fl5 7 . n l 7 s . , 7.CO • . 1 ' ' • • • + + . .__'J:7-3 1 U't>5 i 4 . 5 5 I I I - _. . .. I * • 7.03 • { I " " ' - } - . I J I • 6 . 3 0 I ' • . j I J 5.6(1 • J j I i : 1— . i 1 I 1 : * 5.60 1 - - 1 t I 4.90 • 1 T~ •—' 1 : 1 ! * ** I * * * * 1 «-?n * _ . ' , I i , i ' 1 t • | | • 4 . 2 0 i • * i ! ~ T — . 3.5f) . 1 i I r • . . . i 1 I J I " • 3.50 1 | I . . . I » »* * -* JT~e3 „ . r-—— ( 1 2-80 • ' *£ r- J . . . 2 » 2 . * * * 2 3 » . y „ r-rz # I ' • ' I • 2.83 12* * • »2 • * * • * » , * 1 1  t 2 { * * * « 3 3 *2* ** 2 , *•* 2 . 3 • 2.10 1 . 4 0 • j 1 1 i " " - 2 3 - " - - " 72 4*5_52_.64 35..73 523 *3_45,65 23* 23 35 * 2* 2*2 ** * [ I { I . I r — J i • o.7o i ; 1 . ' — — — 3 2 , 8 0 " 6o:.r't-7;:;~t--;;:,r^--;;:;r^--;rL ro ON NE E C HY tQl . r j t F IJVMCU (CREATICN CAT E - 03/00/77l_ SUBFILE LIV SCATTERGRAM CF (CCWNI N317 22. 45 29.35 36.25 03/13/77 H A G E 2 2 (ACROSS) S2C 43.15 50.05 56.95 63.U5 70.75 77.65 84. 55 7.CO » * I 7.00 6 .30 ?.to C. 30 5.60 4.50 4 . 9 J 4.20 4.20 3.50 I I I « 3.50 J I I I { • 2.60 J ** ** • • • * * 2* • 2** 4 • 21 • I I 24 3 3 2* 2* 2 2 2 » l 2. 80 I I I I j . 2.10 12* * • 2 ** » • 2 * 2*3 * 3* 22 * 2** 53 I **I42 I 3 * ** • *• 2* * I 2.1J 1.40 I I I I } 1.40 ..•5_**„32 ** J?. 22 326 ** .25_24_ .43 755 _34_ I I 24124 _3?5 _49 44 3 *4 2_2_ *2 *_ * I 3.70 I I I 0.70 I I I ) 0.0 • 55 95 19.00 59 59 559 25.50 "55""99 55 32.80 ~55f "9 99~79" 39.70 99" "99""~999~ 46.60 "96 99"58 " 53.5C 99 999 99 60.40 99199 67 996~6S~ .30 ~7S"6 5~42 74.20 "544 ** 22 81.10 2 • 38.00 0. 0 r\o NEED BY AGE M/I SI II r»A(,C 32 - — PJ LE IJVMCU SUBFILE NWV SC ATT ERGR AM OF (CREATION CAT E • 03/08/77 1 = — (CCWN) N217 22.50 25.50 36.50 43.50 50.50 (ACROSS) S20 57.5C 64.50 71. 50 78.50 85.50 5.00 < 1 I I I I I * » 5.00 < 4.53 • I I I j 4.50 4. CO • I I I I 4.03 i I I . . . . . . . I - { 3.50 » I I I i 3.50 3.00 • I J " i * * * * * # « { I I * 2 33 *2 * 3 I* 422 ** ** 222 2 " " " "" * t 3.00 . 2 . JO • I I I ; 2.50 I I -——- * * — --—--- — _ . .—_ _ . . • j I I j j 2. CO • I * 2 * 2 * * I *2 *» I * * * 4* •2 » 3 •* I 2* * »* ** * i 2.03 ,! I I- " i • . 1 I ""I 1.50 • I 1 I ; 1.50 1 I ~* — — — — — . _ — i I.00 »25 I 75 63 532 24 22 324 36 43 *5* 2 5 222 28 44 4*5 22 5* 6*3 32 22 534 22 *2 3 2 23 * *2* * 2 * 1.00 I I I 1 0.50 • I I I \ I 0.50 ; 1 I I j | O.C *58 59 59 559 59' 99 599 67 "99"999 99 99 "597" 26.00 33.00 40.00 47.00 89' 98 959 54.OC 45" 95 997"58"56""396 "92 5* 49* 65 52 22 61. 00 68.00 75.00 82.00 1<).00 ** « • t d9.00 3.3" © NE5.D UY A G E ~ ~ . f JUF IJVMCU t CREATION D A T E _ » 0 3/0 f/7711 SUBFILE RIJ SCATTERGRAM OF (CCKNI f\317 'U3/1J/7 7 HAGfc 4 T " 5.03 • (ACPOSSI S20 ILihl 25. 35 36.25 43. 15 50.05 56.95 63.05 70.75 77.65 3'..55 I * I « - I ... _ I I * I I 5.00 4.50 • I I I j 4.5J 4.CO • I I I 4.00 { . 1 I I j 3.50 • I I I i 3.50 I . - I .... 3.30 • 2 ** * * *35 2*13* I I 2 4* 2 2 *3 2 3*6 2* . 2 I 4 * 2 » *3 43 *2 * - * • 3.00 • 2 . ! 0 • I I I I 2.53 J I I 1 2.00 • I * * * * *I*2 I *• * •» * * * * ** « 2 * * I 2.00 J I i ! I / 1.50 • I I I i 1 . 5 0 " • 1.00 »42 2» ?2 f 333 I I 42 22 33 52 624 59137 56 652 5* 44 7* 969 53 75 94 245 64 3* 3 22 J 1 . 00 I I I ] I I I 1 ' I I 1 0.50 • I I I I 0.53 | 1 I I 55e""99"57: 0 . 0 «99 99 99 99 999 99 99 99 99 999 99199 95 999 34 35 55 5T" 9 9 78 7" 78 8 5 62 "23 2*2" 5* 2* * 2 0.0 I 19.00 25,50 32.80 39. 70 46. 60 53 .50 60.40 67.30 74.20 81 .10 88.00 1\3 ro NEED t!Y *CE 03/13/77 PAGE 52 "F1LF IJVMCU (CPTATICN PATE « C3/C6/77) SUbFILE HEL SCATTEHGOAM OF (CCWM K317 ; ? . 4 Q 25.70 36.C3 4 5.00 4.50 A.00 3.50 I ACROSS) S2C RO 49.60 56.40 63.20 73.00 76.60 33. 60 • •2 2 » 5.33 4.50 4.00 3.50 3. CO »* •' 22""*2>4 3«4 *• 65"22 "36 3 ~5T~53~y22"~33 3 « "*"5 24 "" * *" 3.33 2.50 2.50 2.00 * » » .» 2* * « 2 » 3 * * 2 33 34 4^* 43 23 63 42 54 42 33 ** 25 22 ** * 2.00 1.50 32 63 2* * 22 3 4 « 43 352 9 36 9 26 » 2 62 72 B66 65 54 83 65 74 2 7 726 32 22 *3 4 *2 » 1 . 03 0.50 0.50 0 .0 99 99 99 99" 99 99 99 59 SS9""99 99 59 59 59 99 99 559 • <Y • • • * * • • "99 99" 99 99 999 94 67 47 53 83 * » 2 2 0.0 l s t o T " 2i.eo"~ 32.6C 39.40 46.20 53 .00 59.00 66.63 73.40 6C.20 ST^OO. o NE EC BY ICt .FJLE. ... IJVMCU SUBFILE VAJ SCATTERGRAM CF in7r3Tn m r c i — z r (CREATICK PATS m 03/08/ 77) (CCWNI N317 22.45 29.35 36.25 43.15 50.05 (ACROSS) S20 56.95 63.85 70.75 77.65 84. 55 5.00 • « * 4.50 J i 4.50 4.00 | i 4. 00 ; 3.50 ; 3.53 I I I I 3.00 * 21 * * » * 2 * ** 33 2* * * • * 4 3.00 2.50 { 2.50 I I I 1 2.00 • » 2 * * * * * * ** I • ** * * ** 2* 33 22 •2 2 » * * * • 2.00 1 1 I 1. JO j 1.50 1 .00 •55 • 5 42 2 4 33 22 35 *2 456 *2I*2 43 22* 46 3 43 64 335 53 66 *2 477 2 23 3 23 2*5 3* * *2« 1.00 J j • 0.50 0.50 5.00 C.O' *59 55~5Y~55 559 99 99 59 99 999 99199 99 999 99 99 99 99 999 99 99199 885 66 95 98 57 534 56 45 22 3 • 0.0 » • » « • 4- • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. 19.00 25.90 32.80 39.70 46.60 53. 5C 60.40 67.30 74.2 0 81.13 Bo. 03  ro NEED HY AGE F.IIE _ IJVMCU_ ICREAT1CN CAT E » C3/08/77J "SUQFUE VAF 03/13/1*; PTfCc rr SC ATT ER GR AH OF (CCWN » N317 22.50 29.50 (ACROSS t S20 36.50 43.50 50.50 57.5C 64.50 71. 50 78.50 85.50 J 7.CO 1 * I • 7.00 \ j } { 6.30 1 } j • J 6.3 0 ; . t o • i 1 I | 5.60 I j | } 4.90 • I * * * * I * * • 4.90 i i i i 4.20 { | } • 4.20 3.50 ; I 3.50 2. eo i ** 2 1 •« i » 2* 2+ * * ** * + *• • I 2.83 • 1 1 - ' I I t I 2.10 i * * * * * *. • » * 31 ** * * * » » » * 23 2 1 **2 * 2 3 \ 2.10 1 .40 ! I ! ~~~ 1.40 .'33._3» **__33*..4« * * 33 42 3 3 62 3* *73 22 25 4*4 45 65 65 34 32 642 84 *3 722 *4 64 * * • 2 *2 I 0.70 \ I I I 0. 70 { \ } 0. C • 99 59 59 "799 59 99 19.00 26.00 999 9 9 99 999 99 99 999" 99 99 959 59 9"9 999 99 89" 999" 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.OC 61.00 68.00 S3 99 V84"43""45 225 75.00 82.00 6 3 »* 3 • 89.00 3.3 -ro V > J ro NEEO liv ec.f 03/13/77 PTTCc 57" (CP EAT ION OATE • 03/OE/77I F.I L E IJVMCU SUBFILE SAS SCATT[RGRAM OF (CCVN) K317 22.50 29.50 36.50 A3. 50 50.50 (ACROSS I S20 57.50 6A.50 71.50 78.50 85.50 7.10 • • . . . • {- ._ - . J 7.00 6.20 j j 6.3 J 5.60 | j 5.60 » A.90 * V * 1 A.90 I A. 20 j T I A.20 3 . ! 0 1 i 3.53 j | i *"" 2.80 • * * I • « A * 3 2* 32 3*2 * 2 3 2 .+ 2 * 2 »1 2 .8J I 1 j { 1 1 2.10 122 2 A ** * * *• » i 2* 2 • » 2 » 2 *3 ** 2 2* *3 * 3* 2 • 2 ** j 2.10 l.AO "["' { i l.AO I 9 A .3?. 5t 5 3_2 24 BA 22 353 7A « 2 _4*3_ _25_ 56 76A 52 3* 62A_*5 6* .3.27. 22_*2_ 63 2* _ i . *. * i 0.70 I [ i 3.70 | j \ 0.0 • 99 99 99 999 99 99"999 "99"99" 999 59 99 999 99 "98' 559" ~5"9~ "55" "999~96" 99" "996" ~7&~~98"" 5~c2~ "86" 23 "52/ '3* •t<: 22 + 0.0 19.00 26.00 33.00 AO. CO AT.00 5A.0C 61.00 68.00 75 .00 82.00 89.00 ro v>3 • NEED RY AGE """F ILE ~ IJVMCU SUBFILE LOO SCATTERGRAM QF _ . "TT 03/13/77 PAGE 92 (CR EAT I ON DATE = 03/08/771 (CCkN) K317 (ACR0SS1 S20 . • -7. CO • 22.40 29.20 36.00 * 42. 80 49.60 * 56.40 63.20 70.00 76. 80 cU.oO 7.00 ! J j 6.30 • J | I 6.30 ! j ; ! . . 5.60 • I 5.60 4.90 • * 12 * *. * » « *« ** * • * I 4. 90 1 I I /— 4.2 0 • i } ! 4.20 1 ** i — 3.SO • { | ; 3.50 2.80 . • » * 3 * 2 * 42 14 32 * 2* 2* 332 2 55 34 39 73 8* 43 392 47 *2 24 4* « 3 * 1 < 2.80 } J j 2.10 » I** 2 * ** 3 2 * * 23* *2 . .?* 63 *3 2* 33 32 222 4 35 33 44 3* 6* • 2 *2* * 2.10 1. 40 • [ * 1.40 158 0 .70 • 75 53 6* 53 73 47 67 606 38 "65 89 69 98 "96" 59 5 57" 5 9~99 "99 95 _ 63 57 8 8 984 63 2* *4 *" « * i 0.70 j } j I . 0.0 •99 99 99 99 99 99 99 59 599 99 99 99 99 59 99 96 5 89 99 99 99 89 99 89 88 735 33 52 22 ** 32 V* * 2t 0.0 19.00 25. 80 32. 60 39. 40 46.20 53.00 59.80 6 6 . 6 0 73 . 40 80.20 87.00 NEED BY AGE 03/13/77 TOOT—nJT F.ILE IJVMCU (CREATION DATE » 03/0e/771 "SUBFILE BAN SCATTERGRAM OF (0CWNI K317 (ACROSS) S20 22.50 29.50 36.50 43. 50 50.50 57.50 64.50 71 .60 78.50 83.30 : . • — • — — • — • — • — • — • . — • — • — • — • — • — * — t — ¥ — f — t — t — 1 >  5.00 • » » » I * 1 2 5 < 0 0 4.50 4.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 * - • 2 « 2 2 *3""*55 35 49 "956 "74 » 2 » 5 7 " 5 4 69 936 57 63 893 64" 62 "*47 24 "23" 4* 2 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.53 2.00 • *3 * * 32 *• 2 « 3 5 6* 25 522 22 • **4 7* 5* *3 23 4 » « *22 ** * 2.00 1 .50 1.00 99 97 56 724 99 74 659 93 79 998 95 99 999 88 65 449 99 87 999 59 6 669 79 84 498 52 22 2* 2 * 1.50 1. 00 0.50 3.53 0."6 *99 99 99 999 "99 "99 999"9'9 99~999 99 99 999 "99 W " ? r 5 n « n ? 99~994 _97 _199~953"""4~5" 355 2"7" ~"»" *'»'"• OTO"" • • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • »• *• • + . 1 9.00 26.00 33.00 40. 00 47.00 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.00 32.00 89.00 f~- NEEC BY /GE ... F J IF tJVMCU (CRFATICN CAT = . Q3/08/77)_ "03715777 vKQ TIT" SUBFILE BA SCATTERS RAM TF (OCWN) N317 22.50 21.50 3 6 . 50 43.50 50.50 (ACROSS) S2C 5 7.50 64.50 71.53 78.53 85. j) • • — • 5.00 • j * 5.00 / I | i / 4.50 • } j 4.50 _ . ^ I I 4.00 » } j i 4.00 | | 3. 50 • { 3.50 j j ; j 3.00 ~ • • * • 2* * ** 4 32 *2 ' 2* 2 322 •* 2* « *2 4 * 3.00 2 . 50 .. • { 1 2.50 | { i 2.00 • » » • 2 2 »» * «• 2 • e 2 • 2* 3 • * * * » 2* * * * t 2.00 I 1 1 t I i 1. 50 • 1 j 1 1.50 1.00 »43 *3 »2 243 *3 »2 *24 22 6 332 23 3 452 24 3* * 53 33 24 237 24 42 42 42 ** 4 * ** * 2 • 1.00 \ | [ ; 0.50 • J ! I 0.50 0.3 *99 59 59 S95~ 95 55 999 59 59 999 99 99 599 99 99 "959 99 99 999 99" 99 999 95 98 498 66 34 35 2 0.0 1 • • • • • • • • • • t • • • * • • • 19.00 26.CO 33.00 40.00 47.00 54.00 61.00 68.00 75.00 82. 33 b9.03  ro ON 237 Appendix Oi VHO/lCS-MCl) Definitions of Head of Household and Household Head of Household; "Accept whomever the respondent names as the head of the household. The following d e f i n i t i o n s give guidance when probes are necessary. There oust be one and only one head of the household. In some households you w i l l f i n d two or more unrelated persons who share a dwelling unit. Since there can be only one head, designate one as the "head" on Table 1 and l i s t the others on Table k. I f asked what i s meant by the head of a household, say that he (she) i s the person who i s regarded as the head by the members of the household. In most cases the head i s the chief breadwinner of the family, although t h i s i s not always true. In some cases, the head may be the parent of the chief earner or nay be the only adult member of the household. As pointed out below, members of the Armed Forces are not covered by the survey even i f they continue to l i v e at home. Therefore, i f a member of the Armed F o r c e 3 i s regarded as the head, l i s t instead his wife (or other l o g i c a l person) as the head. Information i n the four tables except f o r the name, should be given by a r e l a t i v e or by the person himself". Household: " A household i s a group of persons who share a dwelling un i t . A household may consist of a person l i v i n g alone, a family, a group of unrelated individuals, or a mixed group of related and unrelated people who l i v e together in the same dwelling u n i t " . Promt WHO/ICS-MCLT Manual 5» Interviewers' Manual, 1970. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094212/manifest

Comment

Related Items