Does Council Tax Valuation Band (CTVB) correlate with Under-Privileged Area 8 (UPA8) score and could it be a better 'Jarman Index'?
Background
Widespread scepticism persists on the use of the Under-Privileged Area (UPA8) score of Jarman in distributing supplementary resources to so-attributed 'deprived' UK general practices. The search for better 'needs' markers continues. Having already shown that Council Tax Valuation Band (CTVB) is a predictor of UK GP workload, we compare, here, CTVB of residence of a random sample of patients with their respective 'Jarman' scores.
Methods
Correlation coefficient is calculated between (i) the CTVB of residence of a randomised sample of patients from an English general practice and (ii) the UPA8 scores of the relevant enumeration districts in which they live.
Results
There is a highly significant correlation between the two measures despite modest study size of 478 patients (85% response).
Conclusions
The proposal that CTVB is a marker of deprivation and of clinical demand should be examined in more detail: it correlates with 'Jarman', which is already used in NHS resource allocation. But unlike 'Jarman', CTVB is simple, objective, and free of the problems of Census data. CTVB, being household-based, can be aggregated at will.
Complete Metadata
| @type | dcat:Dataset |
|---|---|
| accessLevel | public |
| bureauCode |
[
"009:25"
]
|
| contactPoint |
{
"fn": "NIH",
"@type": "vcard:Contact",
"hasEmail": "mailto:info@nih.gov"
}
|
| description | Background Widespread scepticism persists on the use of the Under-Privileged Area (UPA8) score of Jarman in distributing supplementary resources to so-attributed 'deprived' UK general practices. The search for better 'needs' markers continues. Having already shown that Council Tax Valuation Band (CTVB) is a predictor of UK GP workload, we compare, here, CTVB of residence of a random sample of patients with their respective 'Jarman' scores. Methods Correlation coefficient is calculated between (i) the CTVB of residence of a randomised sample of patients from an English general practice and (ii) the UPA8 scores of the relevant enumeration districts in which they live. Results There is a highly significant correlation between the two measures despite modest study size of 478 patients (85% response). Conclusions The proposal that CTVB is a marker of deprivation and of clinical demand should be examined in more detail: it correlates with 'Jarman', which is already used in NHS resource allocation. But unlike 'Jarman', CTVB is simple, objective, and free of the problems of Census data. CTVB, being household-based, can be aggregated at will. |
| distribution |
[
{
"@type": "dcat:Distribution",
"title": "Official Government Data Source",
"mediaType": "text/html",
"description": "Visit the original government dataset for complete information, documentation, and data access.",
"downloadURL": "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59897/"
}
]
|
| identifier | https://healthdata.gov/api/views/nmb9-cx9u |
| issued | 2025-07-14 |
| keyword |
[
"council-tax",
"deprivation-index",
"jarman-index",
"nih",
"upa8-score"
]
|
| landingPage | https://healthdata.gov/d/nmb9-cx9u |
| modified | 2025-09-06 |
| programCode |
[
"009:039"
]
|
| publisher |
{
"name": "National Institutes of Health",
"@type": "org:Organization"
}
|
| theme |
[
"NIH"
]
|
| title | Does Council Tax Valuation Band (CTVB) correlate with Under-Privileged Area 8 (UPA8) score and could it be a better 'Jarman Index'? |