Skip to content

Local Authority Variations in Self-assessed General Health for Males and Females, England and Wales, 2011 This product is designated as National Statistics

Released: 21 November 2013 Download PDF

Key Points

  • In the 2011 Census, almost 80 per cent of residents in England and approximately 77 per cent of residents in Wales reported their general health as ‘Good’.

  • The 10 local authorities with the highest percentages of ‘Good’ health were clustered in an area to the south and west of London.

  • The lowest percentage of ‘Good’ health for males was reported in Merthyr Tydfil, which is in Wales (71.5 per cent), and for females in Tower Hamlets, which is in London (69.2 per cent). 

  • Younger people (aged 35 and under) showed the least variation in their health status between the local authorities.

  • Self-assessed health differences were widest between authorities at ages 65-74.

  • Among males and females there was a strong relationship between self-assessed ‘Good’ general health and area deprivation, both in England and Wales.

Introduction

This short story describes self-assessed general health by age, gender and administrative geographical areas in England and Wales, using the latest 2011 Census data.

Census data helps to describe the characteristics of people and households across areas in detail, giving government, private and voluntary sector organisations information to support planning and decision-making, and enabling public debate.

Background

How does the census measure health?

The 2011 Census asked two questions related to health. The first question asked about an individual’s general health. Respondents to Question 13 (Figure 1) can be categorised as assessing their health as ‘Good’ if they answered Very Good or Good, or as having ‘Not Good’ health if they assessed it as Fair, Bad or Very bad.

Age standardisation

Age standardisation is a technique to produce comparable results across populations of different age structures. In England and Wales some local authority populations have markedly younger or older populations compared with the England and Wales average. Those populations with proportionately more residents at older ages are likely to have less favourable rates of self-assessed health simply on grounds of age, preventing other factors such as area deprivation being examined as a possible reason for health differences.

Age standardisation adjusts for these age differences, enabling populations to be compared on an equal footing. This short story gives a percentage of self-assessed health for each local authority’s resident population, enabling them to be ranked fairly.

The European Standard Population (ESP 2013) has been used to age standardise percentages of self-assessed health. Please see the background notes section for more detail.

Area based deprivation

This report uses English local authorities’ respective Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 summary score to illustrate the pattern in health status with relative area deprivation in England. This index measures deprivation across seven domains: income, employment, health, education, living environment, crime and access to services. For Wales this report uses the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation (WIMD) 2011 to measure the relative deprivation of Welsh unitary authorities. The eight domains used in the WIMD are similar to those used in England: income, housing, employment, access to services, education, health, community, safety, physical environment.

The English index takes into account the characteristics of areas within each local authority such as employment and service access. This can be used to generate an average summary score across all neighbourhoods within the local authority, which enables local authorities to be ranked by the level of relative deprivation experienced.

Further details of how Welsh unitary authorities are ranked can be accessed on the StatsWales website.

The inclusion of these ranks in the tables shows how health status varies by level of deprivation that the authority’s population is exposed to.

National Focus

Self assessment of health is an important indicator of an individual’s health-related well-being, indicating general physical and mental functioning, fitness for work and independent living. Figure 2 shows age-standardised rates of general health broken down into three categories for males and females in England and Wales. These national figures provide a benchmark for local authorities to compare themselves with.

Figure 2: Age standardised percentages of general health for males and females in England and Wales 2011

Figure 2: Age standardised percentages of general health for males and females in England and Wales 2011
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Notes:

  1. For the purpose of this analysis an individual responding to the general health question has been categorised as ‘Good ’if they answered Very Good or Good, or assessing it as ‘Bad’ if they responded as Bad or Very Bad. However the middle response category Fair was not modified and kept identical to the question category
  2. European Standard Population (ESP 2013) is used to standardise self-assessed general health responses to enable comparison allowing for differences in age structure

Download chart

In England and Wales 80.1 per cent (21.7 million) of males and 79.5 per cent (22.2 million) of females assessed their health as Very good or Good; a higher percentage of females assessed their health as Fair (14.5 per cent) than males (13.9 per cent). Only 6.0 per cent of males and 6.0 per cent of females assessed their general health as either Bad or Very bad. At the national level the self-assessed general health of males was slightly more favourable than females.

Figure 3: Prevalence of 'Good' self-assessed health in England and Wales, by age and sex

England and Wales, 2011

Figure 3: Prevalence of 'Good' self-assessed health in England and Wales, by age and sex
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Download chart

Figure 3 describes the overall age distribution of ‘Good’ general health for males and females across England and Wales. A familiar pattern of worsening health with increasing age is observed for each gender, with sharper declines occurring for those aged 50 and above. Children and young adults had the best self-assessed health, with only a modest difference apparent for those aged between 0 and 35. Among females, self-assessed health is less favourable than among males at ages 75 and above.

The remaining analysis in this report has been calculated separately for England and for Wales. One reason for this is because different indices of multiple deprivation are used by the countries and they are not comparable. In addition, as Health is a devolved policy area, administrations in England are interested in English rankings of local authorities for use in planning local services, while the Welsh government is primarily interested in Welsh unitary authority rankings for the same purposes.

English local authority comparison

ONS published data on general health prevalence based on the 2011 Census in January 2013, using crude rates for all persons to rank local authorities. This report presents data for the same time period, but for males and females using age standardised rates.

There are pronounced differences in local authority rankings on the two measures (crude versus age standardised); this illustrates the impact and benefits of age standardisation in enabling a fairer comparison between local authorities to be made. The top and bottom 10 local authorities in the earlier release were partly ranked on account of their relatively younger or older population structures. For example, Wandsworth, in London, with one of the youngest population structures was ranked 6th using crude rates, compared to 160th for males and 167th for females using age standardised rates. While East Lindsey, in Lincolnshire, with a much older age structure, ranked 326th using crude rates, compared to 277th for males and 260th for females using age standardised rates.

The earlier analysis showed only a weak relationship between crude rates of good health and area deprivation for local authorities, showing that age-structure differences can obscure other important local factors linked to health.

By using age standardised rates a more valid ranking of local authorities can be made, and the relationship between self-assessed ‘Good’ general health and local area deprivation can be re-examined.

This report includes the data of self-assessed ‘Good’ health for all 326 local authorities in England; however, because of small population counts the City of London has been merged with the neighbouring London Borough of Hackney, and data for the Isles of Scilly has been merged with Cornwall UA. Therefore the analyses presented here are based on 324 local or unitary authorities.

Authorities are ranked for males and females separately using their respective age-standardised percentage of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health which combines the Very Good and Good responses. Tables 1 and 2 show the 10 local authorities with the highest and lowest age-standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health for males and females respectively.

Age standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health for males with IMD 2010 ranks, local authorities in England 2011. [1],[2],[3]

Local Authority 'Good' health Rank5 Age standardised percentages 'Good' health IMD Ranks 2010
Top 10      
       
Hart 1 87.6 324
Chiltern 2 87.2 311
Waverley 3 87.0 319
Elmbridge 4 87.0 318
Wokingham UA 5 87.0 323
Surrey Heath 6 86.5 322
Mole Valley 7 86.4 308
Winchester 8 86.3 307
Guildford 9 86.2 298
South Bucks 10 86.2 296
       
Bottom 10      
       
Barnsley 315 74.2 47
Nottingham UA 316 74.1 20
Knowsley 317 74.1 5
Sandwell 318 74.0 12
Newham 319 73.8 3
Bolsover 320 73.5 58
Liverpool 321 73.3 1
Blackpool UA 322 73.1 6
Tower Hamlets 323 72.6 7
Manchester 324 72.4 4

Table source: Office for National Statistics

Table notes:

  1. European Standard Population (ESP 2013) has been used to calculate the age standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘good’ general health; which signify the percentage of people in good health by adjusting for the effect of age.   
  2. Authorities are ranked with age standardised percentages of good health for males; the authority with the highest percentage of good health is ranked as 1st. 
  3. Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 score rank, 1 = most deprived, 324 = least deprived; Indices of deprivation 2010 summary score rank is based on the average of LSOA ranks https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6884/1871689.xls
  4. Analysis refers to 324 local authorities as City of London has been merged with Hackney and Isles of Scilly has been merged with Cornwall due to small population counts
  5. Local authorities have been ranked at the England level to more than 1 decimal place.

Download table

Table 2: Age standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health for females with IMD 2010 ranks, local authorities in England 2011 [1],[2],[3],[4]

Local Authority 'Good' health Rank5 Age standardised percentages 'Good' health IMD Ranks 2010
Top 10      
       
Chiltern 1 86.9 311
Hart 2 86.8 324
Elmbridge 3 86.7 318
Waverley 4 86.7 319
Wokingham UA 5 86.2 323
Mole Valley 6 86.2 308
Winchester 7 86.2 307
South Bucks 8 86.1 296
Surrey Heath 9 86.0 322
Horsham 10 85.9 302
       
Bottom 10      
       
Leicester UA 315 73.5 25
Liverpool 316 73.5 1
Knowsley 317 73.3 5
Nottingham UA 318 73.3 20
Barking and Dagenham 319 72.9 22
Hackney and City of London  320 72.4 2
Sandwell 321 72.3 12
Manchester 322 71.3 4
Newham 323 70.2 3
Tower Hamlets 324 69.2 7

Table source: Office for National Statistics

Table notes:

  1. European Standard Population (ESP 2013) has been used to calculate the age standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘good’ general health; which signify percent of people in good health by adjusting for the effect of age. 
  2. Authorities are ranked with age standardised percentages of good health for females; the authority with the highest percentage of good health is ranked as 1st. 
  3. Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 score rank, 1 = most deprived, 324 = least deprived; Indices of deprivation 2010 summary score rank is based on the average of LSOA ranks https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6884/1871689.xls
  4. Analysis refers to 324 local authorities as City of London has been merged with Hackney and Isles of Scilly has been merged with Cornwall due to small population counts
  5. Local Authorities have been ranked at the England level to more than 1 decimal place.

Download table

The composition of the top 10 local authorities is similar for males and females. These local authorities are clustered in an area to the South and West of London, known for being among the least deprived areas of England: the counties of Surrey, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Hampshire, with predominantly semi-rural populations. In these local authorities the male age-standardised rate of ‘Good’ health ranged from 86.2 per cent in South Bucks to 87.6 per cent in Hart; for females the equivalent range was 85.9 per cent in Horsham to 86.9 per cent in Chiltern.

In contrast, the bottom 10 is composed of predominantly urban centres in the North, Midlands and London, where levels of deprivation were high. For males the age-standardised rate of ‘Good’ health ranged from 72.4 per cent in Manchester to 74.2 per cent in Barnsley, showing that more than 1 in 4 of the male population in these local authorities assessed their general health as ‘Not Good’. For females the equivalent range was 69.2 per cent in Tower Hamlets to 73.5 per cent in Leicester, with females in the London boroughs of Newham and Tower Hamlets assessing their general health least favourably across England. 

The local authorities of City of London, Richmond-upon-Thames, Wandsworth, Oxford and St. Albans appeared in the top 10 based on having the highest percentages of crude rates of self-assessed ‘Good’ health in the January 2013 report but dropped out of the top 10 when their age standardised rates were calculated for this report. Conversely East Lindsey, Tendring, Sunderland, South Tyneside, County Durham, Mansfield and Thanet had appeared in the bottom 10 in the January 2013 story based on having the lowest percentages of crude rates of self-assessed ‘Good’ health but are not in the bottom 10 for this analysis. This is mainly because of the different age structures: those which dropped out of the top 10 had younger population structures, and those which dropped out of the bottom 10 had older population structures.

Comparisons of ‘Good’ general health for males and females across all authorities in England in 2011 are shown in Maps 1 and 2 respectively. The darker colours indicate the authorities with higher percentages of ‘Good’ health and the lighter colours show the lower percentages.

Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for males, by local or unitary authority, England, 2011

Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for males, by local or unitary authority, England, 2011
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Download map

Map 2: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for females, by local or unitary authority, England, 2011

Map 2: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for females, by local or unitary authority, England, 2011
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Download map

  • PNG
    (484.8 Kb)

Once differences in age structure are accounted for, there is a strong relationship between general health and area deprivation. Among males, the correlation coefficient is 0.94 and among females 0.93, a close to linear association. The closer to 1 the coefficient is the stronger the relationship between general health and deprivation. This means that even at the local authority level, area deprivation has a significant influence on self-assessed health.

The diverse ethnic composition of the London boroughs of Newham and Tower Hamlets may contribute to their population’s less favourable self-assessed health rates; assessment of general health is known to vary for cultural reasons as well as individual expectations of health status. However, both Newham and Tower Hamlets have poorer health outcomes on a number of measures such as lower health and life expectancy, higher rates of premature death from heart disease and strokes, and higher rates of people diagnosed with diabetes than for England as a whole. For females, Healthy Life Expectancy at birth in 2009-11 was lowest in Tower Hamlets and third lowest in Newham.

For those local authorities not included among the highest and lowest 10, their respective age-standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health and their IMD 2010 summary score rank can be downloaded using the link to the reference table accompanying this publication.

Welsh unitary authority comparison

There were also some differences in the ranking of the unitary authorities in Wales following age-standardisation, compared with the results published in January 2013, but less markedly than those for England.

There are 22 unitary authorities in Wales; Cardiff had the largest population with the youngest population structure.    

Table 3 shows the age-standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ health for the five Welsh unitary authorities with the highest and lowest percentages, for males and females respectively, along with the unitary authority rank on the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation(WIMD), 2011.

Table 3. Welsh unitary authorities with highest and lowest percentages of 'Good' health 1,2,3

Unitary Authority 'Good' health Rank4 Age standardised percentages 'Good' health WIMD rank 2011
Males      
Top 5      
     
Monmouthshire 1 81.9 21=
Gwynedd 2 81.5 17
Powys 3 81.0 20
Flintshire 4 80.8 15
The Vale of Glamorgan 5 80.2 12
       
Bottom 5      
       
Neath Port Talbot 18 74.0 6
Rhondda Cynon Taf 19 73.3 3
Caerphilly 20 73.3 7
Blaenau Gwent 21 72.0 2
Merthyr Tydfil 22 71.5 1
       
Females      
Top 5      
       
Gwynedd 1 81.6 17
Powys 2 80.8 20
Monmouthshire 3 80.8 21=
Isle of Anglesey 4 80.4 19
Conwy 5 80.3 18
       
Bottom 5      
       
Rhondda Cynon Taf 18 72.5 3
Caerphilly 19 72.5 7
Neath Port Talbot 20 72.4 6
Blaenau Gwent 21 71.0 2
Merthyr Tydfil 22 70.9 1

Table source: Office for National Statistics

Table notes:

  1. European Standard Population (ESP 2013) has been used to calculate the age standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘good’ general health; which signify the percentage of people in good health by adjusting for the effect of age. 
  2. Authorities are ranked with age standardised percentages of good health for males and females separately; the authority with the highest percentage of good health is ranked as 1.
  3. WIMD rank 2011, 1=most deprived, 22=least deprived, numbers followed by an "=" sign indicate that this unitary authority shares this rank with another unitary authority

Download table

Overall, males in Wales assessed their general health more favourably than females, but both genders had less favourable self-assessed health than their counterparts in England. Monmouthshire had the highest percentage of males assessing their health as ‘Good’ (81.9 per cent), although this would have placed Monmouthshire only in the middle of the English local authority rankings. The lowest percentage of self-assessed ‘Good’ health by males was in Merthyr Tydfil at 71.5 per cent, which was lower than the lowest ranking English local authority of Manchester. The inequality in health between administrative areas was lower in Wales than in England, but a similar pattern of health worsening with rising levels of deprivation exposure was observed, as in England.

Merthyr Tydfil also had less favourable health outcomes on other measures such as life expectancy where it was lower than the Welsh average in 2009-11, while its mortality rates from circulatory diseases, respiratory diseases and cancer was higher. Merthyr Tydfil was also ranked the most deprived unitary authority in Wales, having the highest proportion of Welsh LSOAs in the most deprived national decile using the WIMD 2011. Conversely, those in the top five were among the least deprived.

Welsh females assessed their general health most favourably in Gwynedd at 81.6 per cent, with Monmouthshire and Powys also in the top five unitary authorities. Again, the female rates in the top five authorities in Wales would have positioned these authorities only in the middle of the English local authority rankings.

The only effect age-standardisation had on the top and bottom five unitary authorities in Wales was to displace Cardiff as the authority with the highest percentage of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health; before age-standardisation Cardiff was ranked 1st, but following age-standardisation it was ranked 12th for both males and females because of the relatively young age profile of Cardiff.

Map 3: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for males, by unitary authority, Wales, 2011

Map 3: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for males, by unitary authority, Wales, 2011
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Download map

  • PNG
    (212.2 Kb)

Map 4: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for females, by unitary authority, Wales, 2011

Map 4: Age standardised percentage of self-assessed 'Good' health for females, by unitary authority, Wales, 2011
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Download map

  • PNG
    (213.1 Kb)

The relationship between self-assessed health and area deprivation is also strong in Wales, following age-standardisation. Among males, the correlation coefficient is 0.84 and among females 0.86. This is not as strong as for England, possibly because of different method of ranking authorities using the WIMD 2011 (which is based on the proportion of neighbourhoods placed in the 10th most deprived neighbourhoods the authority has within its boundary). At the unitary authority level, area deprivation has a significant influence on self-assessed ‘Good’ health in Wales.

Overall general health was more favourably assessed in North and Mid Wales than South Wales. For those authorities not included among the highest and lowest five, their respective age-standardised percentages of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health and their WIMD 2011 rank can be found in the reference table.

Age specific inequality in England

While health inequalities between authorities can be measured using age-standardised percentages, it is also interesting to assess at which ages health inequalities are wider or narrower. In England, the London borough of Tower Hamlets had the lowest age-standardised percentage of self-assessed ‘Good’ general health for females and the second lowest for males; while Hart in Hampshire had the highest percentage for males and the second highest for females.

Figure 4 shows self-assessed health at different ages throughout the life course between all residents of Tower Hamlets, the seventh most deprived authority in England, and all residents in Hart, the least deprived authority, with the all England figures also included. 

Figure 4: Prevalence of 'Good' health in Hart and Tower Hamlets

Figure 4:  Prevalence of 'Good' health in Hart and Tower Hamlets
Source: Office for National Statistics

Notes:

  1. Inequality here refers to the health gap between the most advantaged and one of the least advantaged.
  2. Hart had the highest age standardised rates for 'Good' health of any local authority in England.
  3. Tower Hamlets had the lowest age standardised rates for 'Good' health of any local authority in England.

Download chart

This chart shows that the absolute difference in self-assessed health between these local authorities is small at the younger ages (under 35). However, although health deteriorates from the age of 35 in both local authorities, the decline is more pronounced in Tower Hamlets. The difference in age-specific percentages of ‘Good’ health between Tower Hamlets and Hart widens from a difference of 2.2 percentage points higher in Tower Hamlets at ages 25-34, to 35.7 percentage points higher at ages 65-74, before starting to narrow beyond age 74.

Residents of Hart aged 50-64 assessed their general health more favourably than residents in Tower Hamlets aged 35-49. Similarly, Hart residents aged 75-84 assessed their health more favourably than Tower Hamlets residents aged 50-64. These results show stark contrasts in premature health declines in different parts of England. This provides the opportunity for general population health improvement, by improving the health of those aged 35-74 in authorities such as Tower Hamlets and other authorities which have ‘Good’ health ratings below the England average.

Age specific inequality in Wales

Among residents in Wales, the unitary authority of Gwynedd had the most favourable self-assessed health for females and second most favourable for males, while Merthyr Tydfil had the least favourable. Figure 5 shows that a similar age-specific pattern to that in England was observed. The difference between the Welsh authorities which assessed their health most and least favourably was slightly wider at ages 25-34 at 3.8 percentage points than the top and bottom England authorities, but at older ages the divergence was less marked than between Hart and Tower Hamlets. Age-specific variations in self-assessed health between Gwynedd and Merthyr Tydfil were widest at ages 65-74, with a 25.2 percentage point gap, smaller than at the equivalent age in England (see above). At ages 75 and above there was a greater convergence in percentages of ‘Good’ health between these authorities than in the England authority comparison. 

Figure 5: Prevalence of 'Good' health in Gwynedd and Merthyr Tydfil

Figure 5:  Prevalence of 'Good' health in Gwynedd and Merthyr Tydfil
Source: Census - Office for National Statistics

Notes:

  1. Inequality here refers to the health gap between the most advantaged and one of the least advantaged.
  2. Gwynedd had the highest age standardised rates for 'Good' health of any Unitary Authority in Wales.
  3. Merthyr Tydfil had the lowest age standardised rates for 'Good' health of any Unitary Authority in Wales.

Download chart

 

Interactive content

Additional age-specific data is available for all local and unitary authorities; an interactive map shows the percentage of those with ‘Good’ health in each age group together with their individual trend compared to the England and Wales average in an interactive chart.

Background notes

  1. The rates of ‘Good’ health reported in this short story have been age standardised to the European Standard Population 2013. These age standardised estimates are calculated to allow comparison of populations with differing age structures. Age standardisation is a process where the age specific rates of ‘Good’ health for a particular area or class are applied to a hypothetical European standard population (ESP) for the corresponding age group. The hypothetical number of people in the ESP with ‘Good’ health in each age group is totalled and then divided by the total ESP for all ages studied, to give age standardised rates. There were eight age groups in the census tables: 0-15, 16-24, 25-34, 35-49, 50-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+.The age specific groups in the census tables used in this analysis did not overlap perfectly with the ESP. The ESP has an age group started with 0 and 1-4 whereas this analysis, first age group starts with 0-15. Therefore, in order to create a population total for the age group 0-15 , a fifth of the total population in age group 15-19 was deducted. This was then added to the age group range from 0-14 to give an ESP for the age group  0-15 used in this analysis. Similarly for age group 85+ all age groups in the ESP above 85 were combined to give an ESP weight for those aged 85+.

  2. The European Standard Population 2013 was published by Eurostat, the statistical institute of the European Commission, on 11 July 2013. The publication of the ESP 2013 provides an up-to-date standard population which reflects the average age structure of European countries from 2010-2030; this is important because of population ageing since the original ESP in 1976. ONS held a public consultation on the implementation of the ESP 2013 in UK official statistics which closed on 3 October 2013. Plans for future use of the ESP 2013 in UK official statistics will be published in the near future.

  3. A spreadsheet (64 Kb Excel sheet) detailing the calculation of age standardised rates to the European Standard Population can be found on the ONS website.

  4. The correlation coefficient is a measure of the strength of a relationship between one measure and another, which can range in value from -1 to 1. A value of 1 represents a perfect linear relationship between two measures, where one measure increases in proportion to one another. A value of -1 also represents a perfect linear relationship, but here as one measure increases the other measure decreases. In this example a higher rank means less deprivation and therefore as favourable self-assessed ‘Good’ health increases so does the deprivation measure rank of the local authority.

  5. The inequality that exists between populations is often explained in terms of area disadvantage. Measures of health status are shown to be more favourable in some geographical locations than others and to be strongly patterned with material factors such as income, environment, housing quality, unemployment, access to services and education. These factors have been brought together into an index (such as the Index of Multiple Deprivation) which can be applied to small areas such as LSOAs to give a measure of relative material disadvantage experienced by a specific area compared with other areas. In order to present a picture of general health and the scale of inequality that exists between populations, these small areas are amalgamated, on the basis of their relative level of disadvantage. The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004 and 2010 in England, and the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation 2005 and 2011 in Wales, are used to group areas into tenths (deciles). Rates of ‘Good’ general health are then calculated for these deciles.

  6. Because of small population counts data for the City of London has been merged with the London Borough of Hackney, one of its neighbouring authorities, and data for the Isles of Scilly has been merged with Cornwall UA. Therefore the analyses presented are for 324 local or unitary authorities in England.

  7. Figures in this publication may not sum due to rounding.

  8. Interactive data visualisations developed by ONS are also available to aid interpretation of the results.

  9. Census day was 27 March 2011.

  10. Regional 2011 Census data for all persons is available via the Nomis website using data table DC3302EW (Long term health problems or disability by health by sex by age).

  11. Future releases from the 2011 Census will include cross tabulations by other census characteristics, and tabulations at other geographies. Further information on future releases is available online in the 2011 Census Prospectus.

  12. ONS has ensured that the data collected meet users' needs via an extensive 2011 Census outputs consultation process in order to ensure that the 2011 Census outputs will be of increased use in the planning of housing, education, health and transport services in future years.

  13. The England and Wales census questionnaires asked the same questions with one exception; an additional question on Welsh language was included on the Wales questionnaire.

  14. ONS is responsible for carrying out the census in England and Wales. Simultaneous but separate censuses took place in Scotland and Northern Ireland. These were run by the National Records of Scotland (NRS) and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) respectively.

  15. ONS is responsible for the publication of UK statistics (compiling comparable statistics from the UK statistical agencies above) and these are available on the ONS website. These will be compiled as each of the three statistical agencies involved publish the relevant data. The Northern Ireland census prospectus and the Scotland census prospectus are available online.

  16. A person's place of usual residence is in most cases the address at which they stay the majority of the time. For many people this will be their permanent or family home. If a member of the services did not have a permanent or family address at which they are usually resident, they were recorded as usually resident at their base address.

  17. All key terms used in this publication, such as usual resident are explained in the 2011 Census user guide.

  18. All census population estimates were extensively quality assured, using other national and local sources of information for comparison and review by a series of quality assurance panels. An extensive range of quality assurance, evaluation and methodology papers were published alongside the first release in July 2012, including a Quality and Methodology Information (QMI) document.

  19. The 2011 Census achieved its overall target response rate of 94% of the usually resident population of England and Wales, and over 80% in all local and unitary authorities. The population estimate for England and Wales of 56.1 million is estimated with 95 per cent confidence to be accurate to within +/- 85,000 (0.15 per cent).

  20. Details of the policy governing the release of new data are available by visiting www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html or from the Media Relations Office email: media.relations@ons.gsi.gov.uk

Get all the tables for this publication in the data section of this publication .
Content from the Office for National Statistics.
© Crown Copyright applies unless otherwise stated.