Background: While low response rates need not introduce bias into research, having a lower percentage of responders does increase the potential for this to occur. This is of particular concern given the decline that has been occurring in response rates since the 1950s. However, there are various methods that can be incorporated into the study design, which can assist in increasing levels of participation. Objective: To outline the methods used by the King's Centre for Military Health Research (KCMHR) when conducting a recent telephone survey of serving and ex-Service military personnel. Design: Using participants who had already taken part in a questionnaire-based study on the health effects of serving in the UK Armed Forces (n=10,272), a subsample was selected for an in-depth telephone interview-based follow-up study. The subsample consisted of 1,105 participants, selected on the basis of their mental health status. An adjusted response rate of 76% was achieved (n=821). Results: Various methods of contact were used in this study to ensure an adequate response rate was achieved. Conclusions: Simple research strategies increase response rates and are likely to reduce bias. Use of multiple simultaneous tracing methods and customisation of the approach to the target population increases rapport between participants, ensuring that those who take part feel valued as members of the study. In the current climate of decreasing participation in studies, research teams need to engage with their study population and devise innovative strategies to keep participants involved in the research being undertaken. For the abstract or full text in other languages, please see Supplementary files under Reading Tools online

Abstract

The 2015-16 Armenia Demographic and Health Survey (2015-16 ADHS) is the fourth in a series of nationally representative sample surveys designed to provide information on population and health issues. It is conducted in Armenia under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys program. Specifically, the objective of the 2015-16 ADHS is to provide current and reliable information on fertility and abortion levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, domestic violence against women, child discipline, awareness and behavior regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other health-related issues such as smoking, tuberculosis, and anemia. The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from women of reproductive age and, for certain topics, from men as well.

The 2015-16 ADHS results are intended to provide information needed to evaluate existing social programs and to design new strategies to improve the health of and health services for the people of Armenia. Data are presented by region (marz) wherever sample size permits. The information collected in the 2015-16 ADHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the 2000, 2005, and 2010 surveys.

The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the NSS. The 2015-16 ADHS also provides comparable data for longterm trend analysis because the 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015-16 surveys were implemented by the same organization and used similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database of demographic and health–related information for research purposes.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15-49

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), children age 0-4 years, women age 15-49 years and men age 15-49 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample was designed to produce representative estimates of key indicators at the national level, for Yerevan, and for total urban and total rural areas separately. Many indicators can also be estimated at the regional (marz) level.

The sampling frame used for the 2015-16 ADHS is the Armenia Population and Housing Census, which was conducted in Armenia in 2011 (APHC 2011). The sampling frame is a complete list of enumeration areas (EAs) covering the whole country, a total number of 11,571 EAs, provided by the National Statistical Service (NSS) of Armenia, the implementing agency for the 2015-16 ADHS. This EA frame was created from the census data base by summarizing the households down to EA level. A representative probability sample of 8,749 households was selected for the 2015-16 ADHS sample. The sample was selected in two stages. In the first stage, 313 clusters (192 in urban areas and 121 in rural areas) were selected from a list of EAs in the sampling frame. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey. Appendix A provides additional information on the sample design of the 2015-16 Armenia DHS. Because of the approximately equal sample size in each marz, the sample is not self-weighting at the national level, and weighting factors have been calculated, added to the data file, and applied so that results are representative at the national level.

For further details on sample design, see Appendix A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Five questionnaires were used for the 2015-16 ADHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Armenia. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and international donors. After all questionnaires were finalized in English, they were translated into Armenian. They were pretested in September-October 2015.

Cleaning operations

The processing of the 2015-16 ADHS data began shortly after fieldwork commenced. All completed questionnaires were edited immediately by field editors while still in the field and checked by the supervisors before being dispatched to the data processing center at the NSS central office in Yerevan. These completed questionnaires were edited and entered by 15 data processing personnel specially trained for this task. All data were entered twice for 100 percent verification. Data were entered using the CSPro computer package. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because the senior ADHS technical staff were able to advise field teams of problems detected during the data entry. In particular, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters. Moreover, the double entry of data enabled easy comparison and identification of errors and inconsistencies. As a result, specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in June 2016.

Response rate

A total of 8,749 households were selected in the sample, of which 8,205 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. The main reason for the difference is that some of the dwelling units that were occupied during the household listing operation were either vacant or the household was away for an extended period at the time of interviewing. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 7,893, yielding a household response rate of 96 percent. The household response rate in urban areas (96 percent) was nearly the same as in rural areas (97 percent).

In these households, a total of 6,251 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 6,116 of these women, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. In one-half of the households, a total of 2,856 eligible men were identified, and interviews were completed with 2,755 of these men, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. Among men, response rates are slightly lower in urban areas (96 percent) than in rural areas (97 percent), whereas rates for women are the same in urban and in rural areas (98 percent).

The 2015-16 ADHS achieved a slightly higher response rate for households than the 2010 ADHS (NSS 2012). The increase is only notable for urban households (96 percent in 2015-16 compared with 94 percent in 2010). Response rates in all other categories are very close to what they were in 2010.

Sampling error estimates

SAS computer software were used to calculate sampling errors for the 2015-16 ADHS. The programs used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for means or proportions and the Jackknife repeated replication method for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey final report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months - Nutritional status of children based on the NCHS/CDC/WHO International Reference Population - Vaccinations by background characteristics for children age 18-29 months

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the survey final report.

Abstract

The 2009 MDHS was designed to provide data to monitor the population and health situation in Maldives. Specifically, the MDHS collected information on fertility levels and preferences, marriage, sexual activity, knowledge and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutrition status of women and young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, and awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections. At the household level, the survey collected information on domains of physical disability among those age 5 and older, developmental disability among young children, support for early learning, children at work, the impact of the tsunami of 2004, health expenditures, and care and support for physical activity of adults age 65 and older. At the individual level, the survey assessed additional features of blood pressure, diabetes, heart attack, and stroke.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Children age under 5
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-64

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN

The population of the republic of Maldives is distributed on 195 inhabited islands among a total of 202 inhabited islands; seven islands have no residents (MPND, 2008). Each inhabited island is an administrative unit with an island office that handles island-based affairs. The islands are regrouped to form atolls, a higher-level administrative unit with an atoll office and an atoll chief. There are 20 atolls in total in the republic. The capital city of Malé and the two surrounding islands, Villingili and Hulhumale, form a special atoll. The 21 atolls are regrouped to form six geographic regions according to their location. Malé atoll alone forms a region. In Maldives, there is no urbanrural designation for residential households within an atoll. All residential households in the 20 atolls outside of Malé are considered rural; all residential households in Malé are considered urban.

The 2009 Maldives DHS is based on a probability sample of 7,515 households. The sample was designed to produce representative data on households, women, and children for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, for the six geographical regions, and for each of the atolls of the country. The male and youth surveys were designed to produce representative results for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for each of the six geographical regions.

The 2006 Maldives Population and Housing Census provided the sampling frame for the 2009 MDHS. The MDHS sample was a stratified multistage sample selected in two stages from the census frame. In the first stage, 270 census blocks were selected using a systematic selection, with probability proportional to the number of residential households residing in the block. Stratification was achieved by treating each of the 21 atolls as a sampling stratum. Samples were selected independently in each stratum according to an appropriate allocation.

In the second stage of sampling, residential households were selected in each of the selected census blocks. Household selection involved an equal probability systematic selection of a fixed number of households: 28 households per block. Households were selected from the household listings created in the census, but to allow all households an opportunity to be included in the sample, listings were sent to island offices for updating prior to making household selections for the MDHS.

All ever-married women age 15-49 in the total sample of MDHS households, who were either usual residents of the household or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey, were eligible to be interviewed. In half of the households selected for the ever-married sample of women, all ever-married men age 15-64, who were either usual residents of the household or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey, were eligible to be interviewed. In the same half of households selected for the ever-married sample of men, never-married women and nevermarried men age 15-24, who were either usual residents of the household or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey, were also eligible to be interviewed. The MDHS was for the most part limited to Maldivian citizens; non-Maldivians were included in the survey only if they were the spouse, son, or daughter of a Maldivian.

Note: See detailed sample implementation information in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four questionnaires were used for the 2009 MDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, the Men’s Questionnaire, and the Youth Questionnaire. The contents of the Household, Women’s, and Men’s questionnaires were based on model questionnaires developed by the MEASURE DHS programme. The DHS model questionnaires were modified to reflect concerns pertinent to the Maldives in the areas of population, women and children’s health, family planning, and others. Questionnaires were translated from English into Dhivehi.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected households and to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including their age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The Household Questionnaire was also designed to collect information on characteristics of the household’s dwelling unit, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, water shortage, materials used for the floor and roof of the house, and ownership of various durable goods. In addition, height and weight measurements of ever-married women age 15-49 and children age 6-59 months were recorded in the Household Questionnaire to assess their nutritional status.

Topics added to the Household Questionnaire to reflect issues relevant in the Maldives include physical disability among those age 5 and older, developmental disability among young children, support for early learning, children at work, the tsunami of 2004, health expenditures, and care and support for physical activities of adults age 65 and older.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 15-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (education, media exposure, etc.) - Reproductive history - Knowledge and use of family planning methods - Fertility preferences - Antenatal and delivery care - Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices - Vaccinations and childhood illnesses - Marriage and sexual activity - Woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics - Infant and child feeding practices - Childhood mortality - Awareness and behaviour about AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) - Knowledge of blood pressure, diabetes, heart attack, and stroke

The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all ever-married men age 15-64 living in every second household in the MDHS sample. The Men’s Questionnaire collected much of the same information as the Women’s Questionnaire, but it was shorter because it did not contain questions on reproduction, maternal and child health, and nutrition.

The Youth Questionnaire was administered to all never-married women and men age 15-24 living in every second household in the MDHS sample (the same one-half selected for the Men’s survey). The Youth Questionnaire focuses on priorities of the MOHF that pertain to young adults: reproductive health, knowledge and attitudes about HIV/AIDS, sexual activity, and tobacco, alcohol, and drug use.

Response rate

A total of 7,515 households were selected in the sample, of which 7,137 were found to be occupied at the time of data collection. The difference between the number of households selected and the number occupied usually occurs because some structures are found to be vacant or non-existent. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 6,443, yielding a household response rate of 90 percent.

In the households interviewed in the survey, a total of 8,362 ever-married women were identified as eligible for the individual interview; interviews were completed with 7,131 women, yielding a female response rate of 85 percent. In the one-half sub-sample of MDHS households, a total of 3,224 evermarried men age 15-64 were identified as eligible for the individual interview; interviews were completed with 1,727 men, yielding a male response rate of 54 percent. In the same sub-sample of households, a total of 3,205 never-married women and men age 15-24 (youth) were identified as eligible for individual interview; interviews were completed with 2,240 youth, yielding a youth response rate of 70 percent. The response rate was higher for female youth (80 percent) than male youth (61 percent).

The urban household response rate of 83 percent is lower than the 92 percent response rate among rural households. The same is true for individual interviews with ever-married respondents; response rates are somewhat lower among urban women (79 percent) and men (47 percent) than among their rural counterparts (87 percent and 55 percent, respectively). The difference in response rates between urban and rural youth is negligible.

Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling errors and sampling errors. Non-sampling

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017 Indonesia Dmographic and Health Survey (IDHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. The IDHS provides a comprehensive overview of population and maternal and child health issues in Indonesia. More specifically, the IDHS was designed to: - provide data on fertility, family planning, maternal and child health, and awareness of HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) to help program managers, policy makers, and researchers to evaluate and improve existing programs; - measure trends in fertility and contraceptive prevalence rates, and analyze factors that affect such changes, such as residence, education, breastfeeding practices, and knowledge, use, and availability of contraceptive methods; - evaluate the achievement of goals previously set by national health programs, with special focus on maternal and child health; - assess married men’s knowledge of utilization of health services for their family’s health and participation in the health care of their families; - participate in creating an international database to allow cross-country comparisons in the areas of fertility, family planning, and health.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15-54

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women age 15-49 years resident in the household, and all men age 15-54 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2017 IDHS sample covered 1,970 census blocks in urban and rural areas and was expected to obtain responses from 49,250 households. The sampled households were expected to identify about 59,100 women age 15-49 and 24,625 never-married men age 15-24 eligible for individual interview. Eight households were selected in each selected census block to yield 14,193 married men age 15-54 to be interviewed with the Married Man's Questionnaire. The sample frame of the 2017 IDHS is the Master Sample of Census Blocks from the 2010 Population Census. The frame for the household sample selection is the updated list of ordinary households in the selected census blocks. This list does not include institutional households, such as orphanages, police/military barracks, and prisons, or special households (boarding houses with a minimum of 10 people).

The sampling design of the 2017 IDHS used two-stage stratified sampling: Stage 1: Several census blocks were selected with systematic sampling proportional to size, where size is the number of households listed in the 2010 Population Census. In the implicit stratification, the census blocks were stratified by urban and rural areas and ordered by wealth index category.

Stage 2: In each selected census block, 25 ordinary households were selected with systematic sampling from the updated household listing. Eight households were selected systematically to obtain a sample of married men.

For further details on sample design, see Appendix B of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2017 IDHS used four questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, Woman’s Questionnaire, Married Man’s Questionnaire, and Never Married Man’s Questionnaire. Because of the change in survey coverage from ever-married women age 15-49 in the 2007 IDHS to all women age 15-49, the Woman’s Questionnaire had questions added for never married women age 15-24. These questions were part of the 2007 Indonesia Young Adult Reproductive Survey Questionnaire. The Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire are largely based on standard DHS phase 7 questionnaires (2015 version). The model questionnaires were adapted for use in Indonesia. Not all questions in the DHS model were included in the IDHS. Response categories were modified to reflect the local situation.

Cleaning operations

All completed questionnaires, along with the control forms, were returned to the BPS central office in Jakarta for data processing. The questionnaires were logged and edited, and all open-ended questions were coded. Responses were entered in the computer twice for verification, and they were corrected for computer-identified errors. Data processing activities were carried out by a team of 34 editors, 112 data entry operators, 33 compare officers, 19 secondary data editors, and 2 data entry supervisors. The questionnaires were entered twice and the entries were compared to detect and correct keying errors. A computer package program called Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro), which was specifically designed to process DHS-type survey data, was used in the processing of the 2017 IDHS.

Response rate

Of the 49,261 eligible households, 48,216 households were found by the interviewer teams. Among these households, 47,963 households were successfully interviewed, a response rate of almost 100%.

In the interviewed households, 50,730 women were identified as eligible for individual interview and, from these, completed interviews were conducted with 49,627 women, yielding a response rate of 98%. From the selected household sample of married men, 10,440 married men were identified as eligible for interview, of which 10,009 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 96%. The lower response rate for men was due to the more frequent and longer absence of men from the household. In general, response rates in rural areas were higher than those in urban areas.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors result from mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2017 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (2017 IDHS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2017 IDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling error is a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2017 IDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2017 IDHS is a STATA program. This program used the Taylor linearization method for variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix C of the survey final report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar year - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix D of the survey final report.

Abstract

The primary objective of the Adolescent Reproductive Health component (ARH) of the 2012 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (IDHS) is to provide policymakers and program managers with national- and provincial-level data on representative samples of never married women and men age 15-24.

Specifically, the ARH component of the 2012 IDHS was designed to: • Measure the level of knowledge of adolescents concerning reproductive health issues • Examine the attitudes of adolescents on various reproductive health issues • Measure the level of tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and drug use among adolescents • Measure the level of sexual activity among adolescents • Explore adolescents’ awareness of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Never married woman age 15-49
• Never married man age 15-54

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Indonesia is divided into 33 provinces. Each province is subdivided into districts (regency in areas mostly rural and municipality in urban areas). Districts are subdivided into subdistricts, and each subdistrict is divided into villages. The entire village is classified as urban or rural.

The 2012 IDHS sample was aimed at providing reliable estimates of key characteristics for women age 15-49 and currently-married men age 15-54 in Indonesia as a whole, in urban and rural areas, and in each of the 33 provinces included in the survey. To achieve this objective, a total of 1,840 census blocks (CBs)-874 in urban areas and 966 in rural areas - were selected from the list of CBs in the selected primary sampling units formed during the 2010 population census.

For further details on sample design and implementation, see Appendix B of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2012 IDHS used four questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Married Man’s Questionnaire, and the Never-Married Man’s Questionnaire. Because of the change in survey coverage from ever-married women age 15-49 in the 2007 IDHS to all women age 15-49 in the 2012 IDHS, the Woman’s Questionnaire had questions added for never-married women age 15-24. These questions had previously been a part of the 2007 Indonesia Young Adult Reproductive Survey Questionnaire. Questions asked of never-married women age 15-24 assessed additional background characteristics; knowledge of the human reproductive system; attitudes toward marriage and having children; the role of family, school, community, and media; use of smoking tobacco, alcohol, and drugs; and dating and sexual activity.

Cleaning operations

Data processing activities, which included editing and coding open-ended questions, were carried out by a team of 58 data entry operators, 42 data editors, 14 secondary data editors, and 14 data entry supervisors. Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) software was used to process the survey data.

Response rate

A total of 46,024 households were selected in the sample, of which 44,302 were occupied. Of the households found in the survey, 43,852 were successfully interviewed, yielding a very high response rate (99 percent).

In the interviewed households, 9,442 never-married female and 12,381 never-married male respondents age were identified for an individual interview. Of these, completed interviews were conducted with 8,902 women and 10,980 men, yielding response rates of 94 and 89 percent, respectively. These response rates are higher than those of the 2007 IYARHS, which were 90 and 86 percent, respectively.

Sampling error estimates

Detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix C of the survey report.

Background Response rates to surveys are declining and this threatens the validity and generalisability of their findings. We wanted to determine whether paper quality influences the response rate to postal surveys Methods A postal questionnaire was sent to all members of the British Society of Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE). Recipients were randomised to receiving the questionnaire printed on standard quality paper or high quality paper. Results The response rate for the recipients of high quality paper was 43/195 (22%) and 57/194 (29%) for standard quality paper (relative rate of response 0.75, 95% CI 0.33–1.05, p = 0.1 Conclusion The use of high quality paper did not increase response rates to a questionnaire survey of gynaecologists affiliated to an endoscopic society.

Abstract

The main objective of a demographic household survey (DHS) is to provide estimates of a number of basic demographic and health variables. This is done through interviews with a scientifically selected probability sample that is chosen from a well-defined population.

The 2007 Nauru Demographic and Health Survey (2007 NDHS) was one of four pilot demographic and health surveys conducted in the Pacific under an Asian Development Bank ADB/ Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) Regional DHS Pilot Project. The primary objective of this survey was to provide up-to-date information for policy-makers, planners, researchers and programme managers, for use in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating population and health programmes within the country. The survey was intended to provide key estimates of Nauru's demographics and health situation. The findings of the 2007 NDHS are very important in measuring the achievements of family planning and other health programmes. To ensure better understanding and use of these data, the results of this survey should be widely disseminated at different planning levels. Different dissemination techniques will be used to reach different segments of society.

The primary purpose of the 2007 NDHS was to furnish policy-makers and planners with detailed information on fertility, family planning, infant and child mortality, maternal and child health, nutrition, and knowledge of HIV and AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections.

NOTE: The only dissemination used was wide distribution of the report. A planned data use workshop was not undertaken. Hence there is some misconceptions and lack of awareness on the results obtained from the survey. The report is provided on the NBOS website free for download.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage - Districts

Analysis unit

• Households
• Children (0-14yrs)
• Individual women of reproductive age (15-49 yrs)
• Individual men of reproductive age (15yrs+)
• Facilities providing reproductive and child health services

Universe

The survey covered all household members (usual residents), - All children (aged 0-14 years) resident in the household - All women of reproductive age (15-49 years) resident in all household - All males (15yrs and above) in every second household (approx. 50%) resident in selected household

Results: The 2007 Nauru Demographic Health Survey (2007 NDHS) is a nationally representative survey of 655 eligible women (aged 15-49) and 392 eligible men (aged 15 and above).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

IDG NOTES: Locate sampling documentation with SPC (Graeme Brown) and internal files. Add in this sections. Or second option dilute appendix A Sampling and extract key issues.

ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS - Refer to Appendix A of final NDHS2007 report or; - External Resources - 2007 DHS- Appendix A and B Sampling (to be created separatedly by IDG progress ongoing)

Sampling deviation

IDG NOTES: Locate sampling documentation with Macro and internal files. Add in this section. Or second option dilute appendix B Sampling and extract key issues.

ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS - Refer to Appendix B of final NDHS2007 report or;

• External Resources
  • 2007 DHS- Appendix A and B Sampling (to be created separatedly by IDG progress ongoing)

Extract:

In the 2007 NDHS Report of the survey results, sampling errors for selected variables have been presented in a tabular format. The sampling error tables should include:

.. Variable name

R: Value of the estimate; SE: Sampling error of the estimate; N: Unweighted number of cases on which the estimate is based; WN: Weighted number of cases; DEFT: Design effect value that compensates for the loss of precision that results from using cluster rather than simple random sampling; SE/R: Relative standard error (i.e. ratio of the sampling error to the value estimate); R-2SE: Lower limit of the 95% confidence interval; R+2SE: Upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (never >1.000 for a proportion).

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

DHS questionnaire for women cover the following sections:

• Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc)
• Reproductive history
• Knowledge and use of contraception methods
• Antenatal care, delivery care and postnatal care
• Breastfeeding and infant feeding
• Immunization, child health and nutrition
• Marriage and recent sexual activity
• Fertility preferences
• Knowledge about HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections
• Husbands background and women's work

The men's questionnaire covers the same except for sections 4, 5, 6 which are not applicable to men.

It was also recognized that some countries have a need for special information that is not contained in the core questionnaire. Separate questionnaire modules were developed on a series of topics. These topics are optional and include:

• maternal mortality
• pill-taking behaviour
• sterilization experience
• children's education
• women's status
• domestic violence
• health expenditures
• consanguinity

The Papua New Guinea (PNG) questionnaire was proposed for Nauru to adapt as in comparison to the existing DHS model, this is not as lengthy and time-consuming. The PNG questionnaire also dealt with high incidence of alcohol and tobacco in Nauru. Questions on HIV/AIDS and STI knowledge were included in the men's questionnaire where it was not included in the PNG questionnaire.

Response rate

IDG NOTES: Locate response rate documentation with SPC (Graeme Brown) and internal files. Add in this sections.

Abstract

The JPFHS is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) program, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The 1990 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) was carried out as part of the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) program. The Demographic and Health Surveys is assisting governments and private agencies in the implementation of household surveys in developing countries.

The JPFIS was designed to provide information on levels and trends of fertility, infant and child mortality, and family planning. The survey also gathered information on breastfeeding, matemal and child health cam, the nutritional status of children under five, as well as the characteristics of households and household members.

The main objectives of the project include: a) Providing decision makers with a data base and analyses useful for informed policy choices, b) Expanding the international population and health data base, c) Advancing survey methodology, and d) Developing skills and resources necessary to conduct high quality demographic and health surveys in the participating countries.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the JPFHS survey was selected to be representative of the major geographical regions, as well as the nation as a whole. The survey adopted a stratified, multi-stage sampling design. In each governorate, localities were classified into 9 strata according to the estimated population size in 1989. The sampling design also allowed for the survey results to be presented according to major cities (Amman, Irbid and Zarqa), other urban localities, and the rural areas. Localities with fewer than 5,000 people were considered rural.

For this survey, 349 sample units were drawn, containing 10,708 housing units for the individual interview. Since the survey used a separate household questionnaire, the Department of Statistics doubled the household sample size and added a few questions on labor force, while keeping the original individual sample intact. This yielded 21,172 housing units. During fieldwork for the household interview, it was found that 4,359 household units were ineligible either because the dwelling was vacant or destroyed, the household was absent during the team visit, or some other reason. There were 16,296 completed household interviews out of 16,813 eligible households, producing a response rate of 96.9 percent.

The completed household interviews yielded 7,246 women eligible for the individual interview, of which 6,461 were successfully interviewed, producing a response rate of 89.2 percent.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The 1990 JPFIS utilized two questionnaires, one for the household interview and the other for individual women. Both questionnaires were developed first in English and then translated into Arabic. The household questionnaire was used to list all members of the sample households, including usual residents as well as visitors. For each member of the household, basic demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were recorded and women eligible for the individual interview were identified. To be eligible for individual interview, a woman had to be a usual member of the household (part of the de jure population), ever-married, and between 15 and 49 years of age. The household questionnaire was expanded from the standard DHS-II model questionnaire to facilitate the estimation of adult mortality using the orphanhood and widowhood techniques. In addition, the questionnaire obtained information on polygamy, economic activity of persons 15 years of age and over, family type, type of insurance covering the household members, country of work in the summer of 1990 which coincided with the Gulf crisis, and basic data for the calculation of the crude birth rate and the crude death rate. Additional questions were asked about deceased women if they were ever-married and age 15-49, in order to obtain information for the calculation of materoal mortality indices.

The individual questionnaire is a modified version of the standard DHS-II model "A" questionnaire. Experience gained from previous surveys, in particular the 1983 Jordan Fertility and Family Health Survey, and the questionnaire developed by the Pan Arab Project for Child Development (PAPCHILD), were useful in the discussions on the content of the JPFHS questionnaire. A major change from the DHS-II model questionnaire was the rearrangement of the sections so that the marriage section came before reproduction; this allowed the interview to flow more smoothly. Questions on children's cause of death based on verbal autopsy were added to the section on health, which, due to its size, was split into two parts. The first part focused on antenatal care and breastfeeding; the second part examined measures for prevention of childhood diseases and information on the morbidity and mortality of children loom since January 1985. As questions on sexual relations were considered too sensitive, they were replaced by questions about the husband's presence in the household during the specified time period; this served as a proxy for recent sexual activity.

The JPFHS individual questionnaire consists of nine sections: - Respondent's background and household characteristics - Marriage - Reproduction - Contraception - Breastfeeding and health - Immunization, morbidity, and child mortality - Fertility preferences - Husband's background, residence, and woman's work - Height and weight of children

Response rate

For the individual interview, the number of eligible women found in the selected households and the number of women successfully interviewed are presented. The data indicate a high response rate for the household interview (96.9 percent), and a lower rate for the individual interview (89.2 percent). Women in large cities have a slightly lower response rate (88.6 percent) than those in other areas. Most of the non-response for the individual interview was due to the absence of respondents and the postponement of interviews which were incomplete.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The results from sample surveys are affected by two types of errors, non-sampling error and sampling error. Nonsampling error is due to mistakes made in carrying out field activities, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, errors in the way the questions are asked, misunderstanding on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, data entry errors, etc. Although efforts were made during the design and implementation of the JPFHS to minimize this type of error, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be measured statistically. The sample of women selected in the JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each one would have yielded results that differed somewhat from the actual sample selected. The sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples; although it is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

Sampling error is usually measured in terms of standard error of a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which one can reasonably assured that, apart from nonsampling errors, the true value of the variable for the whole population falls. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that same statistic as measured in 95 percent of all possible samples with the same design (and expected size) will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic.

If the sample of women had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the JPFI-IS sample design depended on stratification, stages and clusters. Consequently, it was necessary to utilize more complex formulas. The computer package CLUSTERS, developed by the International Statistical Institute for the World Fertility Survey, was used to assist in computing the sampling errors with the proper statistical methodology.

Note: See detailed estimate of sampling error calculation in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar year since birth - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the report which is presented in this documentation.

Abstract

The 2010 Armenia Demographic and Health Survey (2010 ADHS) is the third in a series of nationally representative sample surveys designed to provide information on population and health issues. It is conducted in Armenia under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys program. Specifically, the 2010 ADHS has a primary objective of providing current and reliable information on fertility levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, and awareness and behavior regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from women of reproductive age and, for certain topics, from men as well.

The 2010 ADHS results are intended to provide information needed to evaluate existing social programs and to design new strategies to improve health of and health services for the people of Armenia. Data are presented by region (marz) wherever sample size permits. The information collected in the 2010 ADHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the 2000 and 2005 surveys.

The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the NSS. The 2010 ADHS also provides comparable data for longterm trend analysis in Armenia because the 2000, 2005, and 2010 surveys were implemented by the same organisation and used similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database of demographic and health–related information for research purposes.

The 2010 ADHS was conducted by the National Statistical Service (NSS) and the MOH of Armenia from October 5 through December 25, 2010.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample was designed to permit detailed analysis-including the estimation of rates of fertility, infant/child mortality, and abortion-at the national level, for Yerevan, and for total urban and total rural areas separately. Many indicators can also be estimated at the regional (marz) level.

A representative probability sample of 7,580 households was selected for the 2010 ADHS sample. The sample was selected in two stages. In the first stage, 308 clusters were selected from a list of enumeration areas in a subsample of a master sample derived from the 2001 Population Census frame. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey.

All women age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the 2010 ADHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Interviews were completed with 5,922 women. In addition, in a subsample of one-third of all of the households selected for the survey, all men age 15-49 were eligible to be interviewed if they were either permanent residents or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey. Interviews were completed with 1,584 men.

Appendix A of the Final Report provides additional information on the sample design of the 2010 Armenia DHS.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used in the ADHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Woman’s Questionnaire, and a Man’s Questionnaire. The Household Questionnaire and the individual questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed in the MEASURE DHS program and questionnaires used in the previous 2005 ADHS. The model questionnaires were adapted for use by NSS and MOH. Suggestions were also sought from a number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Armenian. They were pretested in July 2010.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information on the socioeconomic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected for each household member or visitor information on their age, sex, educational attainment, and relationship to the head of household. This information provided basic demographic data for Armenian households. It also was used to identify the women and men who were eligible for an individual interview (i.e., women and men age 15-49). In the second part of the Household Questionnaire, there were questions on housing characteristics (e.g., the flooring material, the source of water, and the type of toilet facilities), on ownership of a variety of consumer goods, and on other aspects of the socioeconomic status of the household. In addition, the Household Questionnaire was used to obtain information on each child’s birth registration, ask questions about child discipline and child labor, and record height and weight measurements of children under age 5.

The Woman’s Questionnaire obtained information from women age 15-49 on the following topics: - Background characteristics - Pregnancy history - Antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care - Knowledge, attitudes, and use of contraception - Reproductive and adult health - Childhood mortality - Health and health care utilization - Vaccinations of children under age 5 - Episodes of diarrhea and respiratory illness of children under age 5 - Breastfeeding and weaning practices - Marriage and recent sexual activity - Fertility preferences - Knowledge of and attitudes toward AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases - Woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics

The Man’s Questionnaire, administered to men age 15-49, focused on the following topics: - Background characteristics - Health and health care utilization - Marriage and recent sexual activity - Attitudes toward and use of condoms - Knowledge of and attitudes toward AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases - Attitudes toward women’s status

Cleaning operations

Data Processing

The processing of the ADHS results began shortly after fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned regularly from the field to NSS headquarters in Yerevan, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. The data processing personnel included a supervisor, a questionnaire administrator (who ensured that the expected number of questionnaires from all clusters was received), several office editors, 12 data entry operators, and a secondary editor. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because the senior DHS technical staff were able to advise field teams of problems detected during the data entry. In particular, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters. As a result, specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in March 2011.

Response rate

A total of 7,580 households were selected in the sample, of which 7,043 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. The main reason for the difference is that some of the dwelling units that were occupied during the household listing operation were either vacant or the household was away for an extended period at the time of interviewing. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 6,700, yielding a household response rate of 95 percent. The household response rate in urban areas (94 percent) was slightly lower than in rural areas (97 percent).

In these households, a total of 6,059 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 5,922 of these women, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. In one-third of the households, a total of 1,641 eligible men were identified, and interviews were completed with 1,584 of these men, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. Response rates are slightly lower in urban areas (97 percent for women and 96 percent for men) than in rural areas where rates were 99 and 97 percent, respectively.

Sampling error estimates

Detailed information on sampling errors is provided in Appendix B of the Final Report.

The survey “Health on equal terms?” is a national survey, conducted every year since 2004. The Public Health Agency is responsible for the survey and Statistics Sweden (SCB) is responsible for the distribution, collection and registration. During the data collection in 2015, Region Västra Götaland ordered an additional sample for Västra Götaland County.

The additional sample in 2015 included all individuals aged 16-84 years living in Västra Götaland County, a total of 91,347 individuals. Including the national sample of Västra Götaland County the total number were 94,644 individuals. A part of the additional selection consisted a cohort of people from the survey in 2011.

A total of 52,348 individuals answered the questionnaire, representing a response rate of 55,5 percent.

The questionnaire was printed in two versions. The Public Health Agency designed the questions in the national questionnaire form. Region Västra Götaland excluded some of the questions in the national form and instead added three questions about work environment and the EQ5D-instrument. Both questionnaires covered issues of health, lifestyle, economic conditions, work and employment, and security and social relations. In addition to data collected through the questionnaires, registry data were also included.

Purpose:

The aim of the national survey was to investigate the health in the population and to show changes in the population's health over time as a follow up of the national health politics. The aim of the additional sample in Västra Götaland County was to investigate the health in the population in Västra Götaland County.

Abstract (en): A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download. The India Human Development Survey 2005 (IHDS) is a nationally representative, multi-topic survey of 41,554 households in 1,503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India. Two one-hour interviews in each household covered topics concerning health, education, employment, economic status, marriage, fertility, gender relations, and social capital. Children aged 8-11 completed short reading, writing and arithmetic tests. Additional village, school, and medical facility interviews are also available. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Created variable labels and/or value labels.; Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: Response rates were calculated as 82 percent for the recontact sample, 98 percent for the new sample, and 92 percent for the total response rate. Datasets:DS0: Study-Level FilesDS1: IndividualDS2: HouseholdDS3: MedicalDS4: Non-ResidentDS5: Primary SchoolDS6: Birth HistoryDS7: VillageDS8: Crops Nationally representative sample of Indian households. Smallest Geographic Unit: state Nationally representative, multi-topic survey of 41,554 households in 1,503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India. 2018-08-08 Added an updated version of the Data Guide documentation.2017-05-10 Added Data Guide.2016-02-16 This collection has been updated with a user guide and revised questionnaires obtained from the India Human Development Survey Documentation page.2013-06-17 The Household data (Part 2) were updated to add the following eight variables that had been mistakenly omitted from the dataset: NWORK, NFARM, NANIMAL, NAGWAGE, NNONAG, NSALARY, NBUSINESS, and INCOTHER. The Household data codebook was also updated.2010-06-29 Additional documentation file has been added.2010-05-04 Additional documentation files have been added.2010-03-25 At the principal investigator's request, an ID variable was removed.2010-02-17 Added village-level and crop data as new parts2009-08-25 Added updated versions of the Medical and Primary School questionnaires.2009-06-22 Added updated versions of the Household and the Individual datasets, and added Medical, Non-Resident, School, and Birth History datasets.2009-02-10 Added the original questionnaires that were used during data collection.2008-12-11 At the principal investigator's request, an ID variable was removed and the citation was updated2008-08-22 The title for Part 1 has been revised and response rate information has been added. Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD041455). record abstracts coded on-site observation cognitive assessment test face-to-face interview mixed mode on-site questionnaire

Abstract

The principal objective of the Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behavior, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, the utilization of maternal and child health services, and knowledge of HIV/AIDS. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning, monitoring, and evaluation of programs on health in general and reproductive health in particular at both the national and regional levels. A long-term objective of the survey is to strengthen the technical capacity of the Central Statistical Authority to plan, conduct, process, and analyze data from complex national population and health surveys. Moreover, the 2000 Ethiopia DHS is the first survey of its kind in the country to provide national and regional estimates on population and health that are comparable to data collected in similar surveys in other developing countries. As part of the worldwide DHS project, the Ethiopia DHS data add to the vast and growing international database on demographic and health variables. The Ethiopia DHS collected demographic and health information from a nationally representative sample of women and men in the reproductive age groups 15-49 and 15-59, respectively.

The Ethiopia DHS was carried out under the aegis of the Ministry of Health and was implemented by the Central Statistical Authority. ORC Macro provided technical assistance through its MEASURE DHS+ project. The survey was principally funded by the Essential Services for Health in Ethiopia (ESHE) project through a bilateral agreement between the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Funding was also provided by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The Ethiopia DHS used the sampling frame provided by the list of census enumeration areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1994 Population and Housing Census. A proportional sample allocation was discarded because this procedure yielded a distribution in which 80 percent of the sample came from three regions, 16 percent from four regions and 4 percent from five regions. To avoid such an uneven sample allocation among regions, it was decided that the sample should be allocated by region in proportion to the square root of the region's population size. Additional adjustments were made to ensure that the sample size for each region included at least 700 households, in order to yield estimates with reasonable statistical precision.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The Ethiopia DHS used three questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire, which were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ project. The questionnaires were specifically geared toward obtaining the kind of information needed by health and family planning program managers and policymakers. The model questionnaires were then adapted to local conditions and a number of additional questions specific to on-going health and family planning programs in Ethiopia were added. These questionnaires were developed in the English language and translated into the five principal languages in use in the country: Amarigna, Oromigna, Tigrigna, Somaligna, and Afarigna. They were then independently translated back to English and appropriate changes were made in the translation of questions in which the back-translated version did not compare well with the original English version. A pretest of all three questionnaires was conducted in the five local languages in November 1999.

All usual members in a selected household and visitors who stayed there the previous night were enumerated using the Household Questionnaire. Specifically, the Household Questionnaire obtained information on the relationship to the head of the household, residence, sex, age, marital status, parental survivorship, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Women age 15-49 in all selected households and all men age 15-59 in every fifth selected household, whether usual residents or visitors, were deemed eligible, and were interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also obtained information on some basic socioeconomic indicators such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water, the type of toilet facilities, and the ownership of a variety of durable items. Information was also obtained on the use of impregnated bednets, and the salt used in each household was tested for its iodine content. All eligible women and all children born since Meskerem 1987 in the Ethiopian Calendar, which roughly corresponds to September 1994 in the Gregorian Calendar, were weighed and measured.

The Women’s Questionnaire collected information on female respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunization and health, marriage, fertility preferences, and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics and women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on the male respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, and knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STIs.

Response rate

A total of 14,642 households were selected for the Ethiopia DHS, of which 14,167 were found to be occupied. Household interviews were completed for 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 15,716 eligible women from these households and 2,771 eligible men from every fifth household were identified for the individual interviews. The response rate for eligible women is slightly higher than for eligible men (98 percent compared with 94 percent, respectively). Interviews were successfully completed for 15,367 women and 2,607 men.

There is no difference by urban-rural residence in the overall response rate for eligible women; however, rural men are slightly more likely than urban men to have completed an interview (94 percent and 92 percent, respectively). The overall response rate among women by region is relatively high and ranges from 93 percent in the Affar Region to 99 percent in the Oromiya Region. The response rate among men ranges from 83 percent in the Affar Region to 98 percent in the Tigray and Benishangul-Gumuz regions.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table A.1.1 and Table A.1.2 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the Ethiopia DHS to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the Ethiopia DHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the Ethiopia DHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the Ethiopia DHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (SAMPERR). This module used the Taylor linearisation method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: See detailed estimate of sampling error calculation in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age

Abstract

The 2008 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is a national survey covering all ten regions of the country. The survey was designed to collect, analyse, and disseminate information on housing and household characteristics, education, maternal health and child health, nutrition, family planning, gender, and knowledge and behaviour related to HIV/AIDS. It included, for the first time, a module on domestic violence as one of the topics of investigation.

The 2008 GDHS is designed to provide data to monitor the population and health situation in Ghana. This is the fifth round in a series of national level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys programme. Specifically, the 2008 GDHS has the primary objective of providing current and reliable information on fertility levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of women and young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, domestic violence, and awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The information collected in the 2008 GDHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the earlier rounds of 1988, 1993, 1998, and 2003 surveys.

The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). The 2008 GDHS also provides comparable data for long-term trend analysis in Ghana, since the surveys were implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database on demographic and health–related information for research purposes.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The 2008 GDHS was a household-based survey, implemented in a representative probability sample of more than 12,000 households selected nationwide. This sample was selected in such a manner as to allow for separate estimates of key indicators for each of the 10 regions in Ghana, as well as for urban and rural areas separately.

The 2008 GDHS utilised a two-stage sample design. The first stage involved selecting sample points or clusters from an updated master sampling frame constructed from the 2000 Ghana Population and Housing Census. A total of 412 clusters were selected from the master sampling frame. The clusters were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size. A complete household listing operation was conducted from June to July 2008 in all the selected clusters to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households.

The second stage of selection involved the systematic sampling of 30 of the households listed in each cluster. The primary objectives of the second stage of selection were to ensure adequate numbers of completed individual interviews to provide estimates for key indicators with acceptable precision and to provide a sample large enough to identify adequate numbers of under-five deaths to provide data on causes of death.

Data were not collected in one of the selected clusters due to security reasons, resulting in a final sample of 12,323 selected households. Weights were calculated taking into consideration cluster, household, and individual non-responses, so the representations were not distorted.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used for the 2008 GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire and the Men’s Questionnaire. The content of these questionnaires was based on model questionnaires developed by the MEASURE DHS programme and the 2003 GDHS Questionnaires.

A questionnaire design workshop organised by GSS was held in Accra to obtain input from the Ministry of Health and other stakeholders on the design of the 2008 GDHS Questionnaires. Based on the questionnaires used for the 2003 GDHS, the workshop and several other informal meetings with various local and international organisations, the DHS model questionnaires were modified to reflect relevant issues in population, family planning, domestic violence, HIV/AIDS, malaria and other health issues in Ghana. These questionnaires were translated from English into three major local languages, namely Akan, Ga, and Ewe. The questionnaires were pre-tested in July 2008. The lessons learnt from the pre-test were used to finalise the survey instruments and logistical arrangements.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. The Household Questionnaire collected information on characteristics of the household’s dwelling unit, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used for the floor and roof of the house, ownership of various durable goods, and ownership and use of mosquito nets. The Household Questionnaire was also used to record height and weight measurements, consent for, and the results of, haemoglobin measurements for women age 15-49 and children under five years. The haemoglobin testing procedure is described in detail in the next section.

The Household Questionnaire was also used to record all deaths of household members that occurred since January 2003. Based on this information, in each household that reported the death of a child under age five years since January 2005,3 field editors administered a Verbal Autopsy Questionnaire. Data on child mortality based on the verbal autopsy will be presented in a separate publication.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49 in half of selected households. These women were asked questions about themselves and their children born in the five years since 2003 on the following topics: education, residential history, media exposure, reproductive history, knowledge and use of family planning methods, fertility preferences, antenatal and delivery care, breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding practices, vaccinations and childhood illnesses, marriage and sexual activity, woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics, childhood mortality, awareness and behaviour about AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), awareness of TB and other health issues, and domestic violence.

The Women’s Questionnaire included a series of questions to obtain information on women’s exposure to malaria during their most recent pregnancy in the five years preceding the survey and the treatment for malaria. In addition, women were asked if any of their children born in the five years preceding the survey had fever, whether these children were treated for malaria and the type of treatment they received.

The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-59 living in half of the selected households in the GDHS sample. The Men’s Questionnaire collected much of the same information found in the Women’s Questionnaire, but was shorter because it did not contain a reproductive history or questions on maternal and child health or nutrition.

Cleaning operations

The processing of the GDHS results began shortly after the fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to the GSS office in Accra, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. Data were entered using CSPro, a programme specially developed for use in DHS surveys. All data were entered twice (100 percent verification). The concurrent processing of the data was a distinct advantage for data quality, because GSS had the opportunity to advise field teams of problems detected during data entry. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in February 2009.

Response rate

A total of 12,323 households were selected in the sample, of which 11,913 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. This difference between selected and occupied households occurred mainly because some of the selected structures were found to be vacant or destroyed. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 11,778, yielding a household response rate of 99 percent.

In the households selected for individual interview in the survey (50 percent of the total 2008 GDHS sample), a total of 5,096 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 4,916 of these women, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. In the same households, a total of 4,769 eligible men were identified and interviews were completed with 4,568 of these men, yielding a response rate of 96 percent. The response rates are slightly lower among men than women.

The principal reason for non-response among both eligible women and men was the failure to find individuals at home despite repeated visits to the household. The lower response rate for men reflects the more frequent and longer absences of men from the household

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error

Abstract

The 2019-20 Gambia Demographic and Health Survey (2019-20 GDHS) is a nationwide survey with a nationally representative sample of residential households. The survey was implemented by The Gambia Bureau of Statistics (GBoS) in collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MoH).

The primary objective of the 2019-20 GDHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2019-20 GDHS: ▪ collected data on fertility levels and preferences; contraceptive use; maternal and child health; infant, child, and neonatal mortality levels; maternal mortality; gender; nutrition; awareness about HIV/AIDS; self-reported sexually transmitted infections (STIs); and other health issues relevant to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ▪ obtained information on the availability of, access to, and use of mosquito nets as part of the National Malaria Control Programme ▪ gathered information on other health issues such as injections, tobacco use, hypertension, diabetes, and health insurance ▪ collected data on women’s empowerment, domestic violence, fistula, and female genital mutilation/cutting ▪ tested household salt for the presence of iodine ▪ obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and women age 15-49 ▪ conducted anaemia testing of women age 15-49 and children age 6-59 months ▪ conducted malaria testing of children age 6-59 months

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15 to 59

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49, all men age 15-59, and all children aged 0-5 resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used for the 2019-20 GDHS was based on an updated version of the 2013 Gambia Population and Housing Census (2013 GPHC) conducted by GBoS. The census counts were updated in 2015-16 based on district-level projected counts from the 2015-16 Integrated Household Survey (IHS). Administratively, The Gambia is divided into eight Local Government Areas (LGAs). Each LGA is subdivided into districts and each district is subdivided into settlements. A settlement, a group of small settlements, or a part of a large settlement can form an enumeration area (EA). These units allow the country to be easily separated into small geographical area units, each with an urban or rural designation. There are 48 districts, 120 wards, and 4,098 EAs in The Gambia; the EAs have an average size of 68 households.

The sample for the 2019-20 GDHS was a stratified sample selected in two stages. In the first stage, EAs were selected with a probability proportional to their size within each sampling stratum. A total of 281 EAs were selected.

In the second stage, the households were systematically sampled. A household listing operation was undertaken in all of the selected clusters. The resulting lists of households served as the sampling frame from which a fixed number of 25 households were systematically selected per cluster, resulting in a total sample size of 7,025 selected households. Results from this sample are representative at the national, urban, and rural levels and at the LGA levels.

For further details on sample selection, see Appendix A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Five questionnaires were used for the 2019-20 GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to The Gambia. Suggestions were solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries, departments, and agencies; nongovernmental organisations; and international donors. All questionnaires were written in English, and interviewers translated the questions into the appropriate local language to carry out the interview.

Cleaning operations

All electronic data files were transferred via the Internet File Streaming System (IFSS) to the GBoS central office. The IFSS automatically encrypts the data and sends the data to a server, and the server in turn downloads the data to the data processing supervisor’s password-protected computer in the central office. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computeridentified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. The data were processed by two IT specialists and three secondary editors who took part in the main fieldwork training; they were supervised remotely by staff from The DHS Program. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the fieldwork, field-check tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in November 2019 and completed in May 2020.

Response rate

All 6,985 households in the selected housing units were eligible for the survey, of which 6,736 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 6,549 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. Among the households successfully interviewed, 1,948 interviews were completed in 2019 and 4,601 in 2020.

In the interviewed households, 12,481 women age 15-49 were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 11,865 women, yielding a response rate of 95%, a 4 percentage point increase from the 2013 GDHS. Among men, 5,337 were eligible for individual interviews, and 4,636 completed an interview; this yielded a response rate of 87%, a 5 percentage point increase from the previous survey.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2019-20 Gambia Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2019-20 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95% of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2019-20 GDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables

• Household age distribution
• Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
• Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men
• Completeness of reporting
• Births by calendar years
• Reporting of age at death in days
• Reporting of age at death in months
• Standardisation exercise results from anthropometry training
• Height and weight data completeness and quality for children
• Height measurements from random subsample of measured children
• Number of enumeration areas completed by month, according to Local Government Area, The Gambia DHS 2019-20
• Percentage of children age 6-59 months classified as having malaria according to RDT, by month and Local Government Area, The Gambia DHS 2019-20
• Completeness of information on siblings
• Sibship size and sex ratio of siblings

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the final report.

Abstract

The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.

The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.

The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.

The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).

The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.

The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.

Response rate

A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of shortfalls made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 1998 GDHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 1998 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 1998 GDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.

Background This pilot study evaluates the effectiveness of mobile talk-time incentives in promoting sustained participation in a longitudinal mHealth data collection program among people living with HIV in Lusaka, Zambia. With mobile device usage rapidly increasing in sub-Saharan Africa, mHealth tools, like mobile phone surveys, present an opportunity to capture vital health feedback and improve patient monitoring however, evidence on optimal incentive strategies to ensure long-term engagement remains limited. Understanding response patterns across multiple survey rounds, provides valuable insights into incentive strategies for long-term participation in mHealth programs within the context of expanding mobile access but prepaid billing and multi-SIM usage practices in Zambia and the broader sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) region. Objective Assess the response rate success across multiple invitations to participate in a care experience survey using a mobile phone short code and USSD model among individuals in an HIV care setting in the Lusaka Province of Zambia. Methods We enrolled study participants among individuals exiting two study clinics, one in a peri-urban setting and one in an urban setting. Two rounds of survey invitations were sent to those enrolled in the study. The first invitation was distributed between 1 November 2018 and 25 June 2019 with the invitation to the second survey round following three months after the first (1 February 2019 to 23 September 2019). Three incentive levels were randomly assigned by participant and survey round 1) no incentive, 2) two Zambian Kwacha (ZMW) (~0.16 USD), and 3) five ZMW (~0.42 USD). We assessed the association between incentive and response to the survey using a mixed effects Poisson regression model allowing random effects at the individual and facility level. Probability plots for survey completion were generated based on language, incentive level, and survey round. We projected the cost per additional response for different incentive levels. Results A total of 1,006 participants were enrolled of which 72.1% occurred in the urban HIV care facility and 62.2% requested survey be sent in English. We sent a total of 1,992 survey invitations for both rounds. Overall, survey completion across both surveys was 32.1%, with significantly different response rates between the first (40.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 37.4, 43.6%) and second (23.7%, 95% CI: 21.1, 26.4%) invitations. Implementing a 5 ZMW incentive significantly increased adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) for survey completion compared to those that received no incentive (aPR: 1.35; 95% CI: (1.11, 1.63). The cost per additional response highest at 5 ZMW (72.8 ZMW). Conclusion We observed a sharp decline of almost fifty percent in survey completion success from initial invitation to follow-up survey administered three months later. This substantial decrease suggests that longitudinal data collection potential for a care experience survey may be limited without additional sensitization and/or survey reminders. Implementing a moderate incentive increased response rates to our healthcare experience survey. Tailoring survey strategies to accommodate language preferences and providing moderate incentives can optimize response rates in Zambia. Methods Recruitment procedure Potential survey participants were identified by research assistants at one of two (one in an urban setting, one in a peri-urban setting) pilot study HIV care facilities using convenience sampling following reception and triage procedures including routine data collection (e.g., temperature, weight, and blood pressure). Eligibility for study participation was limited to individuals who were enrolled as a recipient of care at the study facility, were aged 18 years or older, self-reported as literate in one of four survey languages, possessed a mobile phone during enrollment, and voluntarily consented to participate in the study. We confirmed that the mobile phone number reported by the potential participant belonged to the individual through a registration process using the unique PCPH short code, *744# on the potential participant’s phone at enrollment. The registration process confirmed ability to initiate and complete a USSD session, collected the language preference, and recorded the facility where the enrolment took place. Data collection Survey participants were presented with 4 questions related to their experience at their most recent HIV care visit. The opening question was the same for all participants, the next 3 questions were drawn, using a systematic algorithm, from a bank of 9 questions. Survey questions were subject to a cognitive interviewing process to increase acceptability, understanding, and appropriateness prior to piloting. At enrollment, participants selected their preferred survey language from English, Bemba spoken by 33.5% of the Zambian population, Nyanja, spoken by 14.8% of the Zambian population, or Tonga, spoken by 11.4% of the Zambian population. Only 2% of the population have English as the first language however, English is the most spoken second language.

The survey “Health on equal terms?” is a national survey, conducted every year since 2004. The Public Health Agency is responsible for the survey and Statistics Sweden (SCB) is responsible for the distribution, collection and registration. During the data collection in 2015, Region Västra Götaland ordered an additional sample for Västra Götaland County.

The additional sample in 2015 included all individuals aged 16-84 years living in Västra Götaland County, a total of 91,347 individuals. Including the national sample of Västra Götaland County the total number were 94,644 individuals. A part of the additional selection consisted a cohort of people from the survey in 2011.

A total of 52,348 individuals answered the questionnaire, representing a response rate of 55,5 percent.

The questionnaire was printed in two versions. The Public Health Agency designed the questions in the national questionnaire form. Region Västra Götaland excluded some of the questions in the national form and instead added three questions about work environment and the EQ5D-instrument. Both questionnaires covered issues of health, lifestyle, economic conditions, work and employment, and security and social relations. In addition to data collected through the questionnaires, registry data were also included.

Purpose:

The aim of the national survey was to investigate the health in the population and to show changes in the population's health over time as a follow up of the national health politics. The aim of the additional sample in Västra Götaland County was to investigate the health in the population in Västra Götaland County.

1. The aim of the research The survey aimed to collect opinions on how the pandemic has changed scientific research, especially in regards to the usage of different forms of digital tools. The onset of COVID-19 has had an immediate impact on how scientists were able to use their time and resources to do their work. However, there was a lack of real-time data on how they are responding to this event and how it has had differential impacts across scientific fields. 2. Research instrument and subject A survey questionnaire prepared in English was developed for collecting empirical data from academics in Poland and abroad. We used the same version of the survey questionnaire both in Poland and in other countries in the world. The survey questionnaire consisted of several parts. Its first part included questions on demographic information. The second part of the survey questionnaire contained questions about how respondents' work hours were allocated for different activities during, and after the coronavirus pandemic outbreak and the predicted changes in future publication and funding related to spending on researching, writing during and after the coronavirus pandemic. The last part of the survey questionnaire included questions about scientific works, their quality, and support by ICTs during the coronavirus pandemic, as well as the implications of the pandemic for these issues in the future. At the end of the survey questionnaire, we asked respondents about their opinions with regard to the forecast situation in research and education after the coronavirus pandemic. Selecting a sample is a fundamental element of a quantitative study. Stratified sampling was used to obtain the sample, which can be taken to be true for the whole population. The strata were identified based on country, age, gender, position type, and research discipline. To gather a substantial number of respondents, snowball sampling was pursued, which involved daily and routine distribution (social media and e-mail posting) of an introductory e-letter and survey-link requesting participation in the research. To increase response rates, the following methods were used: involving academics (encouraging colleagues), pushing the survey (providing respondents with the survey URL in e-mails sent directly to them), publishing the project with a link for the basic questionnaire on the ResearchGate website and Facebook fan pages and providing frequent reminders.1 3. Data collection Based on several analyses showing that surveys conducted over the internet provide results that are as valid as more "traditional" methods and due to social distancing caused by the coronavirus pandemic, we used the Computer Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) method for recruiting respondents and collecting data. The LimeSurvey tool was employed for recruiting reliable samples. The data were collected during a two-month period of work, between June 11, 2020, and August 18, 2020. This led to 982 responses. After screening the responses and excluding outliers, 476 usable, correct, and complete responses were collected. This uploded dataset is a subset of a larger dataset that the authors collected for their research project titled "The Effects of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Scientific Research and University Teaching". It includes the questionnaire responses related to research during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The questions were designed to gather information about the impact of the pandemic on academic scientists' research.1 4. Results Our results may suggest targeted policies to alleviate the disruptions experienced by specific scientific fields. The findings of the past research were documented in three articles, which can be found below: 1. Ziemba, E. W., & Eisenbardt, M. (2022). The effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on ICT usage by academics. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 62(6), 1154-1168. DOI: 10.1080/08874417.2021.1992806 2. Wartini-Twardowska, J., Grabara, D., & Ziemba, E. W. (2021). The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Use of Digital Technologies by Scientists: A Comparison Between Poland and Abroad. Problemy Zarządzania, 19(3/2021 (93), 12-31. DOI:10.7172/1644-9584.93.1 3. Maruszewska, E. W., Eisenbardt, M., & Tuszkiewicz, M. (2022). COVID Pandemic as a disruptive factor enhancing ICT USE in social sciences' teaching practices. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology. Organization & Management/Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Slaskiej. Seria Organizacji i Zarzadzanie, (160). DOI: 10.29119/1641-3466.2022.160.25

The Health Survey for England (HSE) is part of a programme of surveys commissioned by the Health and Social Care Information Centre. It has been carried out since 1994 by the Joint Health Surveys Unit of NatCen Social Research and the Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at UCL (University College London). The study provides regular information that cannot be obtained from other sources on a range of aspects concerning the public's health and many of the factors that affect health. The series of Health Surveys for England was designed to monitor trends in the nation's health, to estimate the proportion of people in England who have specified health conditions, and to estimate the prevalence of certain risk factors and combinations of risk factors associated with these conditions. The survey is also used to monitor progress towards selected health targets. Each survey in the series includes core questions and measurements (such as blood pressure, anthropometric measurements and analysis of blood and saliva samples), as well as modules of questions on specific issues that vary from year to year. In some years, the core sample has also been augmented by an additional boosted sample from a specific population subgroup, such as minority ethnic groups, older people or children; there was no boost in 2011. This is the twenty first annual Health Survey for England. All surveys have covered the adult population aged 16 and over living in private households in England. Since 1995, the surveys have included children who live in households selected for the survey; children aged 2-15 were included from 1995, and infants under two years old were added in 2001. Those living in institutions were outside the scope of the survey. This should be borne in mind when considering survey findings, since the institutional population is likely to be older and less healthy than those living in private households. The HSE in 2011 provided a representative sample of the population at both national and regional level. For the general population sample, 8,992 addresses were randomly selected in 562 postcode sectors, issued over twelve months from January to December 2011. Where an address was found to have multiple dwelling units, a random selection was made and a single dwelling unit was included. Where there were multiple households at a dwelling unit, again one was selected at random. All adults and children in selected households were eligible for inclusion in the survey. Where there were three or more children aged 0-15 in a household, two of the children were selected at random to limit the respondent burden for parents. A nurse visit was arranged for all participants who consented. A total of 8,610 adults and 2,007 children were interviewed. A household response rate of 66per cent was achieved. 5,715 adults and 1,257 children had a nurse visit. It should be noted that, for the first time for several years, there was no child boost sample in 2011. Thus the scope for analyses of some data for children may be limited by relatively small sample sizes. The report authors would like to acknowledge with thanks the contribution of the National Obesity Observatory to Chapter 10 on adult obesity.

Institutionalization, cognitive impairment, and the inability to conduct an interview due to health impairment are among the top exclusion criteria for most large-scale social and aging surveys. Reservations about targeting vulnerable groups result from economic or legal restrictions of recruitment and concerns regarding research ethics or the validity of the data obtained. However, failure to include these individuals may lead to substantial bias. Metadata showed that privileged data access and checks against nursing home repositories prevented the undercoverage of institutionalized individuals. Measures to include difficult-to-survey groups led to a marked increase in response rates. Individuals with health impairments substantially contributed to the representativity of the sample. Nonresponse bias was cut in half when compared with a less inclusive study protocol. From a Total Survey Error perspective, reductions in nonresponse bias, low item-nonresponse, and evidence of measurement invariance across self-reports and proxy reports for key outcome variables show significant benefits of including difficult-to-survey groups in estimating characteristics of this population. Probability Sample Face-to-face interviewInterview.FaceToFace