Abstract

The 2002 Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey (VNDHS 2002) is a nationally representative sample survey of 5,665 ever-married women age 15-49 selected from 205 sample points (clusters) throughout Vietnam. It provides information on levels of fertility, family planning knowledge and use, infant and child mortality, and indicators of maternal and child health. The survey included a Community/ Health Facility Questionnaire that was implemented in each of the sample clusters.

The survey was designed to measure change in reproductive health indicators over the five years since the VNDHS 1997, especially in the 18 provinces that were targeted in the Population and Family Health Project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children. Consequently, all provinces were separated into “project” and “nonproject” groups to permit separate estimates for each. Data collection for the survey took place from 1 October to 21 December 2002.

The Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey 2002 (VNDHS 2002) was the third DHS in Vietnam, with prior surveys implemented in 1988 and 1997. The VNDHS 2002 was carried out in the framework of the activities of the Population and Family Health Project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children (previously the National Committee for Population and Family Planning).

The main objectives of the VNDHS 2002 were to collect up-to-date information on family planning, childhood mortality, and health issues such as breastfeeding practices, pregnancy care, vaccination of children, treatment of common childhood illnesses, and HIV/AIDS, as well as utilization of health and family planning services. The primary objectives of the survey were to estimate changes in family planning use in comparison with the results of the VNDHS 1997, especially on issues in the scope of the project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children.

VNDHS 2002 data confirm the pattern of rapidly declining fertility that was observed in the VNDHS 1997. It also shows a sharp decline in child mortality, as well as a modest increase in contraceptive use. Differences between project and non-project provinces are generally small.

Geographic coverage

The 2002 Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey (VNDHS 2002) is a nationally representative sample survey. The VNDHS 1997 was designed to provide separate estimates for the whole country, urban and rural areas, for 18 project provinces and the remaining nonproject provinces as well. Project provinces refer to 18 focus provinces targeted for the strengthening of their primary health care systems by the Government's Population and Family Health Project to be implemented over a period of seven years, from 1996 to 2002 (At the outset of this project there were 15 focus provinces, which became 18 by the creation of 3 new provinces from the initial set of 15). These provinces were selected according to criteria based on relatively low health and family planning status, no substantial family planning donor presence, and regional spread. These criteria resulted in the selection of the country's poorer provinces. Nine of these provinces have significant proportions of ethnic minorities among their population.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 2002 VNDHS is defined as the universe of all women age 15-49 in Vietnam.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the VNDHS 2002 was based on that used in the VNDHS 1997, which in turn was a subsample of the 1996 Multi-Round Demographic Survey (MRS), a semi-annual survey of about 243,000 households undertaken regularly by GSO. The MRS sample consisted of 1,590 sample areas known as enumeration areas (EAs) spread throughout the 53 provinces/cities of Vietnam, with 30 EAs in each province. On average, an EA comprises about 150 households. For the VNDHS 1997, a subsample of 205 EAs was selected, with 26 households in each urban EA and 39 households for each rural EA. A total of 7,150 households was selected for the survey. The VNDHS 1997 was designed to provide separate estimates for the whole country, urban and rural areas, for 18 project provinces and the remaining nonproject provinces as well. Because the main objective of the VNDHS 2002 was to measure change in reproductive health indicators over the five years since the VNDHS 1997, the sample design for the VNDHS 2002 was as similar as possible to that of the VNDHS 1997.

Although it would have been ideal to have returned to the same households or at least the same sample points as were selected for the VNDHS 1997, several factors made this undesirable. Revisiting the same households would have held the sample artificially rigid over time and would not allow for newly formed households. This would have conflicted with the other major survey objective, which was to provide up-to-date, representative data for the whole of Vietnam. Revisiting the same sample points that were covered in 1997 was complicated by the fact that the country had conducted a population census in 1999, which allowed for a more representative sample frame.

In order to balance the two main objectives of measuring change and providing representative data, it was decided to select enumeration areas from the 1999 Population Census, but to cover the same communes that were sampled in the VNDHS 1997 and attempt to obtain a sample point as close as possible to that selected in 1997. Consequently, the VNDHS 2002 sample also consisted of 205 sample points and reflects the oversampling in the 20 provinces that fall in the World Bank-supported Population and Family Health Project. The sample was designed to produce about 7,000 completed household interviews and 5,600 completed interviews with ever-married women age 15-49.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

As in the VNDHS 1997, three types of questionnaires were used in the 2002 survey: the Household Questionnaire, the Individual Woman's Questionnaire, and the Community/Health Facility Questionnaire. The first two questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, with additions and modifications made during an ORC Macro staff visit in July 2002. The questionnaires were pretested in two clusters in Hanoi (one in a rural area and another in an urban area). After the pretest and consultation with ORC Macro, the drafts were revised for use in the main survey.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in selected households and to collect information on age, sex, education, marital status, and relationship to the head of household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify persons who were eligible for individual interview (i.e. ever-married women age 15-49). In addition, the Household Questionnaire collected information on characteristics of the household such as water source, type of toilet facilities, material used for the floor and roof, and ownership of various durable goods.

b) The Individual Questionnaire was used to collect information on ever-married women aged 15-49 in surveyed households. These women were interviewed on the following topics:
- Respondent's background characteristics (education, residential history, etc.); - Reproductive history; - Contraceptive knowledge and use;
- Antenatal and delivery care; - Infant feeding practices; - Child immunization; - Fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning; - Husband's background characteristics; - Women's work information; and - Knowledge of AIDS.

c) The Community/Health Facility Questionnaire was used to collect information on all communes in which the interviewed women lived and on services offered at the nearest health stations. The Community/Health Facility Questionnaire consisted of four sections. The first two sections collected information from community informants on some characteristics such as the major economic activities of residents, distance from people's residence to civic services and the location of the nearest sources of health care. The last two sections involved visiting the nearest commune health centers and intercommune health centers, if these centers were located within 30 kilometers from the surveyed cluster. For each visited health center, information was collected on the type of health services offered and the number of days services were offered per week; the number of assigned staff and their training; medical equipment and medicines available at the time of the visit.

Cleaning operations

The first stage of data editing was implemented by the field editors soon after each interview. Field editors and team leaders checked the completeness and consistency of all items in the questionnaires. The completed questionnaires were sent to the GSO headquarters in Hanoi by post for data processing. The editing staff of the GSO first checked the questionnaires for completeness. The data were then entered into microcomputers and edited using a software program specially developed for the DHS program, the Census and Survey Processing System, or CSPro. Data were verified on a 100 percent basis, i.e., the data were entered separately twice and the two results were compared and corrected. The data processing and editing staff of the GSO were trained and supervised for two weeks by a data processing specialist from ORC Macro. Office editing and processing activities were initiated immediately after the beginning of the fieldwork and were completed in late December 2002.

Response rate

The results of the household and individual

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.

The 110th Congressional District Summary File (Sample) (110CDSAMPLE) contains the sample data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of a sample of all people and housing units. Population items include basic population totals; urban and rural; households and families; marital status; grandparents as caregivers; language and ability to speak English; ancestry; place of birth, citizenship status, and year of entry; migration; place of work; journey to work (commuting); school enrollment and educational attainment; veteran status; disability; employment status; industry, occupation, and class of worker; income; and poverty status. Housing items include basic housing totals; urban and rural; number of rooms; number of bedrooms; year moved into unit; household size and occupants per room; units in structure; year structure built; heating fuel; telephone service; plumbing and kitchen facilities; vehicles available; value of home; monthly rent; and shelter costs. The file contains subject content identical to that shown in Summary File 3 (SF 3).

BackgroundMental health professionals play a crucial role in promoting the physical well-being of people with mental illness. Awareness of HIV status can enable professionals in mental health services to provide more comprehensive care. However, it remains uncertain whether mental health professionals consistently document HIV status in mental health records.AimsTo investigate the extent to which mental health professionals document previously established HIV diagnoses of people with mental illness in mental health records, and to identify the clinical and demographic factors associated with documentation or lack thereof.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using an established data linkage between routinely collected clinical data from secondary mental health services in South London, UK, and national HIV surveillance data from the UK Health Security Agency. Individuals with an HIV diagnosis prior to their last mental health service contact were included. Documented HIV diagnosis in mental health records was assessed.ResultsAmong the 4,032 individuals identified as living with HIV, 1,281 (31.8%) did not have their diagnosis recorded in their mental health records. Factors associated with the absence of an HIV diagnosis included being of Asian ethnicity, having certain primary mental health diagnoses including schizophrenia, being older, being with a mental health service for longer, having more clinical mental health appointments, and living in a less deprived area.ConclusionsA significant number of individuals living with HIV who are receiving mental healthcare in secondary mental health services did not have their HIV diagnosis documented in their mental health records. Addressing this gap could allow mental healthcare providers to support those living with HIV and severe mental illness to manage the complexity of comorbidities and psychosocial impacts of HIV. Mental health services should explore strategies to increase dialogue around HIV in mental health settings.

Abstract

The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was a nationally representative sample survey conducted from March through June 1988 to collect data on fertility, family planning, and child and maternal health. A total of 9,045 households and 6,775 ever-married women aged 15 to 49 were interviewed. Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is carried out by the Institute of Population Studies (IPS) of Chulalongkorn University with the financial support from USAID through the Institute for Resource Development (IRD) at Westinghouse. The Institute of Population Studies was responsible for the overall implementation of the survey including sample design, preparation of field work, data collection and processing, and analysis of data. IPS has made available its personnel and office facilities to the project throughout the project duration. It serves as the headquarters for the survey.

The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was undertaken for the main purpose of providing data concerning fertility, family planning and maternal and child health to program managers and policy makers to facilitate their evaluation and planning of programs, and to population and health researchers to assist in their efforts to document and analyze the demographic and health situation. It is intended to provide information both on topics for which comparable data is not available from previous nationally representative surveys as well as to update trends with respect to a number of indicators available from previous surveys, in particular the Longitudinal Study of Social Economic and Demographic Change in 1969-73, the Survey of Fertility in Thailand in 1975, the National Survey of Family Planning Practices, Fertility and Mortality in 1979, and the three Contraceptive Prevalence Surveys in 1978/79, 1981 and 1984.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 1987 THADHS is defined as the universe of all women Ever-married women in the reproductive ages (i.e., women 15-49). This covered women in private households on the basis of a de facto coverage definition. Visitors and usual residents who were in the household the night before the first visit or before any subsequent visit during the few days the interviewing team was in the area were eligible. Excluded were the small number of married women aged under 15 and women not present in private households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE SIZE AND ALLOCATION

The objective of the survey was to provide reliable estimates for major domains of the country. This consisted of two overlapping sets of reporting domains: (a) Five regions of the country namely Bangkok, north, northeast, central region (excluding Bangkok), and south; (b) Bangkok versus all provincial urban and all rural areas of the country. These requirements could be met by defining six non-overlapping sampling domains (Bangkok, provincial urban, and rural areas of each of the remaining 4 regions), and allocating approximately equal sample sizes to them. On the basis of past experience, available budget and overall reporting requirement, the target sample size was fixed at 7,000 interviews of ever-married women aged 15-49, expected to be found in around 9,000 households. Table A.I shows the actual number of households as well as eligible women selected and interviewed, by sampling domain (see Table i.I for reporting domains).

THE FRAME AND SAMPLE SELECTION

The frame for selecting the sample for urban areas, was provided by the National Statistical Office of Thailand and by the Ministry of the Interior for rural areas. It consisted of information on population size of various levels of administrative and census units, down to blocks in urban areas and villages in rural areas. The frame also included adequate maps and descriptions to identify these units. The extent to which the data were up-to-date as well as the quality of the data varied somewhat in different parts of the frame. Basically, the multi-stage stratified sampling design involved the following procedure. A specified number of sample areas were selected systematically from geographically/administratively ordered lists with probabilities proportional to the best available measure of size (PPS). Within selected areas (blocks or villages) new lists of households were prepared and systematic samples of households were selected. In principle, the sampling interval for the selection of households from lists was determined so as to yield a self weighting sample of households within each domain. However, in the absence of good measures of population size for all areas, these sampling intervals often required adjustments in the interest of controlling the size of the resulting sample. Variations in selection probabilities introduced due to such adjustment, where required, were compensated for by appropriate weighting of sample cases at the tabulation stage.

SAMPLE OUTCOME

The final sample of households was selected from lists prepared in the sample areas. The time interval between household listing and enumeration was generally very short, except to some extent in Bangkok where the listing itself took more time. In principle, the units of listing were the same as the ultimate units of sampling, namely households. However in a small proportion of cases, the former differed from the latter in several respects, identified at the stage of final enumeration: a) Some units listed actually contained more than one household each b) Some units were "blanks", that is, were demolished or not found to contain any eligible households at the time of enumeration. c) Some units were doubtful cases in as much as the household was reported as "not found" by the interviewer, but may in fact have existed.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The DHS core questionnaires (Household, Eligible Women Respondent, and Community) were translated into Thai. A number of modifications were made largely to adapt them for use with an ever- married woman sample and to add a number of questions in areas that are of special interest to the Thai investigators but which were not covered in the standard core. Examples of such modifications included adding marital status and educational attainment to the household schedule, elaboration on questions in the individual questionnaire on educational attainment to take account of changes in the educational system during recent years, elaboration on questions on postnuptial residence, and adaptation of the questionnaire to take into account that only ever-married women are being interviewed rather than all women. More generally, attention was given to the wording of questions in Thai to ensure that the intent of the original English-language version was preserved.

a) Household questionnaire

The household questionnaire was used to list every member of the household who usually lives in the household and as well as visitors who slept in the household the night before the interviewer's visit. Information contained in the household questionnaire are age, sex, marital status, and education for each member (the last two items were asked only to members aged 13 and over). The head of the household or the spouse of the head of the household was the preferred respondent for the household questionnaire. However, if neither was available for interview, any adult member of the household was accepted as the respondent. Information from the household questionnaire was used to identify eligible women for the individual interview. To be eligible, a respondent had to be an ever-married woman aged 15-49 years old who had slept in the household 'the previous night'.

Prior evidence has indicated that when asked about current age, Thais are as likely to report age at next birthday as age at last birthday (the usual demographic definition of age). Since the birth date of each household number was not asked in the household questionnaire, it was not possible to calculate age at last birthday from the birthdate. Therefore a special procedure was followed to ensure that eligible women just under the higher boundary for eligible ages (i.e. 49 years old) were not mistakenly excluded from the eligible woman sample because of an overstated age. Ever-married women whose reported age was between 50-52 years old and who slept in the household the night before birthdate of the woman, it was discovered that these women (or any others being interviewed) were not actually within the eligible age range of 15-49, the interview was terminated and the case disqualified. This attempt recovered 69 eligible women who otherwise would have been missed because their reported age was over 50 years old or over.

b) Individual questionnaire

The questionnaire administered to eligible women was based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire for high contraceptive prevalence countries. The individual questionnaire has 8 sections: - Respondent's background - Reproduction - Contraception - Health and breastfeeding - Marriage - Fertility preference - Husband's background and woman's work - Heights and weights of children and mothers

The questionnaire was modified to suit the Thai context. As noted above, several questions were added to the standard DHS core questionnaire not only to meet the interest of IPS researchers hut also because of their relevance to the current demographic situation in Thailand. The supplemental questions are marked with an asterisk in the individual questionnaire. Questions concerning the following items were added in the individual questionnaire: - Did the respondent ever

The State Legislative District Summary File (Sample) (SLDSAMPLE) contains the sample data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of a sample of all people and housing units. Population items include basic population totals; urban and rural; households and families; marital status; grandparents as caregivers; language and ability to speak English; ancestry; place of birth, citizenship status, and year of entry; migration; place of work; journey to work (commuting); school enrollment and educational attainment; veteran status; disability; employment status; industry, occupation, and class of worker; income; and poverty status. Housing items include basic housing totals; urban and rural; number of rooms; number of bedrooms; year moved into unit; household size and occupants per room; units in structure; year structure built; heating fuel; telephone service; plumbing and kitchen facilities; vehicles available; value of home; monthly rent; and shelter costs. The file contains subject content identical to that shown in Summary File 3 (SF 3).

Abstract

The 2013 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS-2013) is a nationally representative sample survey. The primary objective of the TDHS-2013 is to provide data on socioeconomic characteristics of households and women between ages 15-49, fertility, childhood mortality, marriage patterns, family planning, maternal and child health, nutritional status of women and children, and reproductive health. The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from a sample of women of reproductive age (15-49). The TDHS-2013 was designed to produce information in the field of demography and health that to a large extent cannot be obtained from other sources.

Specifically, the objectives of the TDHS-2013 included: - Collecting data at the national level that allows the calculation of some demographic and health indicators, particularly fertility rates and childhood mortality rates, - Obtaining information on direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality, - Measuring the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by contraceptive method and some background characteristics, i.e., region and urban-rural residence, - Collecting data relative to maternal and child health, including immunizations, antenatal care, and postnatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding, - Measuring the nutritional status of children under five and women in the reproductive ages, - Collecting data on reproductive-age women about marriage, employment status, and social status

The TDHS-2013 information is intended to provide data to assist policy makers and administrators to evaluate existing programs and to design new strategies for improving demographic, social and health policies in Turkey. Another important purpose of the TDHS-2013 is to sustain the flow of information for the interested organizations in Turkey and abroad on the Turkish population structure in the absence of a reliable and sufficient vital registration system. Additionally, like the TDHS-2008, TDHS-2013 is accepted as a part of the Official Statistic Program.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49
• Children under age of five

Universe

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample design and sample size for the TDHS-2013 makes it possible to perform analyses for Turkey as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for the five demographic regions of the country (West, South, Central, North, and East). The TDHS-2013 sample is of sufficient size to allow for analysis on some of the survey topics at the level of the 12 geographical regions (NUTS 1) which were adopted at the second half of the year 2002 within the context of Turkey’s move to join the European Union.

In the selection of the TDHS-2013 sample, a weighted, multi-stage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used. Sample selection for the TDHS-2013 was undertaken in two stages. The first stage of selection included the selection of blocks as primary sampling units from each strata and this task was requested from the TURKSTAT. The frame for the block selection was prepared using information on the population sizes of settlements obtained from the 2012 Address Based Population Registration System. Settlements with a population of 10,000 and more were defined as “urban”, while settlements with populations less than 10,000 were considered “rural” for purposes of the TDHS-2013 sample design. Systematic selection was used for selecting the blocks; thus settlements were given selection probabilities proportional to their sizes. Therefore more blocks were sampled from larger settlements.

The second stage of sample selection involved the systematic selection of a fixed number of households from each block, after block lists were obtained from TURKSTAT and were updated through a field operation; namely the listing and mapping fieldwork. Twentyfive households were selected as a cluster from urban blocks, and 18 were selected as a cluster from rural blocks. The total number of households selected in TDHS-2013 is 14,490.

The total number of clusters in the TDHS-2013 was set at 642. Block level household lists, each including approximately 100 households, were provided by TURKSTAT, using the National Address Database prepared for municipalities. The block lists provided by TURKSTAT were updated during the listing and mapping activities.

All women at ages 15-49 who usually live in the selected households and/or were present in the household the night before the interview were regarded as eligible for the Women’s Questionnaire and were interviewed. All analysis in this report is based on de facto women.

Note: A more technical and detailed description of the TDHS-2013 sample design, selection and implementation is presented in Appendix B of the final report of the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Two main types of questionnaires were used to collect the TDHS-2013 data: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for all women of reproductive age. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS core questionnaire. Additions, deletions and modifications were made to the DHS model questionnaire in order to collect information particularly relevant to Turkey. Attention also was paid to ensuring the comparability of the TDHS-2013 findings with previous demographic surveys carried out by the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. In the process of designing the TDHS-2013 questionnaires, national and international population and health agencies were consulted for their comments.

The questionnaires were developed in Turkish and translated into English.

Cleaning operations

TDHS-2013 questionnaires were returned to the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies by the fieldwork teams for data processing as soon as interviews were completed in a province. The office editing staff checked that the questionnaires for all selected households and eligible respondents were returned from the field. A total of 29 data entry staff were trained for data entry activities of the TDHS-2013. The data entry of the TDHS-2013 began in late September 2013 and was completed at the end of January 2014.

The data were entered and edited on microcomputers using the Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) software. CSPro is designed to fulfill the census and survey data processing needs of data-producing organizations worldwide. CSPro is developed by MEASURE partners, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, ICF International’s DHS Program, and SerPro S.A. CSPro allows range, skip, and consistency errors to be detected and corrected at the data entry stage. During the data entry process, 100% verification was performed by entering each questionnaire twice using different data entry operators and comparing the entered data.

Response rate

In all, 14,490 households were selected for the TDHS-2013. At the time of the listing phase of the survey, 12,640 households were considered occupied and, thus, eligible for interview. Of the eligible households, 93 percent (11,794) households were successfully interviewed. The main reasons the field teams were unable to interview some households were because some dwelling units that had been listed were found to be vacant at the time of the interview or the household was away for an extended period.

In the interviewed 11,794 households, 10,840 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview, aged 15-49 and were present in the household on the night before the interview. Interviews were successfully completed with 9,746 of these women (90 percent). Among the eligible women not interviewed in the survey, the principal reason for nonresponse was the failure to find the women at home after repeated visits to the household.

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 TDHS-2013 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 TDHS-2013 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

Demographic information about the online survey respondents (%, n = 314) regarding: gender; age; country of residence; position in the trade; and how they encountered the surveySurvey sample demographics.

For years, we have relied on population surveys to keep track of regional public health statistics, including the prevalence of non-communicable diseases. Because of the cost and limitations of such surveys, we often do not have the up-to-date data on health outcomes of a region. In this paper, we examined the feasibility of inferring regional health outcomes from socio-demographic data that are widely available and timely updated through national censuses and community surveys. Using data for 50 American states (excluding Washington DC) from 2007 to 2012, we constructed a machine-learning model to predict the prevalence of six non-communicable disease (NCD) outcomes (four NCDs and two major clinical risk factors), based on population socio-demographic characteristics from the American Community Survey. We found that regional prevalence estimates for non-communicable diseases can be reasonably predicted. The predictions were highly correlated with the observed data, in both the states included in the derivation model (median correlation 0.88) and those excluded from the development for use as a completely separated validation sample (median correlation 0.85), demonstrating that the model had sufficient external validity to make good predictions, based on demographics alone, for areas not included in the model development. This highlights both the utility of this sophisticated approach to model development, and the vital importance of simple socio-demographic characteristics as both indicators and determinants of chronic disease.

Abstract

The 1993 Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women less than 50 years old. The survey was designed to provide information on fertility levels and trends, infant and child mortality, family planning, and maternal and child health. The TDHS was conducted by the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies under a subcontract through an agreement between the General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. of Calverton, Maryland. Fieldwork was conducted from August to October 1993. Interviews were carried out in 8,619 households and with 6,519 women.

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of ever-married women of reproductive ages, designed to collect data on fertility, marriage patterns, family planning, early age mortality, socioeconomic characteristics, breastfeeding, immunisation of children, treatment of children during episodes of illness, and nutritional status of women and children. The TDHS, as part of the international DHS project, is also the latest survey in a series of national-level population and health surveys in Turkey, which have been conducted by the Institute of Population Studies, Haeettepe University (HIPS).

More specifically, the objectives of the TDHS are to:

Collect data at the national level that will allow the calculation of demographic rates, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; Analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality; Measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by method, region, and urban- rural residence; Collect data on mother and child health, including immunisations, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections among children under five, antenatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding; Measure the nutritional status of children under five and of their mothers using anthropometric measurements.

The TDHS information is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in evaluating existing programs and in designing new strategies for improving family planning and health services in Turkey.

MAIN RESULTS

Fertility in Turkey is continuing to decline. If Turkish women maintain current fertility rates during their reproductive years, they can expect to have all average of 2.7 children by the end of their reproductive years. The highest fertility rate is observed for the age group 20-24. There are marked regional differences in fertility rates, ranging from 4.4 children per woman in the East to 2.0 children per woman in the West. Fertility also varies widely by urban-rural residence and by education level. A woman living in rural areas will have almost one child more than a woman living in an urban area. Women who have no education have almost one child more than women who have a primary-level education and 2.5 children more than women with secondary-level education.

The first requirement of success ill family planning is the knowledge of family planning methods. Knowledge of any method is almost universal among Turkish women and almost all those who know a method also know the source of the method. Eighty percent of currently married women have used a method sometime in their life. One third of currently married women report ever using the IUD. Overall, 63 percent of currently married women are currently using a method. The majority of these women are modern method users (35 percent), but a very substantial proportion use traditional methods (28 percent). the IUD is the most commonly used modern method (I 9 percent), allowed by the condom (7 percent) and the pill (5 percent). Regional differences are substantial. The level of current use is 42 percent in tile East, 72 percent in tile West and more than 60 percent in tile other three regions. "File common complaints about tile methods are side effects and health concerns; these are especially prevalent for the pill and IUD.

One of the major child health indicators is immunisation coverage. Among children age 12-23 months, the coverage rates for BCG and the first two doses of DPT and polio were about 90 percent, with most of the children receiving those vaccines before age one. The results indicate that 65 percent of the children had received all vaccinations at some time before the survey. On a regional basis, coverage is significantly lower in the Eastern region (41 percent), followed by the Northern and Central regions (61 percent and 65 percent, respectively). Acute respiratory infections (ARI) and diarrhea are the two most prevalent diseases of children under age five in Turkey. In the two weeks preceding the survey, the prevalence of ARI was 12 percent and the prevalence of diarrhea was 25 percent for children under age five. Among children with diarrhea 56 percent were given more fluids than usual.

Breastfeeding in Turkey is widespread. Almost all Turkish children (95 percent) are breastfed for some period of time. The median duration of breastfeeding is 12 months, but supplementary foods and liquids are introduced at an early age. One-third of children are being given supplementary food as early as one month of age and by the age of 2-3 months, half of the children are already being given supplementary foods or liquids.

By age five, almost one-filth of children arc stunted (short for their age), compared to an international reference population. Stunting is more prevalent in rural areas, in the East, among children of mothers with little or no education, among children who are of higher birth order, and among those born less than 24 months after a prior birth. Overall, wasting is not a problem. Two percent of children are wasted (thin for their height), and I I percent of children under five are underweight for their age. The survey results show that obesity is d problem among mothers. According to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculations, 51 percent of mothers are overweight, of which 19 percent are obese.

Geographic coverage

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 12-49
• Children under five

Universe

The population covered by the 1993 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the TDHS was designed to provide estimates of population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates for the nation as a whole, fOr urban and rural areas, and for the five major regions of the country. A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS sample.

Sample selection was undertaken in three stages. The sampling units at the first stage were settlements that differed in population size. The frame for the selection of the primary sampling units (PSUs) was prepared using the results of the 1990 Population Census. The urban frame included provinces and district centres and settlements with populations of more than 10,000; the rural frame included subdistricts and villages with populations of less than 10,000. Adjustments were made to consider the growth in some areas right up to survey time. In addition to the rural-urban and regional stratifications, settlements were classified in seven groups according to population size.

The second stage of selection involved the list of quarters (administrative divisions of varying size) for each urban settlement, provided by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Every selected quarter was subdivided according tothe number of divisions(approximately 100 households)assigned to it. In rural areas, a selected village was taken as a single quarter, and wherever necessary, it was divided into subdivisions of approximately 100 households. In cases where the number of households in a selected village was less than 100 households, the nearest village was selected to complete the 100 households during the listing activity, which is described below.

After the selection of the secondary sampling units (SSUs), a household listing was obtained for each by the TDHS listing teams. The listing activity was carried out in May and June. From the household lists, a systematic random sample of households was chosen for the TDHS. All ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used in the main fieldwork for the TDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive age. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed in the DHS program and on the questionnaires that had been employed in previous Turkish population and health surveys. The questionnaires were adapted to obtain data needed for program planning in Turkey during consultations with population and health agencies. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Turkish.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, marital status and relationship to the head of household for each person listed as a household member

Abstract

The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOHSW) initiated the 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey (LDHS) to collect population-based data to inform the Health Sector Reform Programme (2000-2009). The 2004 LDHS will assist in monitoring and evaluating the performance of the Health Sector Reform Programme since 2000 by providing data to be compared with data from the first baseline survey, which was conducted when the reform programme began. The LDHS survey will also provide crucial information to help define the targets for Phase II of the Health Sector Reform Programme (2005-2008). Additionally, the 2004 LDHS results will serve as the main source of key demographic indicators in Lesotho until the 2006 population census results are available.

The LDHS was conducted using a representative sample of women and men of reproductive age.

The specific objectives were to: - Provide data at national and district levels that allow the determination of demographic indicators, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; - Measure changes in fertility and contraceptive use and at the same time analyse the factors that affect these changes, such as marriage patterns, desire for children, availability of contraception, breastfeeding patterns, and important social and economic factors; - Examine the basic indicators of maternal and child health in Lesotho, including nutritional status, use of antenatal and maternity services, treatment of recent episodes of childhood illness, and immunisation coverage for children; - Describe the patterns of knowledge and behaviour related to the transmission of HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis; - Estimate adult and maternal mortality ratios at the national level; - Estimate the prevalence of anaemia among children, women and men, and the prevalence of HIV among women and men at the national and district levels.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 2004 LDHS covered the household population. A representative probability sample of more than 9,000 households was selected for the 2004 LDHS sample. This sample was constructed to allow for separate estimates for key indicators in each of the ten districts in Lesotho, as well as for urban and rural areas separately.

The survey utilized a two-stage sample design. In the first stage, 405 clusters (109 in the urban and 296 in the rural areas) were selected from a list of enumeration areas from the 1996 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 household residents in the 2004 LDHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. In addition, in every second household selected for the survey, all men age 15-59 years were eligible to be interviewed if they were either permanent residents or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey. In the households selected for the men's survey, height and weight measurements were taken for eligible women and children under five years of age. Additionally, eligible women, men, and children under age five were tested in the field for anaemia, and eligible women and men were asked for an additional blood sample for anonymous testing for HIV.

Note: See detailed sample implementation in the APPENDIX A of the final 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey Final Report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used for the 2004 LDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. To reflect relevant issues in population and health in Lesotho, the questionnaires were adapted during a series of technical meetings with various stakeholders from government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organizations and international donors. The final draft of the questionnaire was discussed at a large meeting of the LDHS Technical Committee organized by the MOHSW and BOS. The adapted questionnaires were translated from English into Sesotho and pretested during June 2004.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all of the usual members and visitors in the selected households. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Some basic information was also collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, education, residence and emigration status, and relationship to the head of the household. For children under 18, survival status of the parents was determined. The Household Questionnaire also 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 of the house, ownership of various durable goods, and access to health facilities. For households selected for the male survey subsample, the questionnaire was used to record height, weight, and haemoglobin measurements of women, men and children, and the respondents’ decision about whether to volunteer to give blood samples for HIV.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49. The women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (education, residential history, media exposure, etc.) - Birth history and childhood mortality - 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 - Awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and tuberculosis (TB) - Maternal mortality

The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-59 living in every other household in the 2004-05 LDHS 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 detailed reproductive history or questions on maternal and child health, nutrition, and maternal mortality.

Geographic coordinates were collected for each EA in the 2004 LDHS.

Cleaning operations

The processing of the 2004 LDHS results began shortly after the fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to BOS headquarters, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. The data processing personnel included two supervisors, two questionnaire administrators/office editors-who ensured that the expected number of questionnaires from each cluster was received-16 data entry operators, and two secondary editors. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because BOS was 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 May 2005.

Response rate

Response rates are important because high non-response may affect the reliability of the results. A total of 9,903 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,025 were found to be occupied during data collection. Of the 9,025 existing households, 8,592 were successfully interviewed, yielding a household response rate of 95 percent.

In these households, 7,522 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview. Interviews were completed with 94 percent of these women. Of the 3,305 eligible men identified, 85 percent were successfully interviewed. The response rate for urban women and men is somewhat higher than for rural respondents (96 percent compared with 94 percent for women and 88 percent compared with 84 percent for men). The principal reason for non-response among 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, principally because of employment and life style.

Response rates for the HIV testing component were lower than those for the interviews.

See summarized response rates in Table 1.2 of the Final 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 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey (LSDHS) 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 2004 LSDHS 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

Age, Sex, Race, Ethnicity, Total Housing Units, and Voting Age Population. This service is updated annually with American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data. Contact: District of Columbia, Office of Planning. Email: planning@dc.gov. Geography: District-wide. Current Vintage: 2019-2023. ACS Table(s): DP05. Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey. Date of API call: January 2, 2025. National Figures: data.census.gov. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data. Data Note from the Census: Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. Data Processing Notes: This layer is updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases. Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines clipped for cartographic purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 AWATER (Area Water) boundaries offered by TIGER. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page. Data processed using R statistical package and ArcGIS Desktop. Margin of Error was not included in this layer but is available from the Census Bureau. Contact the Office of Planning for more information about obtaining Margin of Error values.

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.

Demographic data of the total study sample and each group.

This feature layer provides Esri 2018 demographic estimates for popular variables including: 2018 Total Population, 2018 Household Population, 2018 Median Age, 2018 Median Household Income, 2018 Per Capita Income, 2018 Diversity Index and many more. Data is available from country, state, county, ZIP Code, tract, and block group level with adjustable scale visibility. It is intended as a sample feature service to demonstrate smart mapping capabilities with Esri's Demographic data. Example feature views and web maps built from this layer include:Predominant Generations in the United StatesUnemployment in the United StatesMedian Home Value and IncomePopulation Growth or Decline?For more information, visit the Updated Demographics documentation. For a full list of variables, click the Data tab. This data is featured on the Mapping page of www.esri.com

Abstract

The 1991 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (IDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women age 15-49. It was conducted between May and July 1991. The survey was designed to provide information on levels and trends of fertility, infant and child mortality, family planning and maternal and child health. The IDHS was carried out as collaboration between the Central Bureau of Statistics, the National Family Planning Coordinating Board, and the Ministry of Health. The IDHS is follow-on to the National Indonesia Contraceptive Prevalence Survey conducted in 1987.

The DHS program has four general objectives: - To provide participating countries with data and analysis useful for informed policy choices; - To expand the international population and health database; - To advance survey methodology; and - To help develop in participating countries the technical skills and resources necessary to conduct demographic and health surveys.

In 1987 the National Indonesia Contraceptive Prevalence Survey (NICPS) was conducted in 20 of the 27 provinces in Indonesia, as part of Phase I of the DHS program. This survey did not include questions related to health since the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) had collected that information in the 1987 National Socioeconomic Household Survey (SUSENAS). The 1991 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (IDHS) was conducted in all 27 provinces of Indonesia as part of Phase II of the DHS program. The IDHS received financial assistance from several sources.

The 1991 IDHS was specifically designed to meet the following objectives: - To provide data concerning fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health that can be used by program managers, policymakers, and researchers to evaluate and improve existing programs; - To measure changes in fertility and contraceptive prevalence rates and at the same time study factors which affect the change, such as marriage patterns, urban/rural residence, education, breastfeeding habits, and the availability of contraception; - To measure the development and achievements of programs related to health policy, particularly those concerning the maternal and child health development program implemented through public health clinics in Indonesia.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Indonesia is divided into 27 provinces. For the implementation of its family planning program, the National Family Planning Coordinating Board (BKKBN) has divided these provinces into three regions as follows:

• Java-Bali: Jakarta, West Java, Central Java, Yogyakarta, East Java, and Bali
• Outer Java-Bali I: Aceh, North Sumatra, West Sumatra, South Sumatra, Lampung, West Kalimantan, South Kalimantan, North Sulawesi, South Sulawesi, and West Nusa Tenggara
• Outer Java-Bali II: Riau, Jambi, Bengkulu, East Nusa Tenggara, East Timor, Central Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, Central Sulawesi, Southeast Sulawesi, Maluku, and Irian Jaya.

The 1990 Population Census of Indonesia shows that Java-Bali contains about 62 percent of the national population, while Outer Java-Bali I contains 27 percent and Outer Java-Bali II contains 11 percent. The sample for the Indonesia DHS survey was designed to produce reliable estimates of contraceptive prevalence and several other major survey variables for each of the 27 provinces and for urban and rural areas of the three regions.

In order to accomplish this goal, approximately 1500 to 2000 households were selected in each of the provinces in Java-Bali, 1000 households in each of the ten provinces in Outer Java-Bali I, and 500 households in each of the 11 provinces in Outer Java-Bali II for a total of 28,000 households. With an average of 0.8 eligible women (ever-married women age 15-49) per selected household, the 28,000 households were expected to yield approximately 23,000 individual interviews.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The DHS model "A" questionnaire and manuals were modified to meet the requirements of measuring family planning and health program attainment, and were translated into Bahasa Indonesia.

Cleaning operations

The first stage of data editing was done by the field editors who checked the completed questionnaires for completeness and accuracy. Field supervisors also checked the questionnaires. They were then sent to the central office in Jakarta where they were edited again and open-ended questions were coded. The data were processed using 11 microcomputers and ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis).

Data entry and editing were initiated almost immediately after the beginning of fieldwork. Simple range and skip errors were corrected at the data entry stage. Secondary machine editing of the data was initiated as soon as sufficient questionnaires had been entered. The objective of the secondary editing was to detect and correct, if possible, inconsistencies in the data. All of the data were entered and edited by September 1991. A brief report containing preliminary survey results was published in November 1991.

Response rate

Of 28,141 households sampled, 27,109 were eligible to be interviewed (excluding those that were absent, vacant, or destroyed), and of these, 26,858 or 99 percent of eligible households were successfully interviewed. In the interviewed households, 23,470 eligible women were found and complete interviews were obtained with 98 percent of these women.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.2 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. Non-sampling 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 IDHS to minimize this type of error, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate analytically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be measured statistically. The sample of women selected in the IDHS 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 be assured that, apart from non-sampling 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 IDHS 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 survey report.

This study was conducted under the auspices of the Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology at the University of Washington. It is a nationally representative sample of the population of the United States in 1900, drawn from the manuscript returns of individuals enumerated in the 1900 United States Census. Household variables include region, state and county of household, size of household, and type and ownership of dwelling. Individual variables for each household member include relationship to head of household, race, sex, age, marital status, number of children, and birthplace. Immigration variables include parents' birthplace, year of immigration and number of years in the United States. Occupation variables include occupation, coded by both the 1900 and 1950 systems, and number of months unemployed. Education variables include number of months in school, whether respondents could read or write a language, and whether they spoke English. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at ICPSR at https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR07825.v1. We highly recommend using the ICPSR version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

India Census Dataset

This dataset provides comprehensive census data at the district level for India. It includes detailed demographic, religious, educational, and workforce-related attributes, making it a rich resource for socio-economic analysis.

1. Columns and Descriptions

A. Basic Information

District_code: A unique numeric code for each district. State_name: Name of the state to which the district belongs. District_name: Name of the district.

B. Population Data

Population: Total population of the district. Male: Total male population in the district. Female: Total female population in the district.

C. Literacy Data

Literate: Total number of literate individuals in the district.

D. Workforce Data

Workers: Total number of workers in the district. Male_Workers: Total number of male workers in the district. Female_Workers: Total number of female workers in the district. Cultivator_Workers: Number of workers engaged as cultivators. Agricultural_Workers: Number of workers engaged in agricultural labor. Household_Workers: Number of workers engaged in household industries.

E. Religion Data

Hindus: Total number of Hindus in the district. Muslims: Total number of Muslims in the district. Christians: Total number of Christians in the district. Sikhs: Total number of Sikhs in the district. Buddhists: Total number of Buddhists in the district. Jains: Total number of Jains in the district.

F. Education Data

Secondary_Education: Number of individuals with secondary education. Higher_Education: Number of individuals with higher education qualifications. Graduate_Education: Number of individuals with graduate-level education.

G. Age Group Data

Age_Group_0_29: Population in the age group 0–29 years. Age_Group_30_49: Population in the age group 30–49 years. Age_Group_50: Population aged 50 years and above.

2. Key Highlights

Number of Districts: 640 Number of Columns: 25 Non-null Values: All columns are complete with no missing data. Detailed breakdown of population by gender, age group, literacy levels, and workforce distribution. Religious composition and education statistics are also included for each district.

3. Potential Use Cases

Data Analysis and Visualization:

Explore patterns in population distribution, literacy rates, workforce composition, and religious demographics. Machine Learning Applications:

Build predictive models to classify districts or forecast demographic trends. Social Research:

Investigate correlations between education levels, workforce participation, and religion. Policy Planning:

Help policymakers target specific demographics or regions for intervention. Educational Insights:

Analyze the impact of education levels on workforce participation or literacy.

4. Dataset Overview

Total Rows: 640 Total Columns: 25 This dataset provides a unique opportunity to understand India's socio-economic and demographic composition at a granular district level.

Abstract

The 2009 Kiribati Demographic and Health Survey was the first survey in phase two of Pacific DHS Project with funding support from ADB. 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 Kiribati’s demographic and health situation.

The main objective of the 2009 Kiribati Demographic and Health Survey (2009 KDHS) is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, adult and maternal mortality, children’s nutritional status, the use of maternal and child healthcare services, and knowledge of HIV and AIDS. Specific objectives are to:

• collect data (at the national level) that will allow the calculation of key demographic rates;
• analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine the level and trends of fertility;
• measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice among women and men by method, urban–rural residence and region;
• collect high-quality data on family health, including immunisation coverage among children, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea and other diseases among children under age 5 years, and maternity care indicators (including antenatal visits, assistance at delivery, and postnatal care);
• collect data on infant and child mortality;
• obtain data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and collect ‘observation’ information to use in assessing the nutritional status of women and children;
• collect data on knowledge and attitudes of women and men about sexually transmitted infections (STIs), HIV and AIDS, and evaluate patterns of recent behaviour regarding condom use; and
• collect data on knowledge and attitudes of women and men about tuberculosis.

Geographic coverage

National coverage.

Analysis unit

• Household,
• Individual.

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged between 15-49 years, and all men aged between 15-49 years.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The primary focus of the 2009 Kiribati Demographic Health Survey (DHS) was to provide estimates of key population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates, for the country as a whole, for the urban area and rural areas (separately) - urban is South Tarawa and urban settlement on Kiritimati Island while the rest of Kiribati is defined as rural areas. The survey used the sampling frame provided by the list of census enumeration areas, with population and household information coming from the 2005 Kiribati Population and Housing Census.

The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 2,193 women aged 15-49. In addition, males aged 15-59 in every second household were interviewed. To take non-response into account, 1,480 households countrywide were selected: 640 in the urban area and 840 in rural areas.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were administered during the 2009 Kiribati Demographic Health Survey (KDHS): a Household questionnaire, a Women’s questionnaire and a Men’s questionnaire. These were adapted to reflect population and health issues relevant to Kiribati, and were presented at a series of meetings with various stakeholders, including government ministries and agencies, NGOs and international donors. The final draft of each questionnaire was discussed at a questionnaire design workshop organised by Kiribati National Statistics Office (KNSO) in March 2009 in Tarawa. Survey questionnaires were then translated into the local language (I-Kiribati) and pretested from 7–19 August 2009.

The Household questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in selected households, and to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, education and relationship to the head of the household. For children under age 18 years, the survival status of their parents was ascertained. The Household questionnaire also collected information on characteristics of each household’s dwelling unit, such as source of drinking water, type of toilet facility, material used for the floor, and ownership of various durable goods.

The Women’s questionnaire collected information from all women aged 15–49 about: - education, residential history and media exposure; - pregnancy history and childhood mortality; - knowledge and use of family planning methods; - fertility preferences; - antenatal, delivery and postnatal care; - breastfeeding and infant feeding practices; - immunisation and childhood illnesses; - marriage and sexual activity; - their own work and their husband’s background characteristics; and - awareness and behaviour regarding HIV and other STIs.

The Men’s questionnaire was administered to all men aged 15–49 living in every second household. It collected much of the same information as the women’s questionnaire, but was shorter because it did not contain questions about reproductive history or maternal and child health or nutrition.

Cleaning operations

Processing the 2009 Kiribati Demographic Health Survey (KDHS) results began three weeks after the start of fieldwork. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to the Kiribati National Statistics Office (KNSO) data processing center in South Tarawa, where the data were entered and edited by seven data processing personnel specially trained for this task. Data processing personnel were supervised by KNSO staff. Data entry and editing of questionnaires was completed by 30 March 30 2010. CSPRo was used for data processing.

Response rate

In total, 1,477 households were selected for the sample, of which 1,451 were found to be occupied during data collection. Of these existing households, 1,422 were successfully interviewed, giving a household response rate of 98%.

In households, 2,193 women were identified as being eligible for the individual interview. Interviews were completed with 1,978 women, yielding a response rate of 90%. Of the 1,337 eligible men identified in the selected sub-sample of households, 85% were successfully interviewed. Response rates were higher in rural areas than in the urban area, with the rural–urban difference in response rates being the greatest among eligible men.

Sampling error estimates

The sample of respondents selected in the 2009 Kiribati Demographic Health Survey (KDHS) 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.

Sampling errors are the errors that result from taking a sample of the covered population through a particular sample design. Non-sampling errors are systematic errors that would be present even if the entire population was covered (e.g. response errors, coding and data entry errors, etc.).

For the entire covered population and for large subgroups, the KDHS sample is generally sufficiently large to provide reliable estimates. For such populations the sampling error is small and less important than the non-sampling error. However, for small subgroups, sampling errors become very important in providing an objective measure of reliability of the data.

Sampling errors will be displayed for total, urban and rural and each sample domain only. No other panels should be included in the sampling error table. The choice of variables for which sampling error computations will be done depends on the priority given to specific variables. However, it is recommended that sampling errors be calculated for at least the following variables, which was not case with Kiribati given the smallness of the sample compared to other countries in the Pacific.

Sampling errors are 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 by simple random sampling, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2009 KDHS sample was the result of a multistage stratified design, and, consequently, it is necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2009 KDHS is the Integrated Sample Survey Analysis (ISSA) Sampling Error Module. This module uses 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.

In addition to the standard error, ISSA

Abstract

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

The BDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. In general, the objectives of the BDHS are to: - assess the overall demographic situation in Bangladesh, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programs in Bangladesh, and - advance survey methodology.

More specifically, the objective of the BDHS is to provide up-to-date information on fertility and childhood mortality levels; nuptiality; fertility preferences; awareness, approval, and use of family planning methods; breastfeeding practices; nutrition levels; and maternal and child health. This information is intended to assist policymakers and administrators in evaluating and designing programs and strategies for improving health and family planning services in the country.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 10-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

Bangladesh is divided into six administrative divisions, 64 districts (zillas), and 490 thanas. In rural areas, thanas are divided into unions and then mauzas, a land administrative unit. Urban areas are divided into wards and then mahallas. The 1996-97 BDHS employed a nationally-representative, two-stage sample that was selected from the Integrated Multi-Purpose Master Sample (IMPS) maintained by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Each division was stratified into three groups: 1 ) statistical metropolitan areas (SMAs), 2) municipalities (other urban areas), and 3) rural areas. 3 In the rural areas, the primary sampling unit was the mauza, while in urban areas, it was the mahalla. Because the primary sampling units in the IMPS were selected with probability proportional to size from the 1991 Census frame, the units for the BDHS were sub-selected from the IMPS with equal probability so as to retain the overall probability proportional to size. A total of 316 primary sampling units were utilized for the BDHS (30 in SMAs, 42 in municipalities, and 244 in rural areas). In order to highlight changes in survey indicators over time, the 1996-97 BDHS utilized the same sample points (though not necessarily the same households) that were selected for the 1993-94 BDHS, except for 12 additional sample points in the new division of Sylhet. Fieldwork in three sample points was not possible (one in Dhaka Cantonment and two in the Chittagong Hill Tracts), so a total of 313 points were covered.

Since one objective of the BDHS is to provide separate estimates for each division as well as for urban and rural areas separately, it was necessary to increase the sampling rate for Barisal and Sylhet Divisions and for municipalities relative to the other divisions, SMAs and rural areas. Thus, the BDHS sample is not self-weighting and weighting factors have been applied to the data in this report.

Mitra and Associates conducted a household listing operation in all the sample points from 15 September to 15 December 1996. A systematic sample of 9,099 households was then selected from these lists. Every second household was selected for the men's survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all ever-married women age 10-49, interviewers also interviewed all currently married men age 15-59. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 10,000 ever-married women age 10-49 and 3,000 currently married men age 15-59.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the BDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women's Questionnaire, a Men' s Questionnaire and a Community Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with relatively high levels of contraceptive use. These model questionnaires were adapted for use in Bangladesh during a series of meetings with a small Technical Task Force that consisted of representatives from NIPORT, Mitra and Associates, USAID/Bangladesh, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (ICDDR,B), Population Council/Dhaka, and Macro International Inc (see Appendix D for a list of members). Draft questionnaires were then circulated to other interested groups and were reviewed by the BDHS Technical Review Committee (see Appendix D for list of members). The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla (see Appendix E for final version in English).

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 his/her 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. In addition, information was collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, and ownership of various consumer goods.

The Women's Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 10-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc.), - Reproductive history, - Knowledge and use of family planning methods, - Antenatal and delivery care, - Breastfeeding and weaning practices, - Vaccinations and health of children under age five, - Marriage, - Fertility preferences, - Husband's background and respondent's work, - Knowledge of AIDS, - Height and weight of children under age five and their mothers.

The Men's Questionnaire was used to interview currently married men age 15-59. It was similar to that for women except that it omitted the sections on reproductive history, antenatal and delivery care, breastfeeding, vaccinations, and height and weight. The Community Questionnaire was completed for each sample point and included questions about the existence in the community of income-generating activities and other development organizations and the availability of health and family planning services.

Response rate

A total of 9,099 households were selected for the sample, of which 8,682 were successfully interviewed. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant or in which the inhabitants had left for an extended period at the time they were visited by the interviewing teams. Of the 8,762 households occupied, 99 percent were successfully interviewed. In these households, 9,335 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview (i.e., ever-married and age 10-49) and interviews were completed for 9,127 or 98 percent of them. In the half of the households that were selected for inclusion in the men's survey, 3,611 eligible ever-married men age 15-59 were identified, of whom 3,346 or 93 percent were interviewed.

The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was the failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The refusal rate was low.

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: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Non-sampling 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 BDHS 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 evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the BDHS 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 BDHS 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 BDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module used the Taylor