Abstract

Different countries have different health outcomes that are in part due to the way respective health systems perform. Regardless of the type of health system, individuals will have health and non-health expectations in terms of how the institution responds to their needs. In many countries, however, health systems do not perform effectively and this is in part due to lack of information on health system performance, and on the different service providers.

The aim of the WHO World Health Survey is to provide empirical data to the national health information systems so that there is a better monitoring of health of the people, responsiveness of health systems and measurement of health-related parameters.

The overall aims of the survey is to examine the way populations report their health, understand how people value health states, measure the performance of health systems in relation to responsiveness and gather information on modes and extents of payment for health encounters through a nationally representative population based community survey. In addition, it addresses various areas such as health care expenditures, adult mortality, birth history, various risk factors, assessment of main chronic health conditions and the coverage of health interventions, in specific additional modules.

The objectives of the survey programme are to: 1. develop a means of providing valid, reliable and comparable information, at low cost, to supplement the information provided by routine health information systems. 2. build the evidence base necessary for policy-makers to monitor if health systems are achieving the desired goals, and to assess if additional investment in health is achieving the desired outcomes. 3. provide policy-makers with the evidence they need to adjust their policies, strategies and programmes as necessary.

Geographic coverage

The survey sampling frame must cover 100% of the country's eligible population, meaning that the entire national territory must be included. This does not mean that every province or territory need be represented in the survey sample but, rather, that all must have a chance (known probability) of being included in the survey sample.

There may be exceptional circumstances that preclude 100% national coverage. Certain areas in certain countries may be impossible to include due to reasons such as accessibility or conflict. All such exceptions must be discussed with WHO sampling experts. If any region must be excluded, it must constitute a coherent area, such as a particular province or region. For example if ¾ of region D in country X is not accessible due to war, the entire region D will be excluded from analysis.

Analysis unit

Households and individuals

Universe

The WHS will include all male and female adults (18 years of age and older) who are not out of the country during the survey period. It should be noted that this includes the population who may be institutionalized for health reasons at the time of the survey: all persons who would have fit the definition of household member at the time of their institutionalisation are included in the eligible population.

If the randomly selected individual is institutionalized short-term (e.g. a 3-day stay at a hospital) the interviewer must return to the household when the individual will have come back to interview him/her. If the randomly selected individual is institutionalized long term (e.g. has been in a nursing home the last 8 years), the interviewer must travel to that institution to interview him/her.

The target population includes any adult, male or female age 18 or over living in private households. Populations in group quarters, on military reservations, or in other non-household living arrangements will not be eligible for the study. People who are in an institution due to a health condition (such as a hospital, hospice, nursing home, home for the aged, etc.) at the time of the visit to the household are interviewed either in the institution or upon their return to their household if this is within a period of two weeks from the first visit to the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLING GUIDELINES FOR WHS

Surveys in the WHS program must employ a probability sampling design. This means that every single individual in the sampling frame has a known and non-zero chance of being selected into the survey sample. While a Single Stage Random Sample is ideal if feasible, it is recognized that most sites will carry out Multi-stage Cluster Sampling.

The WHS sampling frame should cover 100% of the eligible population in the surveyed country. This means that every eligible person in the country has a chance of being included in the survey sample. It also means that particular ethnic groups or geographical areas may not be excluded from the sampling frame.

The sample size of the WHS in each country is 5000 persons (exceptions considered on a by-country basis). An adequate number of persons must be drawn from the sampling frame to account for an estimated amount of non-response (refusal to participate, empty houses etc.). The highest estimate of potential non-response and empty households should be used to ensure that the desired sample size is reached at the end of the survey period. This is very important because if, at the end of data collection, the required sample size of 5000 has not been reached additional persons must be selected randomly into the survey sample from the sampling frame. This is both costly and technically complicated (if this situation is to occur, consult WHO sampling experts for assistance), and best avoided by proper planning before data collection begins.

All steps of sampling, including justification for stratification, cluster sizes, probabilities of selection, weights at each stage of selection, and the computer program used for randomization must be communicated to WHO

STRATIFICATION

Stratification is the process by which the population is divided into subgroups. Sampling will then be conducted separately in each subgroup. Strata or subgroups are chosen because evidence is available that they are related to the outcome (e.g. health, responsiveness, mortality, coverage etc.). The strata chosen will vary by country and reflect local conditions. Some examples of factors that can be stratified on are geography (e.g. North, Central, South), level of urbanization (e.g. urban, rural), socio-economic zones, provinces (especially if health administration is primarily under the jurisdiction of provincial authorities), or presence of health facility in area. Strata to be used must be identified by each country and the reasons for selection explicitly justified.

Stratification is strongly recommended at the first stage of sampling. Once the strata have been chosen and justified, all stages of selection will be conducted separately in each stratum. We recommend stratifying on 3-5 factors. It is optimum to have half as many strata (note the difference between stratifying variables, which may be such variables as gender, socio-economic status, province/region etc. and strata, which are the combination of variable categories, for example Male, High socio-economic status, Xingtao Province would be a stratum).

Strata should be as homogenous as possible within and as heterogeneous as possible between. This means that strata should be formulated in such a way that individuals belonging to a stratum should be as similar to each other with respect to key variables as possible and as different as possible from individuals belonging to a different stratum. This maximises the efficiency of stratification in reducing sampling variance.

MULTI-STAGE CLUSTER SELECTION

A cluster is a naturally occurring unit or grouping within the population (e.g. enumeration areas, cities, universities, provinces, hospitals etc.); it is a unit for which the administrative level has clear, nonoverlapping boundaries. Cluster sampling is useful because it avoids having to compile exhaustive lists of every single person in the population. Clusters should be as heterogeneous as possible within and as homogenous as possible between (note that this is the opposite criterion as that for strata). Clusters should be as small as possible (i.e. large administrative units such as Provinces or States are not good clusters) but not so small as to be homogenous.

In cluster sampling, a number of clusters are randomly selected from a list of clusters. Then, either all members of the chosen cluster or a random selection from among them are included in the sample. Multistage sampling is an extension of cluster sampling where a hierarchy of clusters are chosen going from larger to smaller.

In order to carry out multi-stage sampling, one needs to know only the population sizes of the sampling units. For the smallest sampling unit above the elementary unit however, a complete list of all elementary units (households) is needed; in order to be able to randomly select among all households in the TSU, a list of all those households is required. This information may be available from the most recent population census. If the last census was >3 years ago or the information furnished by it was of poor quality or unreliable, the survey staff will have the task of enumerating all households in the smallest randomly selected sampling unit. It is very important to budget for this step if it is necessary and ensure that all households are properly enumerated in order that a representative sample is obtained.

It is always best to have as many clusters in the PSU as possible. The reason for this is that the fewer the number of respondents in each PSU, the lower will be the clustering effect which

Abstract

The 1997 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is a national sample survey carried out by the Department of Statistics (DOS) as part of its National Household Surveys Program (NHSP). The JPFHS was specifically aimed at providing information on fertility, family planning, and infant and child mortality. Information was also gathered on breastfeeding, on maternal and child health care and nutritional status, and on the characteristics of households and household members. The survey will provide policymakers and planners with important information for use in formulating informed programs and policies on reproductive behavior and health.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

The 1997 JPFHS sample was designed to produce reliable estimates of major survey variables for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, for the three regions (each composed of a group of governorates), and for the three major governorates, Amman, Irbid, and Zarqa.

The 1997 JPFHS sample is a subsample of the master sample that was designed using the frame obtained from the 1994 Population and Housing Census. A two-stage sampling procedure was employed. First, primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected with probability proportional to the number of housing units in the PSU. A total of 300 PSUs were selected at this stage. In the second stage, in each selected PSU, occupied housing units were selected with probability inversely proportional to the number of housing units in the PSU. This design maintains a self-weighted sampling fraction within each governorate.

UPDATING OF SAMPLING FRAME

Prior to the main fieldwork, mapping operations were carried out and the sample units/blocks were selected and then identified and located in the field. The selected blocks were delineated and the outer boundaries were demarcated with special signs. During this process, the numbers on buildings and housing units were updated, listed and documented, along with the name of the owner/tenant of the unit or household and the name of the household head. These activities took place between January 7 and February 28, 1997.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The 1997 JPFHS used two questionnaires, one for the household interview and the other for eligible women. Both questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into Arabic. The household questionnaire was used to list all members of the sampled households, including usual residents as well as visitors. For each member of the household, basic demographic and social characteristics were recorded and women eligible for the individual interview were identified. The individual questionnaire was developed utilizing the experience gained from previous surveys, in particular the 1983 and 1990 Jordan Fertility and Family Health Surveys (JFFHS).

The 1997 JPFHS individual questionnaire consists of 10 sections: - Respondent’s background - Marriage - Reproduction (birth history) - Contraception - Pregnancy, breastfeeding, health and immunization - Fertility preferences - Husband’s background, woman’s work and residence - Knowledge of AIDS - Maternal mortality - Height and weight of children and mothers.

Cleaning operations

Fieldwork and data processing activities overlapped. After a week of data collection, and after field editing of questionnaires for completeness and consistency, the questionnaires for each cluster were packaged together and sent to the central office in Amman where they were registered and stored. Special teams were formed to carry out office editing and coding.

Data entry started after a week of office data processing. The process of data entry, editing, and cleaning was done by means of the ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis) program DHS has developed especially for such surveys. The ISSA program allows data to be edited while being entered. Data entry was completed on November 14, 1997. A data processing specialist from Macro made a trip to Jordan in November and December 1997 to identify problems in data entry, editing, and cleaning, and to work on tabulations for both the preliminary and final report.

Response rate

A total of 7,924 occupied housing units were selected for the survey; from among those, 7,592 households were found. Of the occupied households, 7,335 (97 percent) were successfully interviewed. In those households, 5,765 eligible women were identified, and complete interviews were obtained with 5,548 of them (96 percent of all eligible women). Thus, the overall response rate of the 1997 JPFHS was 93 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among the women 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 subject to two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing (such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding questions either by the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors). Although during the implementation of the 1997 JPFHS numerous efforts were made to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are not only impossible to avoid but also difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The respondents selected in the 1997 JPFHS constitute only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, given the same design and expected size. Each of those samples would have yielded results differing somewhat from the results of the sample actually selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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, since the 1997 JDHS-II sample resulted from a multistage stratified design, formulae of higher complexity had to be used. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1997 JDHS-II was the ISSA Sampling Error Module, which 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.

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 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.

Abstract This paper contributes to the existing literature by reviewing the research methodology and the literature review with the focus on potential applications for the novelty technology of the single platform E-payment. These included, but were not restricted to the subjects, population, sample size requirement, data collection method and measurement of variables, pilot study and statistical techniques for data analysis. The reviews will shed some light and potential applications for future researchers, students and others to conceptualize, operationalize and analyze the underlying research methodology to assist in the development of their research methodology.

A data set of cross-nationally comparable microdata samples for 15 Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) countries (Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, UK, USA) based on the 1990 national population and housing censuses in countries of Europe and North America to study the social and economic conditions of older persons. These samples have been designed to allow research on a wide range of issues related to aging, as well as on other social phenomena. A common set of nomenclatures and classifications, derived on the basis of a study of census data comparability in Europe and North America, was adopted as a standard for recoding. This series was formerly called Dynamics of Population Aging in ECE Countries. The recommendations regarding the design and size of the samples drawn from the 1990 round of censuses envisaged: (1) drawing individual-based samples of about one million persons; (2) progressive oversampling with age in order to ensure sufficient representation of various categories of older people; and (3) retaining information on all persons co-residing in the sampled individual''''s dwelling unit. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania provided the entire population over age 50, while Finland sampled it with progressive over-sampling. Canada, Italy, Russia, Turkey, UK, and the US provided samples that had not been drawn specially for this project, and cover the entire population without over-sampling. Given its wide user base, the US 1990 PUMS was not recoded. Instead, PAU offers mapping modules, which recode the PUMS variables into the project''''s classifications, nomenclatures, and coding schemes. Because of the high sampling density, these data cover various small groups of older people; contain as much geographic detail as possible under each country''''s confidentiality requirements; include more extensive information on housing conditions than many other data sources; and provide information for a number of countries whose data were not accessible until recently. Data Availability: Eight of the fifteen participating countries have signed the standard data release agreement making their data available through NACDA/ICPSR (see links below). Hungary and Switzerland require a clearance to be obtained from their national statistical offices for the use of microdata, however the documents signed between the PAU and these countries include clauses stipulating that, in general, all scholars interested in social research will be granted access. Russia requested that certain provisions for archiving the microdata samples be removed from its data release arrangement. The PAU has an agreement with several British scholars to facilitate access to the 1991 UK data through collaborative arrangements. Statistics Canada and the Italian Institute of statistics (ISTAT) provide access to data from Canada and Italy, respectively. * Dates of Study: 1989-1992 * Study Features: International, Minority Oversamples * Sample Size: Approx. 1 million/country Links: * Bulgaria (1992), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/02200 * Czech Republic (1991), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06857 * Estonia (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06780 * Finland (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06797 * Romania (1992), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06900 * Latvia (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/02572 * Lithuania (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03952 * Turkey (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03292 * U.S. (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06219

I explore the sample size in qualitative research that is required to reach theoretical saturation. I conceptualize a population as consisting of sub-populations that contain different types of information sources that hold a number of codes. Theoretical saturation is reached after all the codes in the population have been observed once in the sample. I delineate three different scenarios to sample information sources: “random chance,” which is based on probability sampling, “minimal information,” which yields at least one new code per sampling step, and “maximum information,” which yields the largest number of new codes per sampling step. Next, I use simulations to assess the minimum sample size for each scenario for systematically varying hypothetical populations. I show that theoretical saturation is more dependent on the mean probability of observing codes than on the number of codes in a population. Moreover, the minimal and maximal information scenarios are significantly more efficient than random chance, but yield fewer repetitions per code to validate the findings. I formulate guidelines for purposive sampling and recommend that researchers follow a minimum information scenario.

Abstract

The objective of the endline surveys in 2016 were to gather household, biomedical, and cognition data in order to evaluate the long-term impact of home supplementation with micronutrient powders (MNP), when combined with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) and early stimulation, delivered through community preschools and parenting sessions, on the health and cognitive development of children during the first five years of life.

The trial consisted of 3 arms. First, 60 villages with established Early Childhood Development centres (ECD) were randomised to 1 of 2 arms:

1) Children living in villages in the ECD control arm received SMC as part of national health programming and a national parenting intervention delivered by ECD center staff trained and supported by Save the Children, with ALL resident children eligible to participate in the interventions irrespective of enrolment in ECD program (ECD Control group).

2) Children living in villages in the intervention arm also received the SMC and parenting interventions described above, but additionally were eligible to receive home supplementation with micronutrient powders (MNP intervention arm).

3) Second, a third non-randomised arm was recruited comprised of children living in 30 randomly selected villages where there were no ECD centers in place and thus both the parenting interventions and MNPs were absent. These children received SMC only, as part of national health programming (non-ECD comparison arm).

Trial arm and Interventions received:

T1. MNP intervention arm: 30 villages with ECD centre (randomised); MNP-Yes, Parenting-Yes, SMC-Yes C1. ECD control arm: 30 villages with ECD centre (randomised); MNP-No, Parenting-Yes, SMC-Yes C2. Non-ECD comparison arm: 30 villages without ECD centre (not randomised); MNP-No, Parenting-No, SMC-Yes

Three cross-sectional endline surveys took place during the period May-August 2016, three years after the original MNP intervention began, and consisted of the following questionnaires and assessments in two age groups of children, 3 year olds and 5 year olds:

i) A household questionnaire was used to collect data from the primary adult caregiver of the child on home environment, exposure to the interventions, and reported practice outcomes of relevance to the parenting intervention.

ii) Biomedical outcomes were measured in children through laboratory and clinical assessment.

iii) A battery of tests were used to assess cognitive performance and school readiness in childen, using a different age-specific test battery for each age group adapted for local language and culture.

Note: Household and cognitive performance data were gathered from participants in all three arms. Biomedical data were only collected from children in the two randomised arms, to evaluate impact of MNP supplementation on anaemia (primary biomedical outcome) in children who received MNPs and those who did not, using a robust study design.

Geographic coverage

Districts (cercles) of Sikasso and Yorosso, Region of Sikasso

Analysis unit

Individuals and communities

Universe

Random sample of target population for the intervention in the 90 communities that consented to participate in the trial, namely pre-school children 0-6 years.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The target population for the interventions comprised all children aged 3 months to 6 years, who were resident in the 90 study communities participating in the trial; the primary sampling unit is the individual child.

Sample Frame:

To identify the number of target beneficiaries, a complete census of all children of eligible age was carried out in the 90 study villages in August 2013. The census listing from 2013 thus defined the population of children who are eligible to have received the interventions every year for the three years between 2013-2016; and was used as the sampling frame of children in whom the impact after three years of implementation of the interventions was evaluated. The intention was to evaluate study outcomes in the same child one year after the start of the MNP intervention (May 2014) and again after three years of the intervention (2016).

A random sample of children was drawn from all children listed in the census for each community participating in the trial, according to the following age criteria:

Date of Birth, or Age in August 2013 (Age group in 2016 surveys) (i) Born between 1 Jan 2013 – 30 June 2013, or aged <1 year in 2013 census if DOB not known (3 years) (ii) Born between 1 May 2010 – 30 April 2011, or aged 2 years in census if DOB not known (5 years)

Thus, all children previously randomly selected and enrolled in the evaluation cohort in 2014 were, if still resident in the village and present on the day of the survey, re-surveyed in May 2016.

Sample Size:

Power analysis was undertaken for a comparison of two arms, taking account of clustering by community. Survey data on biomedical and cognitive outcomes collected in 2014 were used to inform sample size assumptions, including prevalence of primary outcomes, intraclass correlation (ICC) and number of children recruited per cluster. Prevalence of anaemia amongst 3-year old children in 2014 was found to be 61.6% and 64.0% in the intervention and control arms respectively (p=0.618) and 53.8% and 51.9% respectively amongst 5-year old children (p=0.582). The observed ICC for anaemia endpoint at baseline was 0.08 in 3-year old children and 0.06 in 5-year old children. Observed ICC for cognitive outcomes measured in 2014 was 0.09, ranging from 0.05 to 0.16 for individual tasks within the cognitive battery.

Sample Size Estimation for Health Outcomes:

Approximately 20-25 children per cluster were recruited into each age cohort in 2013. Power calculations for anaemia (primary endpoint) were undertaken for three alternative scenarios at endline: (i) to allow for the possibility of up to 20% loss to follow up between 2014 and 2016, power calculations were performed for a sample size at endline of 16 children per cluster; (ii) a smaller cluster size of 14 children sampled per village, under a scenario of 30% loss to follow-up; and (iii) unequal clusters, to allow for the possibility that variation in losses to follow-up between villages could result in an unequal number of children sampled in each village. In this case, cluster size is the mean number of children sampled per cluster.

Thus, assuming a conservative prevalence of anaemia of 50% in the control group and ICC of 0.08, a sample size of 30 communities per arm with 14-20 children sampled per community, will under all of these scenarios provide 80% power to detect a reduction in anemia of at least 28% at 5% level of significance.

Sample Size Estimation for Cognitive Outcomes:

Power calculations for cognitive outcomes explored: (i) a smaller cluster size of 14 children sampled per village, for example resulting from a higher than expected loss to follow-up of 30%; (ii) statistical analysis of differences between arms which does not adjust for baseline - a scenario which allows for the possibility to increase the sample size to compensate for losses to follow-up by increased recruitment of new children for whom no baseline data would be available; and (iii) effect of unequal clusters. Thus, for cognitive-linguistic skills, a sample size of 30 communities per arm with 14-20 children in each age cohort sampled per community will provide 80% power to detect an effect size between 0.27-0.29 at 5% level of significance, assuming an (ICC) of 0.10 and individual, household and community-level factors account for at least 25% of variation in cognitive foundation skills. Whilst for a similar sample size of 30 communities per arm with 14-20 children sampled per community and ICC of 0.10, a statistical analysis which does not adjust for baseline will provide 80% power to detect an effect size between 0.28-0.30 at 5% level of significance.

The sample at endline in May 2016 thus comprised a total of up to 600 children aged 3y and 600 children aged 5y at endline in each arm: T1 Intervention group (with ECD): 30 communities, with approx. 40 randomly selected children in each community (20 aged 3y; 20 aged 5y). C1 ECD control group (with ECD): 30 communities, with approx. 40 randomly selected children in each community (20 aged 3y; 20 aged 5y). C2 Comparison group (without ECD): 30 communities, with approx. 40 randomly selected children in each community (20 aged 3y; 20 aged 5y).

Strategy for Absent Respondents/Not Found/Refusals:

Every effort was made to trace children previously recruited into the evaluation cohort. Since some losses-to-follow-up (for example to due to child deaths, outward migration) were expected between 2014 and 2016, the primary strategy was to oversample in 2014. However, for villages where loss-to-follow-up was higher than expected and it was not possible to trace sufficient number of children remaining from the original sample to meet the required sample size per cluster, additional children were recruited into the evaluation survey in 2016. New recruits were selected at random from the children listed as resident in the village at the time of the original census in 2013. All new recruits had thus been resident in the village and exposed to the interventions throughout the three preceding years.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

1. Household questionnaire (Form_Parent_MaliSIEF_2016_french.pdf ; Form_Parent_MaliSIEF_2016_english.pdf)

The questionnaires for the parent interview were structured questionnaires. A questionnaire was administered to the child’s primary caregiver

Abstract

Rather than studying the entire population, the 1998 Household Poverty Study opted for a sample survey. The advantages of sampling against a complete coverage are well documented and will not be dwelt on here. This notwithstanding, it is worth mentioning that this option allowed for a wide range of issues to be studied. In all, the survey collected information on issues such as education, health, employment and earnings, anthropometry, demography, among others.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SURVEY DESIGN

The sample size of any study depends a to large extent on three key factors: 1. The degree of accuracy required 2. The extent of variation in the population with regards to key characteristics of the study. 3. The population size.

The sample size also needs to be sufficiently large to allow for meaningful analysis bearing in mind the objective of the study, which was mainly to provide a wide range of indicators which will form benchmark information from which poverty will be monitored over time and space.

Against this background, the sample size for the 1998 Household Poverty Study was set at 2000 households. This was deemed sufficient because it would provide enough cases for subgroup analysis. Two thousand households would also provide sufficient cases given the resource constraints in terms of financing, personnel and time.

SAMPLE SELECTION

In order to have a sample that is representative of the country and to avoid conducting interviews in rural areas with scattered population, cluster sampling procedure was adopted using the existing geographical clusters in the form of Enumeration Areas (EA). Technically, Enumeration Areas are mapped to contain about 500 persons but in reality, they range from 300 to 1000 persons. The EA demarcation covers the whole country and conforms to the administrative boundaries.

Another consideration in the sampling process was the number of households to be selected since this has implications on costs and sampling error. According to Scott (cited in CSD, 1994), a constant take of households per enumeration area has no effect on the sampling error over a Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) technique at the first stage of sampling.

Unlike rural areas where the rich and poor normally live in the same area, the urban population is more residentially homogeneous. In other words, rich people tend to live in certain areas whilst the poor also tend to cluster together. Given the above considerations, a multistage sampling procedure using the PPS technique was adopted. Therefore, 18 households were randomly selected in rural areas against nine in the urban areas.

In summary, a multi-stage sample with probability proportional to size (PPS) was taken. Enumeration areas were stratified into 15 groups based on division and density within divisions. A fraction of these EAs (same as in 1993 Population Census) was selected with PPS and 18 households for rural EAs (or 9 for urban EAs) selected using simple random sampling procedure.

Note: See detailed sampling information in the survey final report which is presented in this documentation.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey was administered using structured questionnaire that consists of two parts. Part one of the questionnaire collected demographic, health, education and crop production, among other information. Part two collected information mostly on household expenditure and anthropometric measures.

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002

2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)

4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

Geographic coverage

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

Response rate

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households

Abstract

The main objectives of the study were to assess the knowledge and beliefs of high-risk groups about STI and HIV, determine the prevalence of HIV infection and syphilis among these groups and obtain baseline data that will permit comparisons of risk behaviours, HIV infection and syphilis over time.

Geographic coverage

Six selected states

Analysis unit

State, group, individual

Universe

The Integrated Biological and Behavioural Surveillance Survey 2007 covered only males and females aged up to 15-49 years among seven sub-populations at risk of HIV in six selected states of Nigeria, namely Female Sex Workers (both brothel- and non-brothel-based), men who have sex with men (MSM), injecting drug users (IDU), members of the armed forces, police, and transport workers (TW).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

In order to reach a representative sample of all groups involved in the 2007 IBBSS, a number of different sampling techniques were used depending on the group in question, including simple random sampling (SRS), cluster sampling (probability proportionate to size (PPS) for fixed populations), time-location sampling (TLS) and respondent-driven sampling (RDS). For MSM and IDU, the RDS method was used, while a TLS technique was used to select non-brothel-based FSW and TW. The brothel-based FSW, armed forces, and police were selected using a two-stage cluster sampling technique. The take all (TA) sampling method was used when the desired sample size was not attainable based on the results of target population mapping.

ITLS is a form of cluster sampling that contains both time and location dimensions. TLS provides the opportunity to reach members of a target population who access certain locations at any point in time. The process starts by creating time * location PSU (PSU that have both a time and a location dimensions) from which a random sample is selected. At the second stage all or a sub-sample of randomly selected population members who appear at the site during a designated time interval of fixed length, for example 4 hours, are interviewed. To the extent that all members of a target population access the locations at some point in time, TLS is a probability sampling method because: (i) all population members have a non-zero chance of selection as long as the TLS frame is complete; and (ii) the selection probabilities can be calculated by taking the time dimension as well as the space dimension into account.

RDS is a method that combines "snowball sampling" with a mathematical model that weights the sample to compensate for the fact that the sample was collected in a non-random way. Characterized by long referral chains (to ensure that all members of the target population can be reached) and a statistical theory of the sampling process which controls for bias including the effects of choice of seeds and differences in network size, RDS overcomes the shortcomings of institutional sampling (coverage) and snow-ball type methods (statistical validity). By making chain-referral into a probability sampling method and consequently resolving the dilemma of a choice between coverage and statistical validity, RDS has become the most appropriate method for reaching the hard-to-reach population groups. The RDS process starts with the recruitment of the initial seeds each of whom recruits a maximum of two to three members from their population group.

Sampling deviation

Cluster samples were chosen randomly based on sampling frames developed through the mapping process. This process was to identify places where potential subjects could be reached and sampled. Field work for the mapping exercise was performed over one week. Due to the limited period some hidden populations may not be adequately represented in sampling frames.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was designed in collaboration with FMOH, SFH, CDC, WHO, UNAIDS and other stakeholders. At both central- and state-level trainings, each question in the questionnaire was reviewed and role-played and possible challenges were identified and addressed. The questionnaire of Integrated Biological and Behavioural Surveillance Survey 2007 was grouped into fifteen sections

Section 0: Identification particularsBackground characteristics Section 1: Background characteristics Section 2: Marriage and partnerships Section 3: Sexual history numbers and types of partners Section 4: Sexual history-regular partners (for those with spouse/live-in sexual partners only; for MSM, female spouse/live-in sexual partners only) Section 5: Sexual history-boy friends/girl friends (for those with boy friends/girl friends sexual partners only; for MSM, female boy friends/girl friends sexual partners only) Section 6: Sexual history-purchasing sex (male only) (for those with commercial sex partners only; for MSM, female commercial sex partners only) Section 7: Sexual history-casual-non regular non-paying sexual partners (for those with casual sexual partners only; for MSM, female casual sexual partners only) Section 8: Selling sex (for female populatios only) Section 9: Social habits (all groups) Section 10: Dru use/needle sharing (all population reporting drug injection in the past 12 months) Section 11: MSM-men who have sex with men (ask all respondents) Section 12: STIs (ask all respondents) Section 13: Knowledge, opinions, and attitudes towards HIV/AIDS (ask all respondents) Section 12: Exposure to interventions

Cleaning operations

After data entry, the data was cleaned using STATA 10. Frequency counts were carried out to check consistency and assess cleaniness of the database. The data cleaning also included the following:

Searching for ages outside the age range criteria; Cross-checking all corresponding skips to the questionnaire; Reviewing the cluster allocations; Cross-checking the questionnaire completion responses from the interviewers in the database with the records in the supervisors log to ensure they matched; Tallying the supervisors log of blood samples collected to ensure that recorded numbers of samples collected matched the results recorded in the database; and Consistency checks involving cross-checking answers to related questions.

Response rate

There were 11,175 individuals selected for this study out of whom 0.8% and 8.1% refused to participate in behavioural and biological componenets of the study respectively.

Non-brothel based FSW had the highest refusal rate of 2.7% and 19.4% for behavioural and biological components respectively, followed by brothel-based FSW at 2.2% and 13.1% respectively. Refusal rates for the behavioural component were less than 0.5% for other groups.

For the biological component, refusal rates were 3% for police, 0.8% for the armed forces, 1 .2% for TW, 4.6% for MSM, and 3.3% for IDU.

Sampling error estimates

No sampling error estimate

Data appraisal

A template for the questionnaire was designed with pre-programmed consistency checks for cross-checking answers, including skips and eligibility criteria. Laboratory data forms were collected on a periodic basis from the central laboratories and brought to the same centralized location for data entry. At least 25% of the questionnaires entered daily by each data entry clerk had the behaviour and other non-biological data entered, while 100% double-data entry was achieved for the biological data for quality control purposes. The data entry clerks were supervised by three supervisors who reviewed and validated all questionnaires entered.

Abstract

The survey on financial literacy among the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina was conducted within a larger project that aims at creating the Action Plan for Consumer Protection in Financial Services.

The conclusion about the need for an Action Plan was reached by the representatives of the World Bank, the Federal Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina, supervisory authorities for entity financial institutions and non-governmental organizations for the protection of consumer rights, based on the Diagnostic Review on Consumer Protection and Financial Literacy in Bosnia and Herzegovina conducted by the World Bank in 2009-2010. This diagnostic review was conducted at the request of the Federal Ministry of Finance, as part of a larger World Bank pilot program to assess consumer protection and financial literacy in developing countries and middle-income countries. The diagnostic review in Bosnia and Herzegovina was the eighth within this project.

The financial literacy survey, whose results are presented in this report, aims at establishing the basic situation with respect to financial literacy, serving on the one hand as a preparation for the educational activities plan, and on the other as a basis for measuring the efficiency of activities undertaken.

Geographic coverage

Data collection was based on a random, nation-wide sample of citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina aged 18 or older (N = 1036).

Analysis unit

Household, individual

Universe

Population aged 18 or older

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SUMMARY

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, as is well known, there is no completely reliable sample frame or information about universe. The main reasons for such a situation are migrations caused by war and lack of recent census data. The last census dates back to 1991, but since then the size and distribution of population has significantly changed. In such a situation, researchers have to combine all available sources of population data to estimate the present size and structure of the population: estimates by official statistical offices and international organizations, voters? lists, list of polling stations, registries of passport and ID holders, data from large random surveys etc.

The sample was three-stage stratified: in the first stage by entity, in the second by county/region and in the third by type of settlement (urban/rural). This means that, in the first stage, the total sample size was divided in two parts proportionally to number of inhabitants by entity, while in the second stage the subsample size for each entity was further divided by regions/counties. In the third stage, the subsample for each region/county was divided in two categories according to settlement type (rural/urban).

Taking into the account the lack of a reliable and complete list of citizens to be used as a sample frame, a multistage sampling method was applied. The list of polling stations was used as a frame for the selection of primary sampling units (PSU). Polling station territories are a good choice for such a procedure since they have been recently updated, for the general elections held in October 2010. The list of polling station territories contains a list of addresses of housing units that are certainly occupied.

In the second stage, households were used as a secondary sampling unit. Households were selected randomly by a random route technique. In total, 104 PSU were selected with an average of 10 respondents per PSU. The respondent from the selected household was selected randomly using the Trohdal-Bryant scheme.

In total, 1036 citizens were interviewed with a satisfactory response rate of around 60% (table 1). A higher refusal rate is recorded among middle-age groups (table 2). The theoretical margin of error for a random sample of this size is +/-3.0%.

Due to refusals, the sample structure deviated from the estimated population structure by gender, age and education level. Deviations were corrected by RIM weighting procedure.

MORE DETAILED INFORMATION

IPSOS designed a representative sample of approximately 1.000 residents age 18 and over, proportional to the adult populations of each region, based on age, sex, region and town (settlement) type.

For this research we designed three-stage stratified representative sample. First we stratify sample at entity level, regional level and then at settlement type level for each region.

Sample universe:

Population of B&H -18+; 1991 Census figures and estimated population dynamics, census figures of refugees and IDPs, 1996. Central Election Commision - 2008; CIPS - 2008;

Sampling frame:

Polling stations territory (approximate size of census units) within strata defined by regions and type of settlements (urban and rural) Polling stations territories are chosen to be used as primary units because it enables the most reliable sample selection, due to the fact that for these units the most complete data are available (dwelling register - addresses)

Type of sample:

Three stage random representative stratified sample

Definition and number of PSU, SSU, TSU, and sampling points

• PSU - Polling station territory Definition: Polling stations territories are defined by street(s) name(s) and dwelling numbers; each polling station territory comprises approximately 300 households, with exception of the settlements with less than 300 HH which are defined as one unite. Number of PSUs in sample universe: 4710
• SSU - Household Definition: One household comprises people living in the same apartment and sharing the expenditure for food
• TSU - Respondent Definition: Member of the HH , 18+ Number of TSUs in sample universe: = 2.966.766
• Sampling points Approximately 10 respondents per one PSU, total 104

Stratification, purpose and method

• First level strata: Federation of B&H Republika Srpska Brc ko District
• Second level strata: 10 cantons 2 regions -
• Third level strata: urban and rural settlements
• Purpose: Optimisation of the sample plan, and reducing the sampling error

• Method: The strata are defined by criteria of optimal geographical and cultural uniformity

• Selection procedure of PSU, SSU, and respondent Stratification, purpose and method

• PSU Type of sampling of the PSU: Polling station territory chosen with probability proportional to size (PPS) Method of selection: Cumulative (Lachirie method)

• SSU Type of sampling of the SSU: Sample random sampling without replacement Method of selection: Random walk - Random choice of the starting point

• TSU - Respondent Type of sampling of respondent: Sample random sampling without replacement Method of selection: TCB (Trohdal-Bryant scheme)

• Sample size N=1036 respondents

• Sampling error Marginal error +/-3.0%

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey was modelled after the identical survey conducted in Romania. The questionnaire used in the Financial Literacy Survey in Romania was localized for Bosnia and Herzegovina, including adaptations to match the Bosnian context and methodological improvements in wording of questions.

Cleaning operations

Before data entry, 100% logic and consistency controls are performed first by local supervisors and once later by staff in central office.

Verification of correct data entry is assured by using BLAISE system for data entry (commercial product of Netherlands statistics), where criteria for logical and consistency control are defined in advance.

Response rate

• Nobody at home: 2,8%
• Eligible person is not home: 2,8%
• Refusal : 32,79%
• Given up after a minimum of two visits: 0,82%
• Other (excluded after control): 0,29%
• Finished: 60,5%

analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D

Abstract

The Afrobarometer is a comparative series of public attitude surveys that assess African citizen's attitudes to democracy and governance, markets, and civil society, among other topics. The surveys have been undertaken at periodic intervals since 1999. The Afrobarometer's coverage has increased over time. Round 1 (1999-2001) initially covered 7 countries and was later extended to 12 countries. Round 2 (2002-2004) surveyed citizens in 16 countries. Round 3 (2005-2006) 18 countries, Round 4 (2008) 20 countries, Round 5 (2011-2013) 34 countries, Round 6 (2014-2015) 36 countries, and Round 7 (2016-2018) 34 countries. The survey covered 34 countries in Round 8 (2019-2021).

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individual

Universe

Citizens aged 18 years and above excluding those living in institutionalized buildings.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Afrobarometer uses national probability samples designed to meet the following criteria. Samples are designed to generate a sample that is a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of being selected for an interview. They achieve this by:

• using random selection methods at every stage of sampling; • sampling at all stages with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible to ensure that larger (i.e., more populated) geographic units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample.

The sampling universe normally includes all citizens age 18 and older. As a standard practice, we exclude people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories, patients in hospitals, and persons in prisons or nursing homes. Occasionally, we must also exclude people living in areas determined to be inaccessible due to conflict or insecurity. Any such exclusion is noted in the technical information report (TIR) that accompanies each data set.

Sample size and design Samples usually include either 1,200 or 2,400 cases. A randomly selected sample of n=1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than +/-2.8% with a confidence level of 95 percent. With a sample size of n=2400, the margin of error decreases to +/-2.0% at 95 percent confidence level.

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample. Specifically, we first stratify the sample according to the main sub-national unit of government (state, province, region, etc.) and by urban or rural location.

Area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. Afrobarometer occasionally purposely oversamples certain populations that are politically significant within a country to ensure that the size of the sub-sample is large enough to be analysed. Any oversamples is noted in the TIR.

Sample stages Samples are drawn in either four or five stages:

Stage 1: In rural areas only, the first stage is to draw secondary sampling units (SSUs). SSUs are not used in urban areas, and in some countries they are not used in rural areas. See the TIR that accompanies each data set for specific details on the sample in any given country. Stage 2: We randomly select primary sampling units (PSU). Stage 3: We then randomly select sampling start points. Stage 4: Interviewers then randomly select households. Stage 5: Within the household, the interviewer randomly selects an individual respondent. Each interviewer alternates in each household between interviewing a man and interviewing a woman to ensure gender balance in the sample.

To keep the costs and logistics of fieldwork within manageable limits, eight interviews are clustered within each selected PSU.

Gabon - Sample size: 1,200 - Sampling Frame: Recensement Général de la Population et des Logements (RGPL) de 2013 réalisée par la Direction Générale de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques - Sample design: Representative, random, clustered, stratified, multi-stage area probability sample - Stratification: Province, Department, and urban-rural location - Stages: Primary sampling unit (PSU), start points, households, respondents - PSU selection: Probability Proportionate to Population Size (PPPS) - Cluster size: 8 households per PSU - Household selection: Randomly selected start points, followed by walk pattern using 5/10 interval - Respondent selection: Gender quota to be achieved by alternating interviews between men and women; potential respondents (i.e. household members) of the appropriate gender are listed, then the computer chooses the individual random

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Round 8 questionnaire has been developed by the Questionnaire Committee after reviewing the findings and feedback obtained in previous Rounds, and securing input on preferred new topics from a host of donors, analysts, and users of the data.

The questionnaire consists of three parts: 1. Part 1 captures the steps for selecting households and respondents, and includes the introduction to the respondent and (pp.1-4). This section should be filled in by the Fieldworker. 2. Part 2 covers the core attitudinal and demographic questions that are asked by the Fieldworker and answered by the Respondent (Q1 – Q100). 3. Part 3 includes contextual questions about the setting and atmosphere of the interview, and collects information on the Fieldworker. This section is completed by the Fieldworker (Q101 – Q123).

Response rate

Outcome rates: - Contact rate: 99% - Cooperation rate: 92% - Refusal rate: 3% - Response rate: 91%

Sampling error estimates

+/- 3% at 95% confidence level

A database based on a random sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the United States, developed for the purpose of studying the effects of demographic and socio-economic characteristics on differentials in mortality rates. It consists of data from 26 U.S. Current Population Surveys (CPS) cohorts, annual Social and Economic Supplements, and the 1980 Census cohort, combined with death certificate information to identify mortality status and cause of death covering the time interval, 1979 to 1998. The Current Population Surveys are March Supplements selected from the time period from March 1973 to March 1998. The NLMS routinely links geographical and demographic information from Census Bureau surveys and censuses to the NLMS database, and other available sources upon request. The Census Bureau and CMS have approved the linkage protocol and data acquisition is currently underway. The plan for the NLMS is to link information on mortality to the NLMS every two years from 1998 through 2006 with research on the resulting database to continue, at least, through 2009. The NLMS will continue to incorporate data from the yearly Annual Social and Economic Supplement into the study as the data become available. Based on the expected size of the Annual Social and Economic Supplements to be conducted, the expected number of deaths to be added to the NLMS through the updating process will increase the mortality content of the study to nearly 500,000 cases out of a total number of approximately 3.3 million records. This effort would also include expanding the NLMS population base by incorporating new March Supplement Current Population Survey data into the study as they become available. Linkages to the SEER and CMS datasets are also available. Data Availability: Due to the confidential nature of the data used in the NLMS, the public use dataset consists of a reduced number of CPS cohorts with a fixed follow-up period of five years. NIA does not make the data available directly. Research access to the entire NLMS database can be obtained through the NIA program contact listed. Interested investigators should email the NIA contact and send in a one page prospectus of the proposed project. NIA will approve projects based on their relevance to NIA/BSR''s areas of emphasis. Approved projects are then assigned to NLMS statisticians at the Census Bureau who work directly with the researcher to interface with the database. A modified version of the public use data files is available also through the Census restricted Data Centers. However, since the database is quite complex, many investigators have found that the most efficient way to access it is through the Census programmers. * Dates of Study: 1973-2009 * Study Features: Longitudinal * Sample Size: ~3.3 Million Link: *ICPSR: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/00134

Abstract

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

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

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

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

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

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

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

Response rate

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

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

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

Sampling error estimates

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

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

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

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

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

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2017-18 JPFHS: - Collected data at the national level that allowed calculation of key demographic indicators - Explored the direct and indirect factors that determine levels of and trends in fertility and childhood mortality - Measured levels of contraceptive knowledge and practice - Collected data on key aspects of family health, including immunisation coverage among children, the prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea and other diseases among children under age 5, and maternity care indicators such as antenatal visits and assistance at delivery among ever-married women - Obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and ever-married women age 15-49 - Conducted haemoglobin testing on children age 6-59 months and ever-married women age 15-49 to provide information on the prevalence of anaemia among these groups - Collected data on knowledge and attitudes of ever-married women and men about sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV/AIDS - Obtained data on ever-married women’s experience of emotional, physical, and sexual violence - Obtained data on household health expenditures

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

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

Universe

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used for the 2017-18 JPFHS is based on Jordan's Population and Housing Census (JPHC) frame for 2015. The current survey is designed to produce results representative of the country as a whole, of urban and rural areas separately, of three regions, of 12 administrative governorates, and of three national groups: Jordanians, Syrians, and a group combined from various other nationalities.

The sample for the 2017-18 JPFHS is a stratified sample selected in two stages from the 2015 census frame. Stratification was achieved by separating each governorate into urban and rural areas. Each of the Syrian camps in the governorates of Zarqa and Mafraq formed its own sampling stratum. In total, 26 sampling strata were constructed. Samples were selected independently in each sampling stratum, through a two-stage selection process, according to the sample allocation. Before the sample selection, the sampling frame was sorted by district and sub-district within each sampling stratum. By using a probability-proportional-to-size selection for the first stage of selection, an implicit stratification and proportional allocation were achieved at each of the lower administrative levels.

In the first stage, 970 clusters were selected with probability proportional to cluster size, with the cluster size being the number of residential households enumerated in the 2015 JPHC. The sample allocation took into account the precision consideration at the governorate level and at the level of each of the three special domains. After selection of PSUs and clusters, a household listing operation was carried out in all selected clusters. The resulting household lists served as the sampling frame for selecting households in the second stage. A fixed number of 20 households per cluster were selected with an equal probability systematic selection from the newly created household listing.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Four questionnaires were used for the 2017-18 JPFHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, and the Biomarker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey questionnaires, were adapted to reflect population and health issues relevant to Jordan. After all questionnaires were finalised in English, they were translated into Arabic.

Cleaning operations

All electronic data files for the 2017-18 JPFHS were transferred via IFSS to the DOS central office in Amman, where they were stored on a password-protected computer. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the duration of fieldwork, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in October 2017 and completed in February 2018.

Response rate

A total of 19,384 households were selected for the sample, of which 19,136 were found to be occupied at the time of the fieldwork. Of the occupied households, 18,802 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98%.

In the interviewed households, 14,870 women were identified as eligible for an individual interview; interviews were completed with 14,689 women, yielding a response rate of 99%. A total of 6,640 eligible men were identified in the sampled households and 6,429 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. Response rates for both women and men were similar across urban and rural areas.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2017-18 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and sample size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected by simple random sampling, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2017-18 JPFHS sample was the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed using SAS programmes developed by ICF International. These programmes use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

The Taylor linearisation method treats any percentage or average as a ratio estimate, r = y/x, where y represents the total sample value for variable y, and x represents the total number of cases in the group or subgroup under consideration.

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

Data appraisal

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

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

Abstract

The Cambodia Socio-Economic Survey (CSES) asks questions to a country wide sample of households and household members about housing conditions, education, economic activities, household production and income, household level and structure of consumption, health, victimization, etc. There are also questions related to people in the labour force, e.g. labour force participation.

Poverty reduction is a major commitment by the Royal Government of Cambodia. Accurate statistical information about the living standards of the population and the extent of poverty is an essential instrument to assist the Government in diagnosing the problems, in designing effective policies for reducing poverty and in monitoring and evaluating the progress of poverty reduction. The Millennium Development Goals (MDG) has been adopted by the Royal Government of Cambodia and a National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) has been developed. The MDGs are also incorporated into the “Rectangular Strategy of Cambodia”.

Cambodia is still a predominantly rural and agricultural society. The vast majority of the population get their subsistence in households as self-employed in agriculture. The level of living is determined by the household's command over labour and resources for own-production in terms of land and livestock for agricultural activities, equipments and tools for fishing, forestry and construction activities and income-earning activities in the informal and formal sector. The CSES aims to estimate household income and consumption/expenditure as well as a number of other household and individual characteristics.

The main objective of the survey is to collect statistical information about living conditions of the Cambodian population and the extent of poverty. The survey can be used for identifying problems and making decisions based on statistical data.

The main user is the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) as the survey supports monitoring the National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) by different socio-economic indicators. Other users are university researchers, analysts, international organizations e.g. the World Bank and NGO’s. The World Bank has published a report on poverty profile and social indicators using CSES 2007 data . In this regard, the CSES continues to serve all stakeholders involved as essential instruments in order to assist in diagnosing the problems and designing their most effective policies. The CSES micro data at NIS is available for research and analysis by external researchers after approval by Senior Minister of Planning. The interesting research questions that could be put to the data are many; NIS welcomes new research based on CSES data.

General Objectives: CSES 2014 will continue the work started through CSES 2004 and the annual CSES 2007 to 2013 and would primarily aim at producing information needed for planning and policy making for reduction of poverty in Cambodia. Reduction of poverty has been given high priority in Cambodia's National Strategic Development Plan. In addition to this, the survey data help in various other ways in developmental planning and policy making in the country. They would also prove useful for the production of National Accounts in Cambodia.

A long-term objective of the entire project is to build national capability in NIS for conducting socio-economic surveys and for utilizing survey data for planning for national development and social welfare.

Specific Objectives Among specific objectives, the following deserve special mention: 1) Obtain data on infrastructural facilities in villages, especially facilities for schooling and health care and associated problems. 2) Obtain data on retail prices of selected food, non-food and medicine items prevailing in the villages. 3) Collect data on utilization of education, housing and land ownership 4) Collect data on household assets and outstanding loans. 5) Collect data on household's construction activities. 6) Collect information on maternal health, child health/care. 7) Collect information on health care seeking and expenditure of the household members related to illness, injury and disability. 8) Collect information on economic activities including the economic activities for children aged between 5 and 17 years. 9) Collect information on victimization by the household 10) Collect information on the presence of the household members.

Geographic coverage

National Phnom Penh / Other Urban / Other Rural 1) Banteay Meanchey 2) Kampong Cham/Tbong Khmum 3) Kampong Chhnang
4) Kampong Speu 5) Kampong Thom 6) Kandal
7) Kratie
8) Phnom Penh
9) Prey Veng
10) Pursat
11) Siem Reap
12) Svay Rieng
13) Takeo
14) Otdar Meanchey
15) Battambang/Pailin
16) Kampot/Kep
17) Preah Sihanouk/Koh Kong 18) Preah Vihear/Stung Treng
19) Mondul Kiri/Ratanak Kiri

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals

Universe

All resident households in Cambodia

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling design in the CSES 2014 survey is a three-stage design. In stage one a sample of villages is selected, in stage two an Enumeration Area (EA) is selected from each village selected in stage one, and in stage three a sample of households is selected from each EA selected in stage two.

Stage 1: A random sample of PSUs was selected from each stratum. The sampling method was systematic PPS (PPS=sampling with probability proportional to size). The size measure used was the number of households in the PSU according to the sampling frame.

Stage 2: One EA was selected by Simple Random Sampling (SRS), in each village selected in stage 1.

Stage 3: In each selected EA a sample of 10 households was selected. The selection of households was done in the field by the supervisors/interviewers. All households in selected EAs were listed by the enumerator. The sample of households was then selected from the list by systematic sampling with a random start (the start value controlled by NIS).

For the details of sample selection please refer to the document "Process Description: Design and Select the Sample for CSES 2014"

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three different questionnaires or forms were used in the survey:

Form 1: Household listing sheets to be used in the sampling procedure in the enumeration areas.

Form 2: Village questionnaire answered by the village leader about economy and infrastructure, crop production, health, education, retail prices and sales prices of agriculture, employment and wages, and recruitment of children for work outside the village.

Form 3: Household questionnaire with questions for each household member, including modules on migration, education and literacy, housing conditions, crop production, household liabilities, durable goods, construction activities, nutrition, fertility and child care, child feeding and vaccination, health of children, mortality, current economic activity, health and illness, smoking, HIV/AIDS awareness, and victimization.

The interviewer is responsible for filling up Form 1 and Form 3 to respondents. For Form 2, the supervisors will be asked to canvass this form. In case that the supervisors are absent for any reason, the interviewers may be also asked to help fill up this form (Form 2).

Cleaning operations

The NIS team commenced their work of checking and coding and coding in begining of February after the first month of fieldwork was completed. Supervisors from the field delivered questionaires to NIS. Sida project expert and NIS Survey Manager helped in solving relevant matters that become apparent when reviewing questionires on delivery.

Response rate

The CSES 2014 enjoyed almost a 100 percent response rate. The high response rate together with close and systematic fieldwork supervision by the core group members were a major contribution for achieving high quality survey results.

Sampling error estimates

In order to provide a basis for assessing the reliability or precision of CSES estimates, the estimation of the magnitude of sampling error in the survey data were computed. Since most of the estimates from the survey are in the form of weighted ratios, thus variances for ratio estimates are computed.

The Coefficients of Variation (CV) on national level estimates are generally below 4 percent. The exception is the CV for total value of assets where there are rather high CVs especially in the urban areas, which should be expected.

The CVs are somewhat higher in the urban and rural domains but still generally below 7 percent. For the five zones, the average CVs are in the range 5 to 13 percent with a few exceptions where the CVs are above 20 percent. For provinces the CVs for food consumption are 9 percent on average.

The sample take within Primary Sampling Units (PSU) was set to 10 households per PSU in the CSES 1999. When data on variances became available, it was possible to make crude calculations of the optimal sample take within PSU. Calculations on some of the central estimates in the CSES 1999 show that the design effects in most cases are in the range 1 to 5.

Intra-cluster correlation coefficients have been calculated based on the design effects. These correlation coefficients are somewhat high. The reason is that the characteristics that are measured tend to be concentrated (clustered) within the PSUs. The optimal sample size within PSUs under different assumptions on cost ratios and intra-cluster correlation coefficients was then calculated. The cost ratio is the average cost for adding a village to the sample divided by the average

Note. JP  =  Journal of Personality, JRP  =  Journal of Research in Personality, PSPB  =  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, JPSP  =  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, JESP  =  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, PS  =  Psychological Science (social/personality articles only), JPSP:ASC  =  Attitudes and Social Cognition section of JPSP, JPSP:IRGP  =  Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes section of JPSP, JPSP:PPID  =  Personality Processes and Individual Differences section of JPSP. Power values assume a two-tailed test with an alpha level of .05.Statistical Power to Detect Various Population Effect Sizes across Journals.

Abstract

This data is from the first round of a unique, cross-country panel survey conducted in Sri Lanka by the Secure Livelihoods Research Consortium (SLRC). The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) is the lead organisation of SLRC. SLRC partners who participated in the survey were: the Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA) in Sri Lanka, Feinstein International Center (FIC, Tufts University), the Sustainable Development Policy Institute(SDPI) in Pakistan, Humanitarian Aid and Reconstruction, based at Wageningen University (WUR) in the Netherlands, the Nepal Centre for Contemporary Research (NCCR), and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

This survey generated the first round of data on people's livelihoods, their access to and experience of basic services, and their views of governance actors. SLRC will attempt to re-interview the same respondents in 2015 to find out how the livelihoods and governance perceptions of people shift (or not) over time, and which factors may have contributed towards that change.

Geographic coverage

Regional

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

Randomly selected households in purposely sampled sites (sampling procedure varied slightly by country). Within a selected household, only one household members was interviewed about the household. Respondents were adults and we aimed to interview a fairly even share of men/ women. In some countries this was achieved, but in other countries the share of male respondents is substantially higher (e.g. Pakistan).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling strategy was designed to select households that are relevant to the main research questions and as well as being of national relevance, while also being able to produce statistically significant conclusions at the study and village level. To meet these objectives, purposive and random sampling were combined at different stages of the sampling strategy. The first stages of the sampling process involved purposive sampling, with random sampling only utilized in the last stage of the process. Sampling locations were selected purposely (including districts and locations within districts), and then randomly households were selected within these locations. A rigorous sample is geared towards meeting the objectives of the research. The samples are not representative for the case study countries and cannot be used to represent the case study countries as a whole, nor for the districts. The samples are representative at the village level, with the exception of Uganda.

Sampling locations (sub-regions or districts, sub-districts and villages) were purposively selected, using criteria, such as levels of service provision or levels of conflict, in order to locate the specific groups of interest and to select geographical locations that are relevant to the broader SLRC research areas and of policy relevance at the national level. For instance, locations experienced high/ low levels of conflict and locations with high/ low provision of services were selected and locations that accounted for all possible combinations of selection criteria were included. Survey locations with different characteristics were chose, so that we could explore the relevance of conflict affectedness, access to services and variations in geography and livelihoods on our outcome variables. Depending on the administrative structure of the country, this process involved selecting a succession of sampling locations (at increasingly lower administrative units).

The survey did not attempt to achieve representativeness at the country /or district level, but it aimed for representativeness at the sub-district /or village level through random sampling (Households were randomly selected within villages so that the results are representative and statistically significant at the village level and so that a varied sample was captured. Households were randomly selected using a number of different tools, depending on data availability, such as random selection from vote registers (Nepal), construction of household listings (DRC) and a quasi-random household process that involved walking in a random direction for a random number of minutes (Uganda).

The samples are statistically significant at the survey level and village level (in all countries) and at the district level in Sri Lanka and sub-region level in Uganda. The sample size was calculated with the aim to achieve statistical significance at the study and village level, and to accommodate the available budget, logistical limitations, and to account for possible attrition between 2012-2015. In a number of countries estimated population data had to be used, as recent population data were not available. The minimum overall sample size required to achieve significance at the study level, given population and average household size across districts, was calculated using a basic sample size calculator at a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. The sample size at the village level was again calculated at the using a 95% confidence level and confidence interval of 5. . Finally, the sample was increased by 20% to account for possible attrition between 2012 and 2015, so that the sample size in 2015 is likely to be still statistically significant. The overall sample required to achieve the sampling objectives in selected districts in each country ranged from 1,259 to 3,175 households.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Cleaning operations

CSPro was used for data entries in most countries.

Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including: - Office editing and coding - During data entry - Structure checking and completeness - Extensive secondary editing conducted by ODI

Response rate

approximately 99

Sampling error estimates

No further estimations of sampling error was conducted beyond the sampling design stage.

Data appraisal

Done on an ad hoc basis for some countries, but not consistently across all surveys and domains.

Abstract

IPUMS-International is an effort to inventory, preserve, harmonize, and disseminate census microdata from around the world. The project has collected the world's largest archive of publicly available census samples. The data are coded and documented consistently across countries and over time to facillitate comparative research. IPUMS-International makes these data available to qualified researchers free of charge through a web dissemination system.

The IPUMS project is a collaboration of the Minnesota Population Center, National Statistical Offices, and international data archives. Major funding is provided by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Additional support is provided by the University of Minnesota Office of the Vice President for Research, the Minnesota Population Center, and Sun Microsystems.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Household

UNITS IDENTIFIED: - Dwellings: No - Vacant units: No - Households: Yes - Individuals: Yes - Group quarters: No - Special populations: Floating population [Population flottante]: these are the homeless people, who live anywhere, near the market places, in the factories, in shacks or even on the pavement, etc.

UNIT DESCRIPTIONS: - Dwellings: A compound is a set of buildings, enclosed or not by a wall or by any other type of fence or paling. In some case it could be reduced to a single building (single hut, house with one or several apartments, or other cases), including a series of distinct dwelling units. Generally, it is placed under the authority of a compound head [Chef de Concession: C.C.]. A compound may include one or several household. - Households: A set of persons, related by blood or not, who live under the same roof and share part or all of their resources to cover their basic needs, in particular lodging and food. These persons are called the household members, take generally their meals together, and recognize the authority of a sole and same person, called the Household Head [Chef de ménage: C.M.]. This concept translates to the words the words ?njël? in Wolof, ?ngank? in Sereer, ?hirande? in Pulaar, and ?siitik? in Diola.

Universe

All persons living in the national territory

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Sampling procedure

MICRODATA SOURCE: National Statistical Office

SAMPLE DESIGN: Systematic sample of every 10th household with a random start, drawn by the Minnesota Population Center

SAMPLE UNIT: Household

SAMPLE FRACTION: 10%

SAMPLE SIZE (person records): 994,562

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire is divided into six sections. Section A is geographic identification of the household. Section B includes questions on the individual characteristics. Section C includes questions on the deads the occurred in the household last year. Section D includes questions on out-migrants who left the household in the past five years. Section D contains housing questions, and Section F contains questions on poverty.

Analysis unit

Woman, Birth, Child, Birth, Man, Household Member

Universe

Ever-married women age 15-49, Births, Children age 0-4, All persons

Kind of data

Demographic and Household Survey [hh/dhs]

Sampling procedure

MICRODATA SOURCE: Department of Statistics [Jordan] and ORS Macro.

SAMPLE UNIT: Woman SAMPLE SIZE: 6006

SAMPLE UNIT: Birth SAMPLE SIZE: 25296

SAMPLE UNIT: Child SAMPLE SIZE: 6073

SAMPLE UNIT: Member SAMPLE SIZE: 46755

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]