The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.
The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.
The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.
National
Sample survey data
The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.
The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.
The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.
Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.
Face-to-face
Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).
The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.
The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.
The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.
A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.
Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of shortfalls made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 1998 GDHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 1998 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 1998 GDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months
Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.
The Turkey Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) 2008 has been conducted by the Haccettepe University Institute of Population Studies in collaboration with the Ministry of health General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning and Undersecretary of State Planning Organization. The Turkey Demographic and Health Survey 2008 has been financed the scientific and Technological research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) under the support program for Research Projects of Public Institutions.
The primary objective of the Turkey DHS 2008 is to provide data on fertility, contraceptive methods, maternal and child health. Detailed information on these issues is obtained through questionnaires, filled by face-to face interviews with ever-married women in reproductive ages (15-49).
Another important objective of the survey, with aims to contribute to the knowledge on population and health as well, is to maintain the flow of information for the related organizations in Turkey on the Turkish demographic structure and change in the absence of reliable vital registration system and ascertain the continuity of data on demographic and health necessary for sustainable development in the absence of a reliable vital registration system. In terms of survey methodology and content, the Turkey DHS 2008 is comparable with the previous demographic surveys in Turkey (MEASURE DHS+).
National
Sample survey data
Face-to-face
Two main types of questionnaires were used to collect the TDHS-2008 data: a) The Household Questionnaire; b) The Individual Questionnaire for Ever-Married Women of Reproductive Ages.
The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model "A" Questionnaire, which was designed for the DHS program for use in countries with high contraceptive prevalence. Additions, deletions and modifications were made to the DHS model questionnaire in order to collect information particularly relevant to Turkey. Attention also was paid to ensuring the comparability of the DHS-2008 findings with previous demographic surveys carried out by the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. In the process of designing the TDHS-2003 questionnaires, national and international population and health agencies were consulted for their comments.
a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, recent migration and residential mobility, employment, marital status, and relationship to the head of household of each person listed as a household member or visitor. The objective of the first part of the Household Questionnaire was to obtain the information needed to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview as well as to provide basic demographic data for Turkish households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire included questions on never married women age 15-49, with the objective of collecting information on basic background characteristics of women in this age group. The third section was used to collect information on the welfare of the elderly people. The final section of the Household Questionnaire was used to collect information on housing characteristics, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water, and the type of toilet facilities, and on the household's ownership of a variety of consumer goods. This section also incorporated a module that was only administered in Istanbul metropolitan households, on house ownership, use of municipal facilities and the like, as well as a module that was used to collect information, from one-half of households, on salt iodization. In households where salt was present, test kits were used to test whether the salt used in the household was fortified with potassium iodine or potassium iodate, i.e. whether salt was iodized.
b) The Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women obtained information on the following subjects:
- Background characteristics
- Reproduction
- Marriage
- Knowledge and use of family planning
- Maternal care and breastfeeding
- Immunization and health
- Fertility preferences
- Husband's background
- Women's work and status
- Sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS
- Maternal and child anthropometry.
The questionnaires were returned to the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies by the fieldwork teams for data processing as soon as interviews were completed in a province. The office editing staff checked that the questionnaires for all the selected households and eligible respondents were returned from the field.
The Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey (ZDHS) is one of a series of surveys carried out by the Central Statistical Office (CSO) as part of the Zimbabwe National Household Survey Capability Programme. Conducted immediately following the second round of the Intercensal Demographic survey in 1988, the objective of the ZDHS was to make available to policy-makers and planners current information on fertility and child mortality levels and trends, contraceptive knowledge, approval and use and basic indicators of maternal and child health. To obtain these data, a nationally representative sample of 4201 women 15-49 was interviewed in the survey between September 1988 and January 1989.
The ZDHS is one of a series of surveys undertaken by the Central Statistical Office (CSO) as part of the Zimbabwe National Household Survey Capability Programme (ZNHSCP). The ZDHS was conducted immediately after the second round of the Intercensal Demographic Survey (ICDS) in 1988. The main objective of the ZDHS was to provide information on: - fertility levels, trends and preferences; - family planning awareness, approval and use; - maternal and child health, including infant and child mortality; - and other topics relating to family health.
The survey was designed to obtain information on family planning use similar to that provided by the 1984 Zimbabwe Reproductive Health Survey (ZRHS) and data on fertility and mortality which would complement information collected in the two rounds of the Intercensal Demographic Survey (ICDS). In addition, participation in the worldwide Demographic and Health Survey project offered an opportunity to strengthen survey capability in Zimbabwe, as well as further comparative research by contributing to the international demographic and health database.
National
The population covered by the 1988 ZDHS is defined as the universe of all women age 15-49 in Zimbabwe. Eligibility for the individual interview was determined on a de facto basis, i.e., a woman was eligible if she was 15 to 49 years of age and had spent the night prior to the household interview in the household, irrespective of whether she was a usual member of the household or not.
Sample survey data
To achieve this objective, a nationally representative, self-weighting sample of women 15- 49 was selected and interviewed in the survey. The ZDHS sample was drawn from the Zimbabwe Revised Master Sample (ZRMS). The ZRMS was based on the master sample constructed at the initiation of the Zimbabwe National Household Survey Capability Programme (ZNHSCP) and revised for the first round of the Intercensal Demographic Survey in 1987.
The ZRMS can be considered as a two-stage sample, which is self-weighting at the household level. The sample is stratified by eight provinces and six sectors. The sectors, which are determined by land use include: (1) communal lands, (2) large-scale commercial farming areas, (3) small-scale commercial farming areas, (4) urban and semi-urban areas, (5) resettlement schemes, and (6) national parks, forest and other areas.
A subsample of 167 enumeration areas (EAs) from the 273 EAs in the ZRMS was selected for the ZDHS, including 114 in rural areas and 53 in urban areas. The EAs were selected systematically with probability proportional to the number of households in the 1982 census. Household listings prepared prior to the 1987 ICDS were used in selecting the households to be included in the ZDHS from the selected EAs. All women 15-49 present in the households drawn for the ZDHS sample on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.
Face-to-face
Two questionnaires were used for the ZDHS, a household and an individual woman's questionnaire. The questionnaires were adapted from the DHS Model "B" Questionnaire, intended for use in countries with low contraceptive prevalence. A pretest was conducted, and the questionnaires were modified, taking into account the pretest results. The household and individual questionnaires were administered in Shona, Ndebele, or English, with these major languages appearing on the same questionnaire.
Information on the age and sex of all usual members and visitors in the selected households was recorded on the household questionnaire and used to identify women eligible for the individual questionnaire. Eligibility for the individual interview was determined on a de facto basis, i.e., a woman was eligible if she was 15 to 49 years of age and had spent the night prior to the household interview in the household, irrespective of whether she was a usual member of the household or not.
The individual questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: - Respondent's background; - Reproduction; - Contraception; - Health and breastfeeding; - Marriage; - Fertility preferences; - Husband's background and women's work; - Height and weight of children 3-60 months.
Data entry and editing began in October 1988 and was completed in February 1989, two weeks after fieldwork ended. The initiation of data processing during the fieldwork allowed the errors that were detected to be communicated immediately to the field teams for corrective measures, thus improving the quality of the data. All data processing activities were carried out in Harare, by a team of five data capture operators under a data processing coordinator. The operators were responsible for office editing and coding, as well as for the entry of the questionnaires. The computer hardware consisted of three IBM-compatible micro-computers. The Integrated System for Survey Analysis (ISSA) software package, developed by IRD for the DHS programme, was used for all phases of the data entry, editing and tabulation. Range, skip and most consistency checks were performed during the data capture itself; only the more sophisticated consistency checks were done during secondary editing.
Of the 4789 households selected for the ZDHS, 4337 were located in the field; of these, 4107 households were successfully interviewed. Within the households successfully interviewed, 4467 women were identified as eligible, and, among these eligible women, 4201 women were interviewed. The overall response rate, which is the product of the household (95 percent) and individual (94 percent) response rates was 89 percent.
The overall response rate, which is the product of the household and individual response rate, was 89 percent for the whole sample. It was 90 percent or higher, except in Manicaland (89 percent), Mashonaland East (88 percent) and Harare/Chitungwiza (74 percent).
Sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples that could have been selected from the same population using the same design and size. For the entire population and for large subgroups, the ZDHS sample is sufficiently large so that the sampling error for most estimates is small. However, for small subgroups, sampling errors are larger and, thus, affect the reliability of the data. Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, ratio, etc.), i.e., the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used also 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 as measured in 95 percent of all possible samples with the same design will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error for that statistic.
The computations required to provide sampling errors for survey estimates which are based on complex sample designs like those used for the ZDHS survey are more complicated than those based on simple random samples. The software package CLUSTERS was used to assist in computing the sampling errors with the proper statistical methodology. The CLUSTERS program 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.
In addition to the standard errors, CLUSTERS computes the design effect (DEFT) for each estimate, which is defined as the ratio between the standard error using the given sample design and the standard error that would result if a simple random sample had been used. A DEFT value of 1,0 indicates that the sample design is as efficient as a simple random sample, while a value greater than 1,0 indicates the increase in the sampling error due to the use of a more complex and less statistically efficient design. CLUSTERS also computes the relative error and confidence limits for estimates.
Sampling errors are presented below for selected variables considered to be of major interest. Results are presented in the Final Report for the whole country, urban and rural areas, three broad age groups and three educationaI levels. For each variable, the type of statistic (mean, proportion) and the base population are given in B.1 of the Final Report. For each variable, Tables B.2-B.5 present the value of the statistic, its standard error, the number of unweighted and weighted cases, the design effect, the relative standard errors, and the 95 percent confidence limits.
The relative standard error for most
The 1993 Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women less than 50 years old. The survey was designed to provide information on fertility levels and trends, infant and child mortality, family planning, and maternal and child health. The TDHS was conducted by the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies under a subcontract through an agreement between the General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. of Calverton, Maryland. Fieldwork was conducted from August to October 1993. Interviews were carried out in 8,619 households and with 6,519 women.
The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of ever-married women of reproductive ages, designed to collect data on fertility, marriage patterns, family planning, early age mortality, socioeconomic characteristics, breastfeeding, immunisation of children, treatment of children during episodes of illness, and nutritional status of women and children. The TDHS, as part of the international DHS project, is also the latest survey in a series of national-level population and health surveys in Turkey, which have been conducted by the Institute of Population Studies, Haeettepe University (HIPS).
More specifically, the objectives of the TDHS are to:
Collect data at the national level that will allow the calculation of demographic rates, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; Analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality; Measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by method, region, and urban- rural residence; Collect data on mother and child health, including immunisations, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections among children under five, antenatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding; Measure the nutritional status of children under five and of their mothers using anthropometric measurements.
The TDHS information is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in evaluating existing programs and in designing new strategies for improving family planning and health services in Turkey.
MAIN RESULTS
Fertility in Turkey is continuing to decline. If Turkish women maintain current fertility rates during their reproductive years, they can expect to have all average of 2.7 children by the end of their reproductive years. The highest fertility rate is observed for the age group 20-24. There are marked regional differences in fertility rates, ranging from 4.4 children per woman in the East to 2.0 children per woman in the West. Fertility also varies widely by urban-rural residence and by education level. A woman living in rural areas will have almost one child more than a woman living in an urban area. Women who have no education have almost one child more than women who have a primary-level education and 2.5 children more than women with secondary-level education.
The first requirement of success ill family planning is the knowledge of family planning methods. Knowledge of any method is almost universal among Turkish women and almost all those who know a method also know the source of the method. Eighty percent of currently married women have used a method sometime in their life. One third of currently married women report ever using the IUD. Overall, 63 percent of currently married women are currently using a method. The majority of these women are modern method users (35 percent), but a very substantial proportion use traditional methods (28 percent). the IUD is the most commonly used modern method (I 9 percent), allowed by the condom (7 percent) and the pill (5 percent). Regional differences are substantial. The level of current use is 42 percent in tile East, 72 percent in tile West and more than 60 percent in tile other three regions. "File common complaints about tile methods are side effects and health concerns; these are especially prevalent for the pill and IUD.
One of the major child health indicators is immunisation coverage. Among children age 12-23 months, the coverage rates for BCG and the first two doses of DPT and polio were about 90 percent, with most of the children receiving those vaccines before age one. The results indicate that 65 percent of the children had received all vaccinations at some time before the survey. On a regional basis, coverage is significantly lower in the Eastern region (41 percent), followed by the Northern and Central regions (61 percent and 65 percent, respectively). Acute respiratory infections (ARI) and diarrhea are the two most prevalent diseases of children under age five in Turkey. In the two weeks preceding the survey, the prevalence of ARI was 12 percent and the prevalence of diarrhea was 25 percent for children under age five. Among children with diarrhea 56 percent were given more fluids than usual.
Breastfeeding in Turkey is widespread. Almost all Turkish children (95 percent) are breastfed for some period of time. The median duration of breastfeeding is 12 months, but supplementary foods and liquids are introduced at an early age. One-third of children are being given supplementary food as early as one month of age and by the age of 2-3 months, half of the children are already being given supplementary foods or liquids.
By age five, almost one-filth of children arc stunted (short for their age), compared to an international reference population. Stunting is more prevalent in rural areas, in the East, among children of mothers with little or no education, among children who are of higher birth order, and among those born less than 24 months after a prior birth. Overall, wasting is not a problem. Two percent of children are wasted (thin for their height), and I I percent of children under five are underweight for their age. The survey results show that obesity is d problem among mothers. According to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculations, 51 percent of mothers are overweight, of which 19 percent are obese.
The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey.
The population covered by the 1993 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.
Sample survey data
The sample for the TDHS was designed to provide estimates of population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates for the nation as a whole, fOr urban and rural areas, and for the five major regions of the country. A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS sample.
Sample selection was undertaken in three stages. The sampling units at the first stage were settlements that differed in population size. The frame for the selection of the primary sampling units (PSUs) was prepared using the results of the 1990 Population Census. The urban frame included provinces and district centres and settlements with populations of more than 10,000; the rural frame included subdistricts and villages with populations of less than 10,000. Adjustments were made to consider the growth in some areas right up to survey time. In addition to the rural-urban and regional stratifications, settlements were classified in seven groups according to population size.
The second stage of selection involved the list of quarters (administrative divisions of varying size) for each urban settlement, provided by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Every selected quarter was subdivided according tothe number of divisions(approximately 100 households)assigned to it. In rural areas, a selected village was taken as a single quarter, and wherever necessary, it was divided into subdivisions of approximately 100 households. In cases where the number of households in a selected village was less than 100 households, the nearest village was selected to complete the 100 households during the listing activity, which is described below.
After the selection of the secondary sampling units (SSUs), a household listing was obtained for each by the TDHS listing teams. The listing activity was carried out in May and June. From the household lists, a systematic random sample of households was chosen for the TDHS. All ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.
Face-to-face
Two questionnaires were used in the main fieldwork for the TDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive age. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed in the DHS program and on the questionnaires that had been employed in previous Turkish population and health surveys. The questionnaires were adapted to obtain data needed for program planning in Turkey during consultations with population and health agencies. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Turkish.
a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, marital status and relationship to the head of household for each person listed as a household member
The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) is the first of this kind of study conducted in Bangladesh. It provides rapid feedback on key demographic and programmatic indicators to monitor the strength and weaknesses of the national family planning/MCH program. The wealth of information collected through the 1993-94 BDHS will be of immense value to the policymakers and program managers in order to strengthen future program policies and strategies.
The BDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. In general, the objectives of the BDHS are to: - asses the overall demographic situation in Bangladesh, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programs in Bangladesh, and - advance survey methodology.
More specifically, the BDHS was designed to: - provide data on the family planning and fertility behavior of the Bangladesh population to evaluate the national family planning programs, - measure changes in fertility and contraceptive prevalence and, at the same time, study the factors which affect these changes, such as marriage patterns, urban/rural residence, availability of contraception, breastfeeding patterns, and other socioeconomic factors, and - examine the basic indicators of maternal and child health in Bangladesh.
National
Sample survey data
Bangladesh is divided into five administrative divisions, 64 districts (zillas), and 489 thanas. In rural areas, thanas are divided into unions and then mauzas, an administrative land unit. Urban areas are divided into wards and then mahallas. The 1993-94 BDHS employed a nationally-representative, two-stage sample. It was selected from the Integrated Multi-Purpose Master Sample (IMPS), newly created by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. The IMPS is based on 1991 census data. Each of the five divisions was stratified into three groups: 1) statistical metropolitan areas (SMAs) 2) municipalities (other urban areas), and 3) rural areas. In rural areas, the primary sampling unit was the mauza, while in urban areas, it was the mahalla. Because the primary sampling units in the IMPS were selected with probability proportional to size from the 1991 census frame, the units for the BDHS were sub-selected from the IMPS with equal probability to make the BDHS selection equivalent to selection with probability proportional to size. A total of 304 primary sampling units were selected for the BDHS (30 in SMAs, 40 in municipalities, and 234 in rural areas), out of the 372 in the IMPS. Fieldwork in three sample points was not possible, so a total of 301 points were covered in the survey.
Since one objective of the BDHS is to provide separate survey estimates for each division as well as for urban and rural areas separately, it was necessary to increase the sampling rate for Barisal Division und for municipalities relative to the other divisions, SMAs, and rural areas. Thus, the BDHS sample is not self-weighting and weighting factors have been applied to the data in this report.
After the selection of the BDHS sample points, field staffs were trained by Mitra and Associates and conducted a household listing operation in September and October 1993. A systematic sample of households was then selected from these lists, with an average "take" of 25 households in the urban clusters and 37 households in rural clusters. Every second household was identified as selected for the husband's survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all ever-married women age 10-49, interviewers also interviewed the husband of any woman who was successfully interviewed. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 10,000 ever-married women age 10-49 and 4,200 of their husbands.
Note: See detailed in APPENDIX A of the survey final report.
Data collected for women 10-49, indicators calculated for women 15-49. A total of 304 primary sampling units were selected, but fieldwork in 3 sample points was not possible.
Face-to-face
Four types of questionnaires were used for the BDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women's Questionnaire, a Husbands' Questionnaire, and a Service Availability Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with relatively high levels of contraceptive use. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaires were made during a series of meetings with representatives of various organizations, including the Asia Foundation, the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, the Cambridge Consulting Corporation, the Family Planning Association of Bangladesh, GTZ, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research (ICDDR,B), Pathfinder International, Population Communications Services, the Population Council, the Social Marketing Company, UNFPA, UNICEF, University Research Corporation/Bangladesh, and the World Bank. The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors of selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his/her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for individual interview. In addition, information was collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, and ownership of various consumer goods.
The Women's Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 10-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc.), - Reproductive history, - Knowledge and use of family planning methods, - Antenatal and delivery care, - Breastfeeding and weaning practices, - Vaccinations and health of children under age three, - Marriage, - Fertility preferences, and - Husband's background and respondent's work.
The Husbands' Questionnaire was used to interview the husbands of a subsample of women who were interviewed. The questionnaire included many of the same questions as the Women's Questionnaire, except that it omitted the detailed birth history, as well as the sections on maternal care, breastfeeding and child health.
The Service Availability Questionnaire was used to collect information on the family planning and health services available in and near the sampled areas. It consisted of a set of three questionnaires: one to collect data on characteristics of the community, one for interviewing family welfare visitors and one for interviewing family planning field workers, whether government or non-governent supported. One set of service availability questionnaires was to be completed in each cluster (sample point).
All questionnaires for the BDHS were returned to Dhaka for data processing at Mitra and Associates. The processing operation consisted of office editing, coding of open-ended questions, data entry, and editing inconsistencies found by the computer programs. One senior staff member, 1 data processing supervisor, questionnaire administrator, 2 office editors, and 5 data entry operators were responsible for the data processing operation. The data were processed on five microcomputers. The DHS data entry and editing programs were written in ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis). Data processing commenced in early February and was completed by late April 1994.
A total of 9,681 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,174 were successfully interviewed. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant, or in which the inhabitants had left for an extended period at the time they were visited by the interviewing teams. Of the 9,255 households that were occupied, 99 percent were successfully interviewed. In these households, 9,900 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview and interviews were completed for 9,640 or 97 percent of these. In one-half of the households that were selected for inclusion in the husbands' survey, 3,874 eligible husbands were identified, of which 3,284 or 85 percent were interviewed.
The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The refusal rate was very low (less than one-tenth of one percent among women and husbands). Since the main reason for interviewing husbands was to match the information with that from their wives, survey procedures called for interviewers not to interview husbands of women who were not interviewed. Such cases account for about one-third of the non-response among husbands. Where husbands and wives were both interviewed, they were interviewed simultaneously but separately.
Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the survey final report.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling errors and sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions
The 1996 Uzbekistan Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS) is a nationally representative survey of 4,415 women age 15-49. Fieldwork was conducted from June to October 1996. The UDHS was sponsored by the Ministry of Health (MOH), and was funded by the United States Agency for International Development. The Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology implemented the survey with technical assistance from the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) program.
The 1996 UDHS was the first national-level population and health survey in Uzbekistan. It was implemented by the Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Ministry of Health of Uzbekistan. The 1996 UDHS was funded by the United States Agency for International development (USAID) and technical assistance was provided by Macro International Inc. (Calverton, Maryland USA) through its contract with USAID.
OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION OF THE SURVEY
The purpose of the 1996 Uzbekistan Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS) was to provide an information base to the Ministry of Health for the planning of policies and programs regarding the health of women and their children. The UDHS collected data on women's reproductive histories, knowledge and use of contraception, breastfeeding practices, and the nutrition, vaccination coverage, and episodes of illness among children under the age of three. The survey also included, for all women of reproductive age and for children under the age of three, the measurement of the hemoglobin level in the blood to assess the prevalence of anemia and measurements of height and weight to assess nutritional status.
A secondary objective of the survey was to enhance the capabilities of institutions in Uzbekistan to collect, process and analyze population and health data so as to facilitate the implementation of future surveys of this type.
MAIN RESULTS
National Seven raions were excluded from the survey because they were considered too remote and sparsely inhabited.
The population covered by the 1996 UDHS is defined as the universe of all women age 15-49 in Uzbekistan
Sample survey data
The UDHS employed a probability sample of women age 15 to 49, representative of 98.7 percent of the country. Seven raions were excluded from the survey because they were considered too remote and sparsely inhabited. These raions are: Kungradskiyi, Muyinakskiyi, and Takhtakupyrskiyi in Karakalpakstan; Uchkudukskiyi, Tamdynskiyi, and Kanimekhskiyi in Navoiiskaya; and Romitanskiyi in Bukharskaya. The remainder of the country was divided into five survey regions. Tashkent City constituted a survey region by itself, while the remaining four survey regions consisted of groups of contiguous oblasts. The five survey regions were defined as follows: Region 1: Karakalpakstan and Khoresmskaya. Region 2: Navoiyiskaya, Bukharskaya, Kashkadarinskaya, and Surkhandarinskaya. Region 3: Samarkandskaya, Dzhizakskaya, Syrdarinskaya, and Tashkentskaya. Region 4: Namanganskaya, Ferganskaya, and Andizhanskaya. Region 5: Tashkent City.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UDHS SAMPLE
The sample for the UDHS was selected in three stages. In the rural areas, the primary sampling units (PSUs) corresponded to the raions which were selected with probabilities proportional to size, the size being the 1994 population. At the second stage, one village was selected in each selected raion. A complete listing of the households residing in each selected village was carried out. The lists of households obtained were used as the frame for third-stage sampling, which is the selection of the households to be visited by the UDHS interviewing teams during the main survey fieldwork. In each selected household, women between the ages of 15 and 49 were identified and interviewed.
In the urban areas, the PSUs were the cities and towns themselves. In the second stage, one health block was selected from each town except in self-representing cities (large cities that were selected with certainty), where more than one health block was selected. The selected health blocks were segmented prior to the household listing operation which provided the household lists for the third-stage selection of households.
SAMPLE ALLOCATION
The regions, stratified by urban and rural areas, were the sampling strata. There were thus nine strata with Tashkent City constituting an entire stratum. A proportional allocation of the target number of 4,000 women to the 9 strata would yield the sample distribution.
The proportional allocation would result in a completely self-weighting sample but would not allow for reliable estimates for at least two of the five survey regions, namely Region 1 and Tashkent City. Results of other demographic and health surveys show that a minimum sample of 1,000 women is required in order to obtain estimates of fertility and childhood mortality rates at an acceptable level of sampling errors. Given that the total sample size for the UDHS could not he increased so as to achieve the required level of sampling errors, it was decided that the sample would be divided equally among the five regions, and within each region, it would be distributed proportionally to the urban and the rural areas. With this type of allocation, demographic rates (fertility and mortality) could not be produced for regions separately.
The number of sample points (or clusters) to be selected for each stratum was calculated by dividing the
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The STAMINA study examined the nutritional risks of low-income peri-urban mothers, infants and young children, and households in Peru during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was designed to capture information through three, repeated cross-sectional surveys at approximately 6 month intervals over an 18 month period, starting in December 2020. The surveys were carried out by telephone in November-December 2020, July-August 2021 and in February-April 2022. The third survey took place over a longer period to allow for a household visit after the telephone interview.The study areas were Manchay (Lima) and Huánuco district in the Andean highlands (~ 1900m above sea level).In each study area, we purposively selected the principal health centre and one subsidiary health centre. Peri-urban communities under the jurisdiction of these health centres were then selected to participate. Systematic random sampling was employed with quotas for IYC age (6-11, 12-17 and 18-23 months) to recruit a target sample size of 250 mother-infant pairs for each survey. .Data collected included: household socio-demographic characteristics; infant and young child feeding practices (IYCF), child and maternal qualitative 24-hour dietary recalls/7 day food frequency questionnaires, household food insecurity experience measured using the validated Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) survey module (Cafiero, Viviani, & Nord, 2018), and maternal mental health.In addition, questions that assessed the impact of COVID-19 on households including changes in employment status, adaptations to finance, sources of financial support, household food insecurity experience as well as access to, and uptake of, well-child clinics and vaccination health services were included.This folder includes the dataset and dictionary of variables for survey 1 (English only).The survey questionnaire for survey 1 is available at 10.17028/rd.lboro.16825507.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Public perception regarding diagnostic sample types as well as personal experiences can influence willingness to test. As such, public preferences for specific sample type(s) should be used to inform diagnostic and surveillance testing programs to improve public health response efforts. To understand where preferences lie, we conducted an international survey regarding the sample types used for SARS-CoV-2 tests. A Qualtrics survey regarding SARS-CoV-2 testing preferences was distributed via social media and email. The survey collected preferences regarding sample methods and key demographic data. Python was used to analyze survey responses. From March 30th to June 15th, 2022, 2,094 responses were collected from 125 countries. Participants were 55% female and predominantly aged 25–34 years (27%). Education and employment were skewed: 51% had graduate degrees, 26% had bachelor’s degrees, 27% were scientists/researchers, and 29% were healthcare workers. By rank sum analysis, the most preferred sample type globally was the oral swab, followed by saliva, with parents/guardians preferring saliva-based testing for children. Respondents indicated a higher degree of trust in PCR testing (84%) vs. rapid antigen testing (36%). Preferences for self- or healthcare worker-collected sampling varied across regions. This international survey identified a preference for oral swabs and saliva when testing for SARS-CoV-2. Notably, respondents indicated that if they could be assured that all sample types performed equally, then saliva was preferred. Overall, survey responses reflected the region-specific testing experiences during the COVID-19. Public preferences should be considered when designing future response efforts to increase utilization, with oral sample types (either swabs or saliva) providing a practical option for large-scale, accessible diagnostic testing.
The 2005 Armenia Demographic and Health Survey (2005 ADHS) is the second in a series of nationally representative sample surveys designed to provide information on population and health issues in Armenia. As in the 2000 ADHS, the primary goal of the 2005 survey was to develop a single integrated set of demographic and health data pertaining to the population of the Republic of Armenia. In addition to integrating measures of reproductive, child, and adult health, another feature of the 2005 ADHS survey is that the majority of data are presented at the marz (region) level.
The 2005 ADHS was conducted by the National Statistical Service (NSS) and the MOH of the Republic of Armenia from September through December 2005. ORC Macro provided technical support for the survey through the MEASURE DHS project. MEASURE DHS is a worldwide project, sponsored by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), with a mandate to assist countries in obtaining information on key population and health indicators. USAID/Armenia provided funding for the survey, while the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)/Armenia and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)/Armenia supported the survey through in-kind contributions.
The 2005 ADHS collected national- and regional-level data on fertility and contraceptive use, maternal and child health, adult health, and HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from women of reproductive age and, on certain topics, from men as well. Data are presented by marz wherever sample size permits.
The 2005 ADHS results are intended to provide the information needed to evaluate existing social programs and to design new strategies for improving the health of and health services for the people of Armenia. The 2005 ADHS also contributes to the growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.
National
Sample survey data
The sample was designed to permit detailed analysis-including the estimation of rates of fertility, infant/child mortality, and abortion-for the national level, for Yerevan, and for total urban and total rural areas separately. Many indicators can also be estimated at the regional (marz) level.
A representative probability sample of 7,565 households was selected for the 2005 ADHS sample. The sample was selected in two stages. In the first stage, 308 clusters were selected from a list of enumeration areas in a subsample from a master sample that was designed from the 2001 Population Census. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey.
All women age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the 2005 ADHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Interviews were completed with 6,566 women. In addition, in a subsample of one-third of all the households selected for the survey, all men age 15-49 were eligible to be interviewed if they were either permanent residents or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey. Interviews were completed with 1,447 men.
Note: See detailed summarized sample implementation tables in APPENDIX A of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Three questionnaires were used in the 2005 ADHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women’s Questionnaire, and a Men’s questionnaire. The Household and Individual Questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed in the MEASURE DHS program and on questionnaires used in the 2000 ADHS. The model questionnaires were adapted for use by experts from the NSS and MOH. Input was also sought from a number of non-governmental organizations. The questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Armenian. The Household and Individual Questionnaires were pretested in June 2005.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information on the socioeconomic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the age, sex, educational attainment, and relationship to the household head of each household member or visitor. This information provides basic demographic data for Armenian households. It also was used to identify the women and men who were eligible for the individual interview (i.e., women and men age 15-49). In the second part of the Household Questionnaire, there were questions on housing characteristics (e.g., flooring material, source of water, type of toilet facilities), on ownership of a variety of consumer goods, and other questions relating to the socioeconomic status of the household. In addition, the Household Questionnaire was used to record height and weight measurements of women, men, and children under age five; hemoglobin measurement of women and children under age five; and blood pressure measurement of women and men.
The Women’s Questionnaire obtained data from women age 15-49 on the following topics: • Background characteristics • Pregnancy history • Antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care • Knowledge, attitudes, and use of contraception • Reproductive and adult health • Health care utilization • Vaccinations, birth registration, and health of children under age five • Episodes of diarrhea and respiratory illness of children under age five • Breastfeeding and weaning practices • Marriage and recent sexual activity • Fertility preferences • Knowledge of and attitude toward HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections
The Men’s Questionnaire, administered to men age 15-49, focused on the following topics: • Background characteristics • Health and health care utilization • Marriage and recent sexual activity • Attitudes toward and use of condoms • Knowledge of and attitude toward HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections • Attitudes toward women’s status
A total of 7,565 households were selected for the sample, of which 7,003 were occupied at the time of fieldwork. The main reason for the difference is that some of the dwelling units that were occupied during the household listing operation were either vacant or the household was away for an extended period at the time of interviewing. Of the occupied households, 96 percent were successfully interviewed.
In these households, 6,773 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview, and interviews were completed with 97 percent of them. Of the 1,630 eligible men identified, 89 percent were successfully interviewed. Response rates are almost identical in urban and rural areas.
Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the report which is presented this documentation.
Estimates derived from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: 1) non-sampling errors, and 2) sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2005 Armenia DHS (2005 ADHS) to minimize this type of error, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2005 ADHS 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 2005 ADHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use a more complex formula. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2005 ADHS is the sampling error module in ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis). This module uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. Another approach, the Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
Note: See detailed
The 2019-20 Gambia Demographic and Health Survey (2019-20 GDHS) is a nationwide survey with a nationally representative sample of residential households. The survey was implemented by The Gambia Bureau of Statistics (GBoS) in collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MoH).
The primary objective of the 2019-20 GDHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2019-20 GDHS: ▪ collected data on fertility levels and preferences; contraceptive use; maternal and child health; infant, child, and neonatal mortality levels; maternal mortality; gender; nutrition; awareness about HIV/AIDS; self-reported sexually transmitted infections (STIs); and other health issues relevant to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ▪ obtained information on the availability of, access to, and use of mosquito nets as part of the National Malaria Control Programme ▪ gathered information on other health issues such as injections, tobacco use, hypertension, diabetes, and health insurance ▪ collected data on women’s empowerment, domestic violence, fistula, and female genital mutilation/cutting ▪ tested household salt for the presence of iodine ▪ obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and women age 15-49 ▪ conducted anaemia testing of women age 15-49 and children age 6-59 months ▪ conducted malaria testing of children age 6-59 months
National coverage
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49, all men age 15-59, and all children aged 0-5 resident in the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The sampling frame used for the 2019-20 GDHS was based on an updated version of the 2013 Gambia Population and Housing Census (2013 GPHC) conducted by GBoS. The census counts were updated in 2015-16 based on district-level projected counts from the 2015-16 Integrated Household Survey (IHS). Administratively, The Gambia is divided into eight Local Government Areas (LGAs). Each LGA is subdivided into districts and each district is subdivided into settlements. A settlement, a group of small settlements, or a part of a large settlement can form an enumeration area (EA). These units allow the country to be easily separated into small geographical area units, each with an urban or rural designation. There are 48 districts, 120 wards, and 4,098 EAs in The Gambia; the EAs have an average size of 68 households.
The sample for the 2019-20 GDHS was a stratified sample selected in two stages. In the first stage, EAs were selected with a probability proportional to their size within each sampling stratum. A total of 281 EAs were selected.
In the second stage, the households were systematically sampled. A household listing operation was undertaken in all of the selected clusters. The resulting lists of households served as the sampling frame from which a fixed number of 25 households were systematically selected per cluster, resulting in a total sample size of 7,025 selected households. Results from this sample are representative at the national, urban, and rural levels and at the LGA levels.
For further details on sample selection, see Appendix A of the final report.
Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]
Five questionnaires were used for the 2019-20 GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to The Gambia. Suggestions were solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries, departments, and agencies; nongovernmental organisations; and international donors. All questionnaires were written in English, and interviewers translated the questions into the appropriate local language to carry out the interview.
All electronic data files were transferred via the Internet File Streaming System (IFSS) to the GBoS central office. The IFSS automatically encrypts the data and sends the data to a server, and the server in turn downloads the data to the data processing supervisor’s password-protected computer in the central office. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computeridentified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. The data were processed by two IT specialists and three secondary editors who took part in the main fieldwork training; they were supervised remotely by staff from The DHS Program. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the fieldwork, field-check tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in November 2019 and completed in May 2020.
All 6,985 households in the selected housing units were eligible for the survey, of which 6,736 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 6,549 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. Among the households successfully interviewed, 1,948 interviews were completed in 2019 and 4,601 in 2020.
In the interviewed households, 12,481 women age 15-49 were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 11,865 women, yielding a response rate of 95%, a 4 percentage point increase from the 2013 GDHS. Among men, 5,337 were eligible for individual interviews, and 4,636 completed an interview; this yielded a response rate of 87%, a 5 percentage point increase from the previous survey.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2019-20 Gambia Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2019-20 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95% of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2019-20 GDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
Note: A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in APPENDIX B of the survey report.
Data Quality Tables
See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the final report.
The primary objective of the 2006 DHS is to provide to the Department of Health (DOH), Department of National Planning and Monitoring (DNPM) and other relevant institutions and users with updated and reliable data on infant and child mortality, fertility preferences, family planning behavior, maternal mortality, utilization of maternal and child health services, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and behavior, sexually risk behavior and information on the general household amenities. This information contributes to policy planning, monitoring, and program evaluation for development at all levels of government particularly at the national and provincial levels. The information will also be used to assess the performance of government development interventions aimed at addressing the targets set out under the MDG and MTDS. The long-term objective of the survey is to technically strengthen the capacity of the NSO in conducting and analyzing the results of future surveys.
The successful conduct and completion of this survey is a result of the combined effort of individuals and institutions particularly in their participation and cooperation in the Users Advisory Committee (UAC) and the National Steering Committee (NSC) in the different phases of the survey.
The survey was conducted by the Population and Social Statistics Division of the National Statistical Office of PNG. The 2006 DHS was jointly funded by the Government of PNG and Donor Partners through ADB while technical assistance was provided by International Consultants and NSO Philippines.
National level Regional level Urban and Rural
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women and men aged 15-50 years resident in the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The primary focus of the 2006 DHS is to provide estimates of key population and health indicators at the national level. A secondary but important priority is to also provide estimates at the regional level, and for urban and rural areas respectively. The 2006 DHS employed the same survey methodology used in the 1996 DHS. The 2006 DHS sample was a two stage self-weighting systematic cluster sample of regions with the first stage being at the census unit level and the second stage at the household level. The 2000 Census frame comprised of a list of census units was used to select the sample of 10,000 households for the 2006 DHS.
A total of 667 clusters were selected from the four regions. All census units were listed in a geographic order within their districts, and districts within each province and the sample was selected accordingly through the use of appropriate sampling fraction. The distribution of households according to urban-rural sectors was as follows:
8,000 households were allocated to the rural areas of PNG. The proportional allocation was used to allocate the first 4,000 households to regions based on projected citizen household population in 2006. The other 4,000 households were allocated equally across all four regions to ensure that each region have sufficient sample for regional level analysis.
2,000 households were allocated to the urban areas of PNG using proportional allocation based on the 2006 projected urban citizen population. This allocation was to ensure that the most accurate estimates for urban areas are obtained at the national level.
All households in the selected census units were listed in a separate field operation from June to July 2006. From the list of households, 16 households were selected in the rural census units and 12 in the urban census units using systematic sampling. All women and men age 15-50 years who were either usual residents of the selected households or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Further information on the survey design is contained in Appendix A of the survey report.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Three questionnaires were used in the 2006 DHS namely; the Household Questionnaire (HHQ), the Female Individual Questionnaire (FIQ) and the Male Individual Questionnaire (MIQ). The planning and development of these questionnaires involved close consultation with the UAC members comprising of the following line departments and agencies namely; Department of Health (DOH), Department of Education (DOE), Department of National Planning and Monitoring (DNPM), National Aids Council Secretariat (NACS), Department of Agriculture and Livestock (DAL), Department of Labour and Employment (DLE), University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG), National Research Institute (NRI) and representatives from Development partners.
The HHQ was designed to collect background information for all members of the selected households. This information was used to identify eligible female and male respondents for the respective individual questionnaires. Additional information on household amenities and services, and malaria prevention was also collected.
The FIQ contains questions on respondents background, including marriage and polygyny; birth history, maternal and child health, knowledge and use of contraception, fertility preferences, HIV/AIDS including new modules on sexual risk behaviour and attitudes to issues of well being. All females age 15-50 years identified from the HHQ were eligible for interview using this questionnaire.
The MIQ collected almost the same information as in the FIQ except for birth history. All males age 15-50 years identified from the HHQ were eligible to be interviewed using the MIQ.
Two pre-tests were carried out aimed at testing the flow of the existing and new questions and the administering of the MIQ between March and April 2006. The final questionnaires contained all the modules used in the 1996 DHS including new modules on malaria prevention, sexual risk behaviour and attitudes to issues of well being.
All questionnaires from the field were sent to the NSO headquarters in Port Moresby in February 2007 for editing and coding, data entry and data cleaning. Editing was done in 3 stages to enable the creation of clean data files for each province from which the tabulations were generated. Data entry and processing were done using the CSPro software and was completed by October 2008.
Table A.2 of the survey report provides a summary of the sample implementation of the 2006 DHS. Despite the recency of the household listing, approximately 7 per cent of households could not be contacted due to prolonged absence or because their dwellings were vacant or had been destroyed. Among the households contacted, a response rate of 97 per cent was achieved. Within the 9,017 households successfully interviewed, a total of 11, 456 women and 11, 463 of men age 15-49 years were eligible to be interviewed. Successful interviews were conducted with 90 per cent of eligible women (10, 353) and 88 per cent of eligible men (10,077). The most common cause of non-response was absence (5 per cent). Among the regions, the rate of success among women was highest in all the regions (92 per cent each) except for Momase region at 86 per cent. The rate of success among men was highest in Highlands and Islands region and lowest in Momase region. The overall response rate, calculated as the product of the household and female individual response rate (.97*.90) was 87 per cent.
Appendix B of the survey report describes the general procedure in the computation of sampling errors of the sample survey estimates generated. It basically follows the procedure adopted in most Demographic and Health Surveys.
Appendix C explains to the data users the quality of the 2006 DHS. Non-sampling errors are those that occur in surveys and censuses through the following causes: a) Failure to locate the selected household b) Mistakes in the way questions were asked c) Misunderstanding by the interviewer or respondent d) Coding errors e) Data entry errors, etc.
Total eradication of non-sampling errors is impossible however great measures were taken to minimize them as much as possible. These measures included: a) Careful questionnaire design b) Pretesting of survey instruments to guarantee their functionality c) A month of interviewers’ and supervisors’ training d) Careful fieldwork supervision including field visits by NSOHQ personnel e) A swift data processing prior to data entry f ) The use of interactive data entry software to minimize errors
The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was a nationally representative sample survey conducted from March through June 1988 to collect data on fertility, family planning, and child and maternal health. A total of 9,045 households and 6,775 ever-married women aged 15 to 49 were interviewed. Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is carried out by the Institute of Population Studies (IPS) of Chulalongkorn University with the financial support from USAID through the Institute for Resource Development (IRD) at Westinghouse. The Institute of Population Studies was responsible for the overall implementation of the survey including sample design, preparation of field work, data collection and processing, and analysis of data. IPS has made available its personnel and office facilities to the project throughout the project duration. It serves as the headquarters for the survey.
The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was undertaken for the main purpose of providing data concerning fertility, family planning and maternal and child health to program managers and policy makers to facilitate their evaluation and planning of programs, and to population and health researchers to assist in their efforts to document and analyze the demographic and health situation. It is intended to provide information both on topics for which comparable data is not available from previous nationally representative surveys as well as to update trends with respect to a number of indicators available from previous surveys, in particular the Longitudinal Study of Social Economic and Demographic Change in 1969-73, the Survey of Fertility in Thailand in 1975, the National Survey of Family Planning Practices, Fertility and Mortality in 1979, and the three Contraceptive Prevalence Surveys in 1978/79, 1981 and 1984.
National
The population covered by the 1987 THADHS is defined as the universe of all women Ever-married women in the reproductive ages (i.e., women 15-49). This covered women in private households on the basis of a de facto coverage definition. Visitors and usual residents who were in the household the night before the first visit or before any subsequent visit during the few days the interviewing team was in the area were eligible. Excluded were the small number of married women aged under 15 and women not present in private households.
Sample survey data
SAMPLE SIZE AND ALLOCATION
The objective of the survey was to provide reliable estimates for major domains of the country. This consisted of two overlapping sets of reporting domains: (a) Five regions of the country namely Bangkok, north, northeast, central region (excluding Bangkok), and south; (b) Bangkok versus all provincial urban and all rural areas of the country. These requirements could be met by defining six non-overlapping sampling domains (Bangkok, provincial urban, and rural areas of each of the remaining 4 regions), and allocating approximately equal sample sizes to them. On the basis of past experience, available budget and overall reporting requirement, the target sample size was fixed at 7,000 interviews of ever-married women aged 15-49, expected to be found in around 9,000 households. Table A.I shows the actual number of households as well as eligible women selected and interviewed, by sampling domain (see Table i.I for reporting domains).
THE FRAME AND SAMPLE SELECTION
The frame for selecting the sample for urban areas, was provided by the National Statistical Office of Thailand and by the Ministry of the Interior for rural areas. It consisted of information on population size of various levels of administrative and census units, down to blocks in urban areas and villages in rural areas. The frame also included adequate maps and descriptions to identify these units. The extent to which the data were up-to-date as well as the quality of the data varied somewhat in different parts of the frame. Basically, the multi-stage stratified sampling design involved the following procedure. A specified number of sample areas were selected systematically from geographically/administratively ordered lists with probabilities proportional to the best available measure of size (PPS). Within selected areas (blocks or villages) new lists of households were prepared and systematic samples of households were selected. In principle, the sampling interval for the selection of households from lists was determined so as to yield a self weighting sample of households within each domain. However, in the absence of good measures of population size for all areas, these sampling intervals often required adjustments in the interest of controlling the size of the resulting sample. Variations in selection probabilities introduced due to such adjustment, where required, were compensated for by appropriate weighting of sample cases at the tabulation stage.
SAMPLE OUTCOME
The final sample of households was selected from lists prepared in the sample areas. The time interval between household listing and enumeration was generally very short, except to some extent in Bangkok where the listing itself took more time. In principle, the units of listing were the same as the ultimate units of sampling, namely households. However in a small proportion of cases, the former differed from the latter in several respects, identified at the stage of final enumeration: a) Some units listed actually contained more than one household each b) Some units were "blanks", that is, were demolished or not found to contain any eligible households at the time of enumeration. c) Some units were doubtful cases in as much as the household was reported as "not found" by the interviewer, but may in fact have existed.
Face-to-face
The DHS core questionnaires (Household, Eligible Women Respondent, and Community) were translated into Thai. A number of modifications were made largely to adapt them for use with an ever- married woman sample and to add a number of questions in areas that are of special interest to the Thai investigators but which were not covered in the standard core. Examples of such modifications included adding marital status and educational attainment to the household schedule, elaboration on questions in the individual questionnaire on educational attainment to take account of changes in the educational system during recent years, elaboration on questions on postnuptial residence, and adaptation of the questionnaire to take into account that only ever-married women are being interviewed rather than all women. More generally, attention was given to the wording of questions in Thai to ensure that the intent of the original English-language version was preserved.
a) Household questionnaire
The household questionnaire was used to list every member of the household who usually lives in the household and as well as visitors who slept in the household the night before the interviewer's visit. Information contained in the household questionnaire are age, sex, marital status, and education for each member (the last two items were asked only to members aged 13 and over). The head of the household or the spouse of the head of the household was the preferred respondent for the household questionnaire. However, if neither was available for interview, any adult member of the household was accepted as the respondent. Information from the household questionnaire was used to identify eligible women for the individual interview. To be eligible, a respondent had to be an ever-married woman aged 15-49 years old who had slept in the household 'the previous night'.
Prior evidence has indicated that when asked about current age, Thais are as likely to report age at next birthday as age at last birthday (the usual demographic definition of age). Since the birth date of each household number was not asked in the household questionnaire, it was not possible to calculate age at last birthday from the birthdate. Therefore a special procedure was followed to ensure that eligible women just under the higher boundary for eligible ages (i.e. 49 years old) were not mistakenly excluded from the eligible woman sample because of an overstated age. Ever-married women whose reported age was between 50-52 years old and who slept in the household the night before birthdate of the woman, it was discovered that these women (or any others being interviewed) were not actually within the eligible age range of 15-49, the interview was terminated and the case disqualified. This attempt recovered 69 eligible women who otherwise would have been missed because their reported age was over 50 years old or over.
b) Individual questionnaire
The questionnaire administered to eligible women was based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire for high contraceptive prevalence countries. The individual questionnaire has 8 sections: - Respondent's background - Reproduction - Contraception - Health and breastfeeding - Marriage - Fertility preference - Husband's background and woman's work - Heights and weights of children and mothers
The questionnaire was modified to suit the Thai context. As noted above, several questions were added to the standard DHS core questionnaire not only to meet the interest of IPS researchers hut also because of their relevance to the current demographic situation in Thailand. The supplemental questions are marked with an asterisk in the individual questionnaire. Questions concerning the following items were added in the individual questionnaire: - Did the respondent ever
The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) is a program of studies designed to assess the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United States. The NHANES combines personal interviews and physical examinations, which focus on different population groups or health topics. These surveys have been conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) on a periodic basis from 1971 to 1994. In 1999, the NHANES became a continuous program with a changing focus on a variety of health and nutrition measurements designed to meet current and emerging concerns. The sample for the survey is selected to represent the U.S. population of all ages. Many of the NHANES 2001-2002 questions also were asked in NHANES II 1976-1980, Hispanic HANES 1982-1984, NHANES III 1988-1994. New questions were added to the survey based on recommendations from survey collaborators, NCHS staff, and other interagency work groups.
In the 2001-2002 wave, the NHANES includes more than 100 datasets. Most have been combined into three datasets for convenience. Each starts with the demographic dataset and includes datasets of a specific type.
1. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), Demographic & Examination Data, 2001-2002 (the base of the Demographic dataset + all data from medical examinations).
2. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), Demographic & Laboratory Data, 2001-2002 (the base of the Demographic dataset + all data from medical laboratories).
3. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), Demographic & Questionnaire Data, 2001-2002 (the base of the Demographic dataset + all data from questionnaires).
Not all files from the 2001-2002 wave are included. This is for two reasons, both of which related to the merging variable (SEQN). For a subset of the files, SEQN is not a unique identifier for cases (i.e. some respondents have multiple cases) or SEQN is not in the file at all. The following datasets from this wave of the NHANES are not included in these three files and can be found individually from the "https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm" Target="_blank">NHANES website at the CDC:
Examination: Dietary Interview (Individual Foods File)
Examination: Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXX)
Examination: Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXX)
Questionnaire: Analgesics Pain Relievers
Questionnaire: Dietary Supplement Use -- Ingredient Information
Questionnaire: Dietary Supplement Use -- Supplement Blend
Questionnaire: Dietary Supplement Use -- Supplement Information
Questionnaire: Drug Information
Questionnaire: Dietary Supplement Use -- Participants Use of Supplement
Questionnaire: Physical Activity Individual Activity File
Questionnaire: Prescription Medications
Variable SEQN is included for merging files within the waves. All data files should be sorted by SEQN.
Additional details of the design and content of each survey are available at the "https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm" Target="_blank">NHANES website.
The 2008 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is a national survey covering all ten regions of the country. The survey was designed to collect, analyse, and disseminate information on housing and household characteristics, education, maternal health and child health, nutrition, family planning, gender, and knowledge and behaviour related to HIV/AIDS. It included, for the first time, a module on domestic violence as one of the topics of investigation.
The 2008 GDHS is designed to provide data to monitor the population and health situation in Ghana. This is the fifth round in a series of national level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys programme. Specifically, the 2008 GDHS has the primary objective of providing current and reliable information on fertility levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of women and young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, domestic violence, and awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The information collected in the 2008 GDHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the earlier rounds of 1988, 1993, 1998, and 2003 surveys.
The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). The 2008 GDHS also provides comparable data for long-term trend analysis in Ghana, since the surveys were implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database on demographic and health–related information for research purposes.
National
Sample survey data
The 2008 GDHS was a household-based survey, implemented in a representative probability sample of more than 12,000 households selected nationwide. This sample was selected in such a manner as to allow for separate estimates of key indicators for each of the 10 regions in Ghana, as well as for urban and rural areas separately.
The 2008 GDHS utilised a two-stage sample design. The first stage involved selecting sample points or clusters from an updated master sampling frame constructed from the 2000 Ghana Population and Housing Census. A total of 412 clusters were selected from the master sampling frame. The clusters were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size. A complete household listing operation was conducted from June to July 2008 in all the selected clusters to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households.
The second stage of selection involved the systematic sampling of 30 of the households listed in each cluster. The primary objectives of the second stage of selection were to ensure adequate numbers of completed individual interviews to provide estimates for key indicators with acceptable precision and to provide a sample large enough to identify adequate numbers of under-five deaths to provide data on causes of death.
Data were not collected in one of the selected clusters due to security reasons, resulting in a final sample of 12,323 selected households. Weights were calculated taking into consideration cluster, household, and individual non-responses, so the representations were not distorted.
Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Three questionnaires were used for the 2008 GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire and the Men’s Questionnaire. The content of these questionnaires was based on model questionnaires developed by the MEASURE DHS programme and the 2003 GDHS Questionnaires.
A questionnaire design workshop organised by GSS was held in Accra to obtain input from the Ministry of Health and other stakeholders on the design of the 2008 GDHS Questionnaires. Based on the questionnaires used for the 2003 GDHS, the workshop and several other informal meetings with various local and international organisations, the DHS model questionnaires were modified to reflect relevant issues in population, family planning, domestic violence, HIV/AIDS, malaria and other health issues in Ghana. These questionnaires were translated from English into three major local languages, namely Akan, Ga, and Ewe. The questionnaires were pre-tested in July 2008. The lessons learnt from the pre-test were used to finalise the survey instruments and logistical arrangements.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. The Household Questionnaire collected information on characteristics of the household’s dwelling unit, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used for the floor and roof of the house, ownership of various durable goods, and ownership and use of mosquito nets. The Household Questionnaire was also used to record height and weight measurements, consent for, and the results of, haemoglobin measurements for women age 15-49 and children under five years. The haemoglobin testing procedure is described in detail in the next section.
The Household Questionnaire was also used to record all deaths of household members that occurred since January 2003. Based on this information, in each household that reported the death of a child under age five years since January 2005,3 field editors administered a Verbal Autopsy Questionnaire. Data on child mortality based on the verbal autopsy will be presented in a separate publication.
The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49 in half of selected households. These women were asked questions about themselves and their children born in the five years since 2003 on the following topics: education, residential history, media exposure, reproductive history, knowledge and use of family planning methods, fertility preferences, antenatal and delivery care, breastfeeding and infant and young child feeding practices, vaccinations and childhood illnesses, marriage and sexual activity, woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics, childhood mortality, awareness and behaviour about AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), awareness of TB and other health issues, and domestic violence.
The Women’s Questionnaire included a series of questions to obtain information on women’s exposure to malaria during their most recent pregnancy in the five years preceding the survey and the treatment for malaria. In addition, women were asked if any of their children born in the five years preceding the survey had fever, whether these children were treated for malaria and the type of treatment they received.
The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-59 living in half of the selected households in the GDHS sample. The Men’s Questionnaire collected much of the same information found in the Women’s Questionnaire, but was shorter because it did not contain a reproductive history or questions on maternal and child health or nutrition.
The processing of the GDHS results began shortly after the fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to the GSS office in Accra, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. Data were entered using CSPro, a programme specially developed for use in DHS surveys. All data were entered twice (100 percent verification). The concurrent processing of the data was a distinct advantage for data quality, because GSS had the opportunity to advise field teams of problems detected during data entry. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in February 2009.
A total of 12,323 households were selected in the sample, of which 11,913 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. This difference between selected and occupied households occurred mainly because some of the selected structures were found to be vacant or destroyed. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 11,778, yielding a household response rate of 99 percent.
In the households selected for individual interview in the survey (50 percent of the total 2008 GDHS sample), a total of 5,096 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 4,916 of these women, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. In the same households, a total of 4,769 eligible men were identified and interviews were completed with 4,568 of these men, yielding a response rate of 96 percent. The response rates are slightly lower among men than women.
The principal reason for non-response among both eligible women and men was the failure to find individuals at home despite repeated visits to the household. The lower response rate for men reflects the more frequent and longer absences of men from the household
Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.
Sampling error
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Children Dependency Ratio(Sample Survey): Zhejiang data was reported at 17.510 % in 2023. This records a decrease from the previous number of 17.950 % for 2022. Children Dependency Ratio(Sample Survey): Zhejiang data is updated yearly, averaging 18.100 % from Dec 2002 (Median) to 2023, with 22 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 22.700 % in 2002 and a record low of 15.100 % in 2013. Children Dependency Ratio(Sample Survey): Zhejiang data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: Children Dependency Ratio: By Region.
The 2010 Armenia Demographic and Health Survey (2010 ADHS) is the third in a series of nationally representative sample surveys designed to provide information on population and health issues. It is conducted in Armenia under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys program. Specifically, the 2010 ADHS has a primary objective of providing current and reliable information on fertility levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, and awareness and behavior regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from women of reproductive age and, for certain topics, from men as well.
The 2010 ADHS results are intended to provide information needed to evaluate existing social programs and to design new strategies to improve health of and health services for the people of Armenia. Data are presented by region (marz) wherever sample size permits. The information collected in the 2010 ADHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the 2000 and 2005 surveys.
The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the NSS. The 2010 ADHS also provides comparable data for longterm trend analysis in Armenia because the 2000, 2005, and 2010 surveys were implemented by the same organisation and used similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database of demographic and health–related information for research purposes.
The 2010 ADHS was conducted by the National Statistical Service (NSS) and the MOH of Armenia from October 5 through December 25, 2010.
Sample survey data
The sample was designed to permit detailed analysis-including the estimation of rates of fertility, infant/child mortality, and abortion-at the national level, for Yerevan, and for total urban and total rural areas separately. Many indicators can also be estimated at the regional (marz) level.
A representative probability sample of 7,580 households was selected for the 2010 ADHS sample. The sample was selected in two stages. In the first stage, 308 clusters were selected from a list of enumeration areas in a subsample of a master sample derived from the 2001 Population Census frame. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey.
All women age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the 2010 ADHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Interviews were completed with 5,922 women. In addition, in a subsample of one-third of all of the households selected for the survey, all men age 15-49 were eligible to be interviewed if they were either permanent residents or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey. Interviews were completed with 1,584 men.
Appendix A of the Final Report provides additional information on the sample design of the 2010 Armenia DHS.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Three questionnaires were used in the ADHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Woman’s Questionnaire, and a Man’s Questionnaire. The Household Questionnaire and the individual questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed in the MEASURE DHS program and questionnaires used in the previous 2005 ADHS. The model questionnaires were adapted for use by NSS and MOH. Suggestions were also sought from a number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Armenian. They were pretested in July 2010.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information on the socioeconomic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected for each household member or visitor information on their age, sex, educational attainment, and relationship to the head of household. This information provided basic demographic data for Armenian households. It also was used to identify the women and men who were eligible for an individual interview (i.e., women and men age 15-49). In the second part of the Household Questionnaire, there were questions on housing characteristics (e.g., the flooring material, the source of water, and the type of toilet facilities), on ownership of a variety of consumer goods, and on other aspects of the socioeconomic status of the household. In addition, the Household Questionnaire was used to obtain information on each child’s birth registration, ask questions about child discipline and child labor, and record height and weight measurements of children under age 5.
The Woman’s Questionnaire obtained information from women age 15-49 on the following topics: - Background characteristics - Pregnancy history - Antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care - Knowledge, attitudes, and use of contraception - Reproductive and adult health - Childhood mortality - Health and health care utilization - Vaccinations of children under age 5 - Episodes of diarrhea and respiratory illness of children under age 5 - Breastfeeding and weaning practices - Marriage and recent sexual activity - Fertility preferences - Knowledge of and attitudes toward AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases - Woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics
The Man’s Questionnaire, administered to men age 15-49, focused on the following topics: - Background characteristics - Health and health care utilization - Marriage and recent sexual activity - Attitudes toward and use of condoms - Knowledge of and attitudes toward AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases - Attitudes toward women’s status
Data Processing
The processing of the ADHS results began shortly after fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned regularly from the field to NSS headquarters in Yerevan, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. The data processing personnel included a supervisor, a questionnaire administrator (who ensured that the expected number of questionnaires from all clusters was received), several office editors, 12 data entry operators, and a secondary editor. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because the senior DHS technical staff were able to advise field teams of problems detected during the data entry. In particular, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters. As a result, specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in March 2011.
A total of 7,580 households were selected in the sample, of which 7,043 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. The main reason for the difference is that some of the dwelling units that were occupied during the household listing operation were either vacant or the household was away for an extended period at the time of interviewing. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 6,700, yielding a household response rate of 95 percent. The household response rate in urban areas (94 percent) was slightly lower than in rural areas (97 percent).
In these households, a total of 6,059 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 5,922 of these women, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. In one-third of the households, a total of 1,641 eligible men were identified, and interviews were completed with 1,584 of these men, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. Response rates are slightly lower in urban areas (97 percent for women and 96 percent for men) than in rural areas where rates were 99 and 97 percent, respectively.
Detailed information on sampling errors is provided in Appendix B of the Final Report.
The main purpose of a Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) was to present high quality and representative national household data on income and expenditure in order to update Consumer Price Index (CPI), improve statistics on National Accounts and measure poverty within the country.
The main objectives of this survey - update the weight of each expenditure item (from COICOP) and obtain weights for the revision of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Funafuti - provide data on the household sectors contribution to the National Accounts - design the structure of consumption for food secutiry - To provide information on the nature and distribution of household income, expenditure and food consumption patterns household living standard useful for planning purposes - To provide information on economic activity of men and women to study gender issues - To generate the income distribution for poverty analysis
The 2010 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) is the third HIES that was conducted by the Central Statistics Division since Tuvalu gained political independence in 1978.
This survey deals mostly with expenditure and income on the cash side and non cash side (gift, home production). Moreover, a lot of information are collected:
at a household level: - goods possession - description of the dwelling - water tank capacity - fruits and vegetables in the garden - livestock
at an individual level: - education level - employment - health
National Coverage: Funafuti and /Outer islands.
The scope of the 2010 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) was all occupied households in Tuvalu. Households are the sampling unit, defined as a group of people (related or not) who pool their money, and cook and eat together. It is not the physical structure (dwelling) in which people live. HIES covered all persons who were considered to be usual residents of private dwellings (must have been living in Tuvalu for a period of 12-months, or have intention to live in Tuvalu for a period of 12-months in order to be included in the survey). Usual residents who are temporary away are included as well (e.g., for work or a holiday).
All the private household are included in the sampling frame. In each household selected, the current resident are surveyed, and people who are usual resident but are currently away (work, health, holydays reasons, or border student for example. If the household had been residing in Tuvalu for less than one year: - but intend to reside more than 12 months => he is included - do not intend to reside more than 12 months => out of scope.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The Tuvalu 2010 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) outputs breakdowns at the domain level which is Funafuti and Outer Islands. To achieve this, and to match the budget constraint, a third of the households were selected in both domains. It was decided that 33% (one third) sample was sufficient to achieve suitable levels of accuracy for key estimates in the survey. So the sample selection was spread proportionally across all the islands except Niulakita as it was considered too small. The selection method used is the simple random survey, meaning that within each domain households were directly selected from the population frame (which was the updated 2009 household listing). All islands were included in the selection except Niulakita that was excluded due to its remoteness, and size.
For selection purposes, in the outer island domain, each island was treated as a separate strata and independent samples were selected from each (one third). The strategy used was to list each dwelling on the island by their geographical position and run a systematic skip through the list to achieve the 33% sample. This approach assured that the sample would be spread out across each island as much as possible and thus more representative.
Population and sample counts of dwellings by islands for 2010 HIES Islands: -Nanumea: Population: 123; sample: 41 -Nanumaga: Population: 117; sample: 39 -Niutao: Population: 138; sample: 46 -Nui: Population: 141; sample: 47 -Vaitupu: Population: 298; sample: 100 -Nukufetau: Population: 141; sample: 47 -Nukulaelae: Population: 78; sample: 26 -Funafuti: Population: 791; sample: 254 -TOTAL: Population: 1827; sample: 600.
Face-to-face [f2f]
3 forms were used. Each question is writen in English and translated in Tuvaluan on the same version of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was highly based on the previous one (2004 survey).
Household Schedule This questionnaire, to be completed by interviewers, is used to collect information about the household composition, living conditions and is also the main form for collecting expenditure on goods and services purchased infrequently.
Individual Schedule There will be two individual schedules: - health and education - labor force (individual aged 15 and above) - employment activity and income (individual aged 15 and above): wages and salaries working own business agriculture and livestock fishing income from handicraft income from gambling small scale activies jobs in the last 12 months other income childreen income tobacco and alcohol use other activities seafarer
Diary (one diary per week, on a 2 weeks period, 2 diaries per household were required) The diaries are used to record all household expenditure and consumption over the two week diary keeping period. The diaries are to be filled in by the household members, with the assistance from interviewers when necessary. - All kind of expenses - Home production - food and drink (eaten by the household, given away, sold) - Goods taken from own business (consumed, given away) - Monetary gift (given away, received, winning from gambling) - Non monetary gift (given away, received, winning from gambling).
Consistency of the data: - each questionnaire was checked by the supervisor during and after the collection - before data entry, all the questionnaire were coded - the CSPRo data entry system included inconsistency checks which allow the National Statistics Office staff to point some errors and to correct them with imputation estimation from their own knowledge (no time for double entry), 4 data entry operators. 1. presence of all the form for each household 2. consistency of data within the questionnaire
at this stage, all the errors were corrected on the questionnaire and on the data entry system in the meantime.
The final response rates for the survey was very pleasing with an average rate of 97 per cent across all islands selected. The response rates were derived by dividing the number of fully responding households by the number of selected households in scope of the survey which weren't vacant.
Response rates for Tuvalu 2010 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES): - Nanumea 100% - Nanumaga 100% - Niutao 98% - Nui 100% - Vaitupu 99% - Nukufetau 89% - Nukulaelae 100% - Funafuti 96%
As can be seen in the table, four of the islands managed a 100 per cent response, whereas only Nukufetau had a response rate of less than 90 per cent.
Further explanation of response rates can be located in the external resource entitled Tuvalu 2010 HIES Report Table 1.2.
The quality of the results can be found in the report provided in this documentation.
The 2015-16 Armenia Demographic and Health Survey (2015-16 ADHS) is the fourth in a series of nationally representative sample surveys designed to provide information on population and health issues. It is conducted in Armenia under the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys program. Specifically, the objective of the 2015-16 ADHS is to provide current and reliable information on fertility and abortion levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of young children, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, domestic violence against women, child discipline, awareness and behavior regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other health-related issues such as smoking, tuberculosis, and anemia. The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from women of reproductive age and, for certain topics, from men as well.
The 2015-16 ADHS results are intended to provide information needed to evaluate existing social programs and to design new strategies to improve the health of and health services for the people of Armenia. Data are presented by region (marz) wherever sample size permits. The information collected in the 2015-16 ADHS will provide updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the 2000, 2005, and 2010 surveys.
The long-term objective of the survey includes strengthening the technical capacity of major government institutions, including the NSS. The 2015-16 ADHS also provides comparable data for longterm trend analysis because the 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015-16 surveys were implemented by the same organization and used similar data collection procedures. It also adds to the international database of demographic and health–related information for research purposes.
National coverage
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), children age 0-4 years, women age 15-49 years and men age 15-49 years resident in the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The sample was designed to produce representative estimates of key indicators at the national level, for Yerevan, and for total urban and total rural areas separately. Many indicators can also be estimated at the regional (marz) level.
The sampling frame used for the 2015-16 ADHS is the Armenia Population and Housing Census, which was conducted in Armenia in 2011 (APHC 2011). The sampling frame is a complete list of enumeration areas (EAs) covering the whole country, a total number of 11,571 EAs, provided by the National Statistical Service (NSS) of Armenia, the implementing agency for the 2015-16 ADHS. This EA frame was created from the census data base by summarizing the households down to EA level. A representative probability sample of 8,749 households was selected for the 2015-16 ADHS sample. The sample was selected in two stages. In the first stage, 313 clusters (192 in urban areas and 121 in rural areas) were selected from a list of EAs in the sampling frame. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey. Appendix A provides additional information on the sample design of the 2015-16 Armenia DHS. Because of the approximately equal sample size in each marz, the sample is not self-weighting at the national level, and weighting factors have been calculated, added to the data file, and applied so that results are representative at the national level.
For further details on sample design, see Appendix A of the final report.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Five questionnaires were used for the 2015-16 ADHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Armenia. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and international donors. After all questionnaires were finalized in English, they were translated into Armenian. They were pretested in September-October 2015.
The processing of the 2015-16 ADHS data began shortly after fieldwork commenced. All completed questionnaires were edited immediately by field editors while still in the field and checked by the supervisors before being dispatched to the data processing center at the NSS central office in Yerevan. These completed questionnaires were edited and entered by 15 data processing personnel specially trained for this task. All data were entered twice for 100 percent verification. Data were entered using the CSPro computer package. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because the senior ADHS technical staff were able to advise field teams of problems detected during the data entry. In particular, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters. Moreover, the double entry of data enabled easy comparison and identification of errors and inconsistencies. As a result, specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in June 2016.
A total of 8,749 households were selected in the sample, of which 8,205 were occupied at the time of the fieldwork. The main reason for the difference is that some of the dwelling units that were occupied during the household listing operation were either vacant or the household was away for an extended period at the time of interviewing. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 7,893, yielding a household response rate of 96 percent. The household response rate in urban areas (96 percent) was nearly the same as in rural areas (97 percent).
In these households, a total of 6,251 eligible women were identified; interviews were completed with 6,116 of these women, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. In one-half of the households, a total of 2,856 eligible men were identified, and interviews were completed with 2,755 of these men, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. Among men, response rates are slightly lower in urban areas (96 percent) than in rural areas (97 percent), whereas rates for women are the same in urban and in rural areas (98 percent).
The 2015-16 ADHS achieved a slightly higher response rate for households than the 2010 ADHS (NSS 2012). The increase is only notable for urban households (96 percent in 2015-16 compared with 94 percent in 2010). Response rates in all other categories are very close to what they were in 2010.
SAS computer software were used to calculate sampling errors for the 2015-16 ADHS. The programs used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for means or proportions and the Jackknife repeated replication method for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey final report.
Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months - Nutritional status of children based on the NCHS/CDC/WHO International Reference Population - Vaccinations by background characteristics for children age 18-29 months
See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the survey final report.
The Survey of Activities of Young People was conducted by Statistics South Africa and commissioned by the Department of Labour, primarily to gather information necessary for formulating an effective programme of action to address the issue of harmful work done by children in South Africa. Technical assistance for the survey was provided by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and a consultant appointed by the Department of Labour. Stats SA also worked with an advisory committee, consisting of representatives from national government departments most directly concerned with child labour (the Departments of Labour,Welfare,Education and Health), non-governmental organisations, and the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef).
The survey has national coverage
Households and individuals
The sampled population was household members in South Africa. The survey excluded all people in prison, patients in hospitals, people residing in boarding houses and hotels, and boarding schools. Any single person households were screened out in all areas before the sample was drawn. Families living in hostels were treated as households.
Sample survey data
The sample frame was based on the 1996 Population Census Enumerator Areas (EA) and the number of households counted in 1996 Population Census. The sampled population excluded all prisoners in prison, patients in hospitals, people residing in boarding houses and hotels (whether temporary or semi-permanent), and boarding schools. Any single person households were screened out in all areas before the sample was drawn. Families living in hostels were treated as households. Coverage rules for the survey were that all children of usual residents were to be included even if they were not present. This means that most boarding school pupils were included in their parents’ household. The 16 EA types from the 1996 Population Census were condensed into four area types. The four area types were Formal Urban, Informal Urban, Tribal, and Commercial Farms. A decision was made to drop the Institution type EAs.
The EAs were stratified by province, and within a province by the four area types defined above. The sample size (6110 households) was disproportionately allocated to strata by using the square root method. Within the strata the EAs were ordered by magisterial district and the EA-types included in the area type (implicit stratification). PSUs consisted of ONE or more EAs of size 100 households to ensure sufficient numbers for screening. Statistics SA was advised by child labour experts that there was a likelihood of high rates of child labour in the Urban Informal and Rural Farm areas. The sample allocation to Rural Commercial Farms was therefore increased to a minimum of 20 PSUs.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The Phase one questionnaire covered the following topics: Living conditions of the household, including the type of dwelling, fuels used for cooking, lighting and heating,water source for domestic use, land ownership,tenure and cultivation; demographic information on members of the household, both adults and children. Questions covered the age, gender and population group of each household member, their marital status, their relationships to each other, and their levels of education; migration details; household income; school attendance of children aged 5 -17 years; information on economic and non-economic activities of children aged 5-17 years in the 12 months prior to the survey
Phase two questionnaire The second phase questionnaire was administered to the sampled sub-set of households in which at least one child was involved in some form of work in the year prior to the interview. It covered activities of children in much more detail than in phase one, and the work situation of related adults in the household. Both adults and children were asked to respond.
The data files contain data from sections of the questionnaires as follows:
PERSON: Data from Section 1, 2 and 3 of the questionnaire HHOLD : Data from Section 4 ADULT : Data from Section 5 YOUNGP: Data from Section 6, 7, 8 and 9
The Health Survey in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (MICS1) is a household survey programme conducted in 1996 by UNICEF and Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.
The aim of this survey was to collect data on the health status of the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in order to facilitate assessment and monitoring of maternal and child health. The collected data would serve as an asset to health planners, the planners of health sector, policy makers and researchers. The main objectives of the survey are: 1. To provide baseline data on the basic indicators of the health situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, such as: health insurance, smoking, disability, reproductive health and child health. 2. To begin the process of main streaming the monitoring of Mid-Decade and Summit Goals stage. 3. To support capacity building within the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics in the areas of planning, surveillance and subsequent monitoring of the maternal and child health. 4. To foster networking and strengthen linkages with different governmental institutions, UN agencies, and NGOs through the health survey.
National
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged between 15-49 years, all children under 5 living in the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The target population of the health survey was all households living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip excluding institutional populations and nomads.
The sample of this survey is a sub-sample of the Demographic Survey. A stratified mulltistage sampling design was used for selecting the surveyed households. At the first stage a sample of localities was selected. The sample of localities were then subdivided into cells of approximately equal size, and a number of cells were selected randomly from each of the sample localities of the second stage. At the third and final stage, a sample of households was randomly selected from the sample cells.
Although a two-stage design would have been preferable, the present, more complex one was utilized because of the limited availability of data, specifically data on the population size of various small area units, e.g. cells. The total sample size was 3,934 households.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The questionnaires were developed by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) after revision and adaptation of the following standard questionnaires:
The questionnaires were prepared and designed in order to meet the need of estimating selected indicators related to the health situation in Palestinian society in accordance with the WHO recommendations. The questionnaires used were as follows:
Disposal and Garbage.
Women's health questionnaire (reproductive health): This questionnaire was designed to collect data on all women ever-married and aged 14-49 years. It consists of five modules:
Respondent's background
Ante-natal care
Tetanus taxied immunization
Child feeding (breastfeeding and supplementary feeding)
Family planning.
Child health questionnaire: This questionnaire was designed to collect information on all children under five years of age. It was divided into seven sections:
General identification
Accidents and injuries
Morbidity (Diarrhea)
Morbidity (Acute respiratory infections)
Immunization
Anthropometry
Vitamin AID Supplementation.
Starting four days after beginning fieldwork in the West Bank, data entry was completed for 2,794 questionnaires on July 18, 1996. But in Gaza Strip it started one month after fieldwork because of closures. Data cleaning and checking processes were initiated simultaneously with data entry. Thorough data quality checks and consistency checks were carried out.
In total 2,694 housing units were selected for interview in the West Bank and 1,240 in Gaza Strip, giving a total of 3,934 housing units selected. For various reasons, all the households corresponding to these housing units could not be interviewed. The rates of non-response are given in Table A1 for the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as for both areas combined.
Response rate (West Bank): 97.6% Response rate (Gaza Strip): 99.5% Response rate (Total): 98.2%
Since the data reported here are based on a sample survey and not on complete enumeration, they are subject to two main types of errors: sampling errors and non- sampling errors. Sampling errors are random outcomes of the sample design, and are, therefore, easily measurable.
Non-sampling errors can occur at the various stages of the survey implementation in data collection and data processing, and are generally difficult to be evaluated statistically. They cover a wide range of errors, including errors resulting from non response, sample frame coverage, data processing and response (both respondent and interviewer-related). The use of effective training and suppervision and the careful design of questions as measures have direct bearing on the magnitude of non-sampling errors, and hence the quality of the resulting data.
Other methods utilized to evaluate the quality of data include; 1. Frequencies of missing values and "don't know" responses and the proportion of responses in the "other" categories. 2. Consistency between different parts of the questionnaire such as between the antenatal care and breastfeeding, between date of birth and anthropometry measurements, and immunization dates and dates of birth. 3. Checks for heaping around decimal point for weight and height measurements was done.
The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.
The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.
The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.
National
Sample survey data
The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.
The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.
The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.
Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.
Face-to-face
Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).
The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.
The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.
The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.
A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.
Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of shortfalls made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 1998 GDHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 1998 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 1998 GDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months
Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.