Multiple indicator cluster survey 2003 in Afghanistan: outdated sampling frame and the effect of sampling weights on

Shivam Gupta1, Muhammad Shuaib, Stan Becker

  • 1Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Due to an urgent need for information on the coverage of health service for women and children after the fall of Taliban regime in Afghanistan, a multiple indicator cluster survey (MICS) was conducted in 2003 using the outdated 1979 census as the sampling frame. When 2004 pre-census data became available, population-sampling weights were generated based on the survey-sampling scheme. Using these weights, the population estimates for seven maternal and child healthcare-coverage indicators were generated and compared with the unweighted MICS 2003 estimates. The use of sample weights provided unbiased estimates of population parameters. Results of the comparison of weighted and unweighted estimates showed some wide differences for individual provincial estimates and confidence intervals. However, the mean, median and absolute mean of the differences between weighted and unweighted estimates and their confidence intervals were close to zero for all indicators at the national level. Ranking of the five highest and the five lowest provinces on weighted and unweighted estimates also yielded similar results. The general consistency of results suggests that outdated sampling frames can be appropriate for use in similar situations to obtain initial estimates from household surveys to guide policy and programming directions. However, the power to detect change from these estimates is lower than originally planned, requiring a greater tolerance for error when the data are used as a baseline for evaluation. The generalizability of using outdated sampling frames in similar settings is qualified by the specific characteristics of the MICS 2003-low replacement rate of clusters and zero probability of inclusion of clusters created after the 1979 census.

Related Concept Videos

Sampling Plans01:23

Sampling Plans

Sampling is a crucial step in analytical chemistry, allowing researchers to collect representative data from a large population. Common sampling methods include random, judgmental, systematic, stratified, and cluster sampling.
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...
Cluster Sampling Method01:20

Cluster Sampling Method

Appropriate sampling methods ensure that samples are drawn without bias and accurately represent the population. Because measuring the entire population in a study is not practical, researchers use samples to represent the population of interest.
To choose a cluster sample, divide the population into clusters (groups) and then randomly select some of the clusters. All the members from these clusters are in the cluster sample. For example, if you randomly sample four departments from your...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data01:25

Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

Epidemiological data primarily involves information on specific populations' occurrence, distribution, and determinants of health and diseases. This data is crucial for understanding disease patterns and impacts, aiding public health decision-making and disease prevention strategies. The analysis of epidemiological data employs various statistical methods to interpret health-related data effectively. Here are some commonly used methods:
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
One-Way ANOVA: Equal Sample Sizes01:15

One-Way ANOVA: Equal Sample Sizes

One-Way ANOVA can be performed on three or more samples with equal or unequal sample sizes. When one-way ANOVA is performed on two datasets with samples of equal sizes, it can be easily observed that the computed F statistic is highly sensitive to the sample mean.
Different sample means can result in different values for the variance estimate: variance between samples. This is because the variance between samples is calculated as the product of the sample size and the variance between the...