Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Feb 8;19(Suppl 1):10.
doi: 10.1186/s12963-020-00241-0.

Paradata analyses to inform population-based survey capture of pregnancy outcomes: EN-INDEPTH study

Collaborators, Affiliations

Paradata analyses to inform population-based survey capture of pregnancy outcomes: EN-INDEPTH study

Vladimir Sergeevich Gordeev et al. Popul Health Metr. .

Abstract

Background: Paradata are (timestamped) records tracking the process of (electronic) data collection. We analysed paradata from a large household survey of questions capturing pregnancy outcomes to assess performance (timing and correction processes). We examined how paradata can be used to inform and improve questionnaire design and survey implementation in nationally representative household surveys, the major source for maternal and newborn health data worldwide.

Methods: The EN-INDEPTH cross-sectional population-based survey of women of reproductive age in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites (in Bangladesh, Guinea-Bissau, Ethiopia, Ghana, and Uganda) randomly compared two modules to capture pregnancy outcomes: full pregnancy history (FPH) and the standard DHS-7 full birth history (FBH+). We used paradata related to answers recorded on tablets using the Survey Solutions platform. We evaluated the difference in paradata entries between the two reproductive modules and assessed which question characteristics (type, nature, structure) affect answer correction rates, using regression analyses. We also proposed and tested a new classification of answer correction types.

Results: We analysed 3.6 million timestamped entries from 65,768 interviews. 83.7% of all interviews had at least one corrected answer to a question. Of 3.3 million analysed questions, 7.5% had at least one correction. Among corrected questions, the median number of corrections was one, regardless of question characteristics. We classified answer corrections into eight types (no correction, impulsive, flat (simple), zigzag, flat zigzag, missing after correction, missing after flat (zigzag) correction, missing/incomplete). 84.6% of all corrections were judged not to be problematic with a flat (simple) mistake correction. Question characteristics were important predictors of probability to make answer corrections, even after adjusting for respondent's characteristics and location, with interviewer clustering accounted as a fixed effect. Answer correction patterns and types were similar between FPH and FBH+, as well as the overall response duration. Avoiding corrections has the potential to reduce interview duration and reproductive module completion by 0.4 min.

Conclusions: The use of questionnaire paradata has the potential to improve measurement and the resultant quality of electronic data. Identifying sections or specific questions with multiple corrections sheds light on typically hidden challenges in the survey's content, process, and administration, allowing for earlier real-time intervention (e.g.,, questionnaire content revision or additional staff training). Given the size and complexity of paradata, additional time, data management, and programming skills are required to realise its potential.

Keywords: Answer correction type; Neonatal; Newborn; Paradata; Survey; Survey design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Data collection cycle showing survey and paradata: EN-INDEPTH survey
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Module structure for questions in the two arms of the EN-INDEPTH survey
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Time to complete questions regarding maternity history (section 2) for the two survey modules (N = 60,871)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Question corrections by question type, nature and structure
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Data collection and correction as a sequence index plot by the length of interview

References

    1. Commission on Information Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health . Keeping promises, measuring results: commission on information and accountability for women’s and children’s health. Geneva: Commission on information and accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health, World Health Organization; 2011.
    1. Countdown to 2015 & Health Metrics Network . Monitoring maternal, newborn and child health: understanding key progress indicators. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
    1. Hansen SE, Benson G, Bowers A, Pennell B-E, Lin Y-cJ, Duffey B, Hu M, Hibben KC. Guidelines for best practice in cross-cultural surveys. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; 2016. Survey quality.
    1. Hancioglu A, Arnold F. Measuring coverage in MNCH: tracking progress in health for women and children using DHS and MICS household surveys. PLoS Med. 2013;10:e1001391. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001391. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leisher C. A comparison of tablet-based and paper-based survey data collection in conservation projects. Soc Sci. 2014;3:264–271. doi: 10.3390/socsci3020264. - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources