Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0688-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
In some surveys, women and men are interviewed separately in selected households, allowing matching of partner information and analyses of couples. Although individual sampling weights exist for men and women, sampling weights specific for couples are rarely derived. We present a method of estimating appropriate weights for couples that extends methods currently used in the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) for individual weights. To see how results vary, we analyze 1912 estimates (means; proportions; linear regression; and simple and multinomial logistic regression coefficients, and their standard errors) with couple data in each of 11 DHS surveys in which the couple weight could be derived. We used two measures of bias: absolute percentage difference from the value estimated with the couple weight and ratio of the absolute difference to the standard error using the couple weight. The latter shows greater bias for means and proportions, whereas the former and a combination of both measures show greater bias for regression coefficients. Comparing results using couple weights with published results using women’s weights for a logistic regression of couple contraceptive use in Turkey, we found that 6 of 27 coefficients had a bias above 5 %. On the other hand, a simulation of varying response rates (27 simulations) showed that median percentage bias in a logistic regression was less than 3 % for 17 of 18 coefficients. Two proxy couple weights that can be calculated in all DHS surveys perform considerably better than either male or female weights. We recommend that a couple weight be calculated and made available with couple data from such surveys.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Allendorf, K. (2007). Couples’ reports of women’s autonomy and health-care use in Nepal. Studies in Family Planning, 38, 35–46. CrossRef
Bankole, A. (1995). Desired fertility and fertility among the Yoruba of Nigeria: A study of couple preferences and subsequent fertility. Population Studies, 49, 317–328. CrossRef
Bankole, A., & Singh, S. (1997). Couples’ fertility and contraceptive decision-making in developing countries: Hearing the man’s voice. International Family Planning Perspectives, 24, 15–24. CrossRef
Becker, S. (1999). Measuring unmet need: Wives, husbands and/or couples. International Family Planning Perspectives, 25, 172–180. CrossRef
Becker, S., & Costenbader, E. (2001). Husbands’ and wives’ reports of contraceptive use. Studies in Family Planning, 32, 111–129. CrossRef
Becker, S., Hossain, M. B., & Thomson, E. (2006). Disagreement in spousal reports of current contraceptive use in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Biosocial Science, 38, 779–796. CrossRef
Chandra Sekar, C., & Deming, W. E. (1949). On a method of estimating birth and death rates and the extent of registration. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44, 101–115. CrossRef
Chemaitelly, H., & Abu-Raddad, L. J. (2016). Characterizing HIV epidemiology in stable couples in Cambodia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and India. Epidemiology & Infection, 144, 90–96. CrossRef
Chemaitelly, H., Cremin, I., Shelton, J., Hallett, T. B., & Abu-Raddad, L. J. (2012). Distinct HIV discordancy patterns by epidemic size in stable sexual partnerships in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 88, 51–57. CrossRef
Chiao, C., Mishra, V., & Ksobiech, K. (2011). Spousal communication about HIV prevention in Kenya. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 1088–1105. CrossRef
Deaton, A. (1998). The analysis of household surveys. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
DHS Program User Forum. (2015). Sampling and weighting [Webinar]. Washington, DC: U.S. Agency for International Development. Available at: http://userforum.dhsprogram.com/index.php?t=thread&frm_id=65&S=e46003ffddd267d2d25ebc06ad5d927d
DuMouchel, W. H., & Duncan, G. J. (1983). Using sample survey weights in multiple regression analyses of stratified samples. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76, 535–543. CrossRef
Eyawo, O., de Walque, D., Ford, N., Gakii, G., Lester, R. T., & Mills, E. J. (2010). HIV status in discordant couples in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infectious Diseases, 10, 770–777. CrossRef
Ezeh, A. C., Seroussi, M., & Raggers, H. (1996). Men’s fertility, contraceptive use, and reproductive preferences (DHS Comparative Studies No. 18). Calverton, MD: Macro International.
Gipson, J., & Hindin, M. (2009). The effect of husbands’ and wives’ fertility preferences on the likelihood of a subsequent pregnancy, Bangladesh 1998–2003. Population Studies, 63, 135–146. CrossRef
Gouskova, E., Heeringa, S. G., McGonagle, K., & Schoeni, R. F. (2008) Panel Study of Income Dynamics: Revised longitudinal weights, 1993–2005 (Technical Series Paper, No. 08-05). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
Hertz, R. (1995). Separate but simultaneous interviewing of husbands and wives: Making sense of their stories. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 429–451. CrossRef
ICF International. (2012). Demographic and Health Survey methodology: Sampling and household listing manual. Calverton, MD: MEASURE DHS/ICF International.
ICF International. (2017). Demographic and Health Surveys: Countries [Map illustration]. Retrieved from http://dhsprogram.com/where-we-work/
Kreuter, F., Olson, K., Wagner, J., Yan, T., Ezzati-Rice, T. M., Casas-Cordero, C., . . . Raghunathan, T. E. (2010). Using proxy measures and other correlates of survey outcomes to adjust for non-response: Examples from multiple surveys. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, 173, 389–407.
Kulczycki, A. (2008). Husband-wife agreement, power relations and contraceptive use in Turkey. International Family Planning Perspectives, 34, 127–137. CrossRef
Lasee, A., & Becker, S. (1997). Husband-wife communication on family planning and couple’s current contraceptive use in Kenya. International Family Planning Perspectives, 23, 15–20. CrossRef
Little, R. (1993). Post-stratification: A modeler’s perspective. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 1001–1012. CrossRef
Little, R., & Rubin, D. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Wiley.
McClintock, E. (2017). Occupational sex composition and gendered housework performance: Compensation or conventionality? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 79, 475–510. CrossRef
Ngom, P. (1997). Men's unmet need for family planning: Implications for African fertility transitions. Studies in Family Planning, 28, 192–202. CrossRef
Schoen, R., Astone, N. M., Kim, Y. J., Nathanson, C. A., & Fields, J. M. (1999). Do fertility intentions predict behavior? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 790–799. CrossRef
StataCorp. (2013). Stata statistical software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
StataCorp. (2015). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
Story, W. T., & Burgard, S. A. (2012). Couples’ reports of household decision-making and the utilization of maternal health services in Bangladesh. Social Science & Medicine, 75, 2403–2411. CrossRef
Taylor, M. F., Brice, J., Buck, N., & Prentice-Lane, E. (Eds.). (2010). British Household Panel Survey user manual. Volume A: Introduction, Technical Report and Appendices. Colchester, UK: University of Essex.
Thomson, D. R., Bah, A. B., Rubanzana, W. G., & Mutesa, L. (2015). Correlates of intimate partner violence against women during a time of rapid social transition in Rwanda: Analysis of the 2005 and 2010 Demographic and Health Surveys. BMC Women’s Health, 15, 96. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0257-3
Thomson, E. (1990). Two into one: Structural models of couple behavior. In T. Draper & A. Marcos (Eds.), Family variables: Conceptualization, measurement and use (pp. 129–142). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Thomson, E. (1997). Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births. Demography, 34, 343–354. CrossRef
Thomson, E., & Hoem, J. M. (1998). Couple childbearing plans and births in Sweden. Demography, 35, 315–322. CrossRef
UNICEF. (2014). Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys—Sample weights calculation template. New York, NY: UNICEF. Retrieved from http://mics.unicef.org/tools?round=mics5
Upadhyay, U. D., & Karasek, D. (2012). Women's empowerment and ideal family size: An examination of DHS empowerment measures in sub-Saharan Africa. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38, 78–89. CrossRef
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). Current Population Survey: Design and methodology (Technical Paper No. 66). Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and U.S. Census Bureau.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). Appendix C: Computing the SIPP sampling weights. In SIPP users guide (pp. C-1–C-22). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Valliant, R., Dever, J. A., & Kreuter, F. (2013). Practical tools for designing and weighting survey samples. New York, NY: Springer. CrossRef
Wilcox, W. B., & Dew, J. (2016). The social and cultural predictors of generosity in marriage: Gender egalitarianism, religiosity, and familism. Journal of Family Issues, 37, 97–118. CrossRef
Winship, C., & Radbill, L. (1994). Sampling weights and regression analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 23, 230–257. CrossRef
- Sampling Weights for Analyses of Couple Data: Example of the Demographic and Health Surveys
- Springer US
Entwicklung einer Supply-Strategie bei der Atotech Deutschland GmbH am Standort Feucht