IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v167y2004i1p141-156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of adjustments for partial non‐response bias in the US National Immunization Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Philip J. Smith
  • David C. Hoaglin
  • J. N. K. Rao
  • Michael P. Battaglia
  • Danni Daniels

Abstract

Summary. Many health surveys conduct an initial household interview to obtain demographic information and then request permission to obtain detailed information on health outcomes from the respondent's health care providers. A ‘complete response’ results when both the demographic information and the detailed health outcome data are obtained. A ‘partial response’ results when the initial interview is complete but, for one reason or another, the detailed health outcome information is not obtained. If ‘complete responders’ differ from ‘partial responders’ and the proportion of partial responders in the sample is at least moderately large, statistics that use only data from complete responders may be severely biased. We refer to bias that is attributable to these differences as ‘partial non‐response’ bias. In health surveys it is customary to adjust survey estimates to account for potential differences by employing adjustment cells and weighting to reduce bias from partial response. Before making these adjustments, it is important to ask whether an adjustment is expected to increase or decrease bias from partial non‐response. After making these adjustments, an equally important question is ‘How well does the method of adjustment work to reduce partial non‐response bias?’. The paper describes methods for answering these questions. Data from the US National Immunization Survey are used to illustrate the methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip J. Smith & David C. Hoaglin & J. N. K. Rao & Michael P. Battaglia & Danni Daniels, 2004. "Evaluation of adjustments for partial non‐response bias in the US National Immunization Survey," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 167(1), pages 141-156, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:1:p:141-156
    DOI: 10.1046/j.0964-1998.2003.00636.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0964-1998.2003.00636.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1046/j.0964-1998.2003.00636.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen P. Jenkins & Lorenzo Cappellari & Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Emanuela Sala, 2006. "Patterns of consent: evidence from a general household survey," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(4), pages 701-722, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:1:p:141-156. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.