1 / 28

Response rate comparison of ELSA and HRS

Response rate comparison of ELSA and HRS. Hayley Cheshire Shaun Scholes Mary Beth Ofstedal. Response Framework . Framework developed by Peter Lynn (ISER) Aim for best practice Main features: Focus on “study” rather than “field” response rate Classify “eligibility” at each wave

andrew
Télécharger la présentation

Response rate comparison of ELSA and HRS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Response rate comparison of ELSA and HRS Hayley Cheshire Shaun Scholes Mary Beth Ofstedal

  2. Response Framework • Framework developed by Peter Lynn (ISER) • Aim for best practice • Main features: • Focus on “study” rather than “field” response rate • Classify “eligibility” at each wave • Cross-sectional and longitudinal rates • unconditional rate (based on eligibility) • conditional rate (based on participation at a prior wave).

  3. Cross-sectional rates • Focus on a particular wave of data collection • Numerator = those who have taken part at a given wave • Provide a “snap shot” of representativeness • What proportion of eligible people took part at this wave? • Measure of wave on wave success • What proportion of people who participated at the previous wave also took part at this wave?

  4. Longitudinal rates • Summarise response over a number of waves • Numerator = those who have participated in every wave • Measure of study representativeness • What proportion of people eligible at all waves were interviewed at all waves? • Measure of success of panel maintenance strategies • What proportion of people who did a wave 1 interview went on to participate in all further waves?

  5. THEORETICAL EXAMPLES OF EACH RESPONSE RATE

  6. Example 1 (CS – unconditional) W1 = 900/1000 W2 = 860/977

  7. Example 2 (CS – conditional) W2|W1 = 850/882

  8. Example 3 (Long – unconditional) W2=850/977

  9. Example 4 (Long – conditional) W2|W1=850/882 W3,W2|W1=750/870

  10. Comparing ELSA and HRS • To understand calculation of response rates: • survey design • eligibility criteria • To understand differences in response rates between studies • look at fieldwork practices

  11. SURVEY DESIGNS

  12. Overview of ELSA

  13. ELSA Eligibility for Wave 1 • Living within the household at the time of the HSE interview in 1998, 1999 or 2001 • Born before 1 March 1952 • Still living at a private residential address in England at the time of the ELSA wave 1 interview in 2002-3

  14. Non-response to Health Survey for England • ELSA response calculations need to factor in non-response to HSE interview • HSE cooperating households • Age information was collected • able to ascertain ELSA eligibility • HSE non-cooperating households • Age information NOT collected • unable to ascertain ELSA eligibility • Estimate eligibility in non-cooperating households • Assume same proportion of people aged 50+ in non-cooperating households as cooperating.

  15. HRS SURVEY DESIGN

  16. Overview of HRS

  17. HRS Sample Sources • Original HRS • Screening of 69, 337 household units in 1992. • AHEAD • 1992 household screening operation (for those born between 1914 and 1923, and about half of those born in 1913 or before) • Medicare enrolment files (for the other half of those born in 1913 or before) • War Baby • 1992 household screening exercise • CODA sample • Medicare enrolment file • Early baby boomer • Screening of 38,385 households.

  18. Sources of non-response from HRS Sample Design • 1992 Screening Exercise • 14% were determined to be non-sample • Eligibility NOT established in only 214 of the 59,918 identified households. • Adjustments made for non-response • Medicare Enrolment files • Adjustments made for non-response • 2004 Screening Exercise (Early baby boomer sample) • Eligibility was determined in 91.3% of the screened households.

  19. BACKGROUND TO RESPONSE CALCULATIONS

  20. Who is included in response calculations for ELSA and HRS? • Follow-up eligible households with at least one Wave 1 interview • Eligible individuals not interviewed at baseline are treated as non-respondents • Rates based on age-eligible sample members (excludes younger/older partners) • Productive = full, partial or proxy interview • Apply mortality rate for “unknown eligibles”

  21. Who is included in response calculations for ELSA and HRS wave 2 onwards?

  22. Comparison of cross-sectional response rates

  23. Comparison of cross-sectional response rates

  24. Comparison of longitudinal response rates

  25. Comparison of longitudinal response rates

  26. CONCLUSIONS

  27. What can we draw from these comparisons? • Impact of sample design on non-response • Impact of fieldwork practices • Mode • Use of proxy interviews • Use of incentives • Cross country differences

  28. THANK YOU WHAT COMMENTS?

More Related