1 / 12

Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan. Regional Meeting of UN Washington City Group on Disability Statistics Rio de Janeiro, Brazil September 19-20. Objective. To test the consistency of the Washington Group (WG) census questions in regards to how their interpretation may differ by: Different core domains

farren
Télécharger la présentation

Analysis Plan

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. Analysis Plan Regional Meeting of UN Washington City Group on Disability Statistics Rio de Janeiro, Brazil September 19-20

  2. Objective • To test the consistency of the Washington Group (WG) census questions in regards to how their interpretation may differ by: • Different core domains • Countries • Subpopulations

  3. For ease of analysis we need binary variables To not lose richness of responses, we can used different definitions D1=1 if some difficulty, a lot, or can’t do at all D2=1 if a lot of difficulty or can’t do at all D3=1 if can’t do at all Step 1: Construct Different Measures of Disability

  4. Functioning Matrix

  5. Step 2: Compute Disability Prevalence • Prevalence measured four ways: • P1=1 if at least one domain has D1=1 • P2=1 if at least one domain has D2=1 • P3=1 if at least one domain has D3=1 • PM=1 if more than one domain has D1=2 • These prevalence rates can be compared with measures from previous country instruments to get a sense of what they are measuring relative to the WG questions

  6. Step 3: Construct Extended Measures • Extended measures get at a deeper sense of how people are answering the core questions • For example, for vision: • Core question:Do you have difficulty seeing, even if wearing glasses? • Extended questions: A) Do you have difficulty seeing and recognizing a person across the road? B) Do you have difficulty seeing and recognizing an object at arm’s length?

  7. Question Order • In order not to “contaminate” the results of the WG questions, it is important that all six core questions be asked prior to the extended questions

  8. Constructing Extended Measures • Within each domain… • ED1 = 1 if at least one extended question in that domain has a response of some difficulty, a lot of difficulty, or can’t do at all • ED2 = 1 if at least one extended question in that domain has a response of a lot of difficulty or can’t do at all • ED3 = 1 if at least one extended question in that domain has a response of can’t do at all

  9. Step 4: Correlation analysis • When people are answering the core questions, how does that relate to the underlying concepts in the extended questions? • It could be that people respond positively to one set or questions but not the other, so define • D0 = 1 if there are no reported difficulties • ED0 =1 if there are no reported difficulties in any of the extended questions

  10. Correlation Matrix – (for each domain)

  11. How do core and extended questions relate? • Using correlation coefficients test if there are statistically significant differences between the D and ED measures • D0 vs. ED0, D1 vs. ED1, etc. • If they differ, then the measures are not equivalent • If they aren’t equivalent, does one set identify more people as disabled?

  12. Step 5: Differences by Subpopulation • Older people • Gender • Rural vs. Urban • Ability to examine subpopulations depends on sample size.

More Related