| Re: Bangladesh 2014 [message #14595 is a reply to message #13290] |
Sun, 22 April 2018 02:57  |
kingx025
Messages: 95
Registered: August 2016
Location: Minneapolis. Minnesota
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I believe that you are ending up with a large number of missing observations because some of the variables you are interested in have only a small number of cases in the universe (i.e., they apply to only a small subset of the data). Cases that are excluded from a variable are coded as blank in the original DHS files and will appear as missing cases. For example, number of children with diarrhea in the past 2 weeks is only a small fraction of all cases of children under 5, and the question about blood in stools and eating and drinking during an episode of diarrhea excludes any children who didn't recently have diarrhea (so those cases appear as missing).
Bangladesh 2014 is now included in the IPUMS-DHS database, and you can check the variable-specific documentation to confirm which cases are in the universe for a given variable (and thus don't appear as blanks in the DHS files). For example:
For H11 (recently had diarrheal disease), the universe is: Bangladesh 2014: Surviving children under age 5, born to ever-married women age 15-49 -- so you are dropping the dead children.
For H11B (had blood in stools during recent diarrheal disease), the universe is: Bangladesh 2014: Surviving children under age 5 with diarrhea in the past 2 weeks, born to ever-married women age 15-49-- so your sample is reduced to the small number of children who survived and had recent diarrheal disease.
You should also be sure that you are using weights when you compare your numbers to the published numbers in the DHS final reports.
Miriam King
Dr. Miriam King
IPUMS-DHS Project Manager (www.idhsdata.org)
|
|
|
|
The DHS Program User Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
