Re: Understanding variables in PR & IR files [message #3684 is a reply to message #3546] |
Mon, 26 January 2015 10:04 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/theme/default/images/up.png) |
Bridgette-DHS
Messages: 3151 Registered: February 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Following is a response from Senior DHS Stata specialist, Tom PullumFirst, hc60, like all of the hc variables, is only coded for young children. In LSPR60FL.dta, hc60 is missing (".") if hc1 (months of age) is missing, i.e. if hc1>59. If you do "label list hc60" you get this:
. label list hc60
hc60:
993 mother not de facto
994 incomplete woman's interview
995 not in household
If you then do "tab hc60" in LSPR60FL.dta, there are 2,584 non-missing values, one for every child with hc1<=59. Of these, 29 have code 993; 233 have code 994, and 591 have code 995.
Code 993 would typically mean that the mother was in the household but she was a "visitor" who did not sleep there the previous night, so she was not eligible for the woman's interview; code 994 means "incomplete woman's interview", i.e. she is a de facto member in the household listing but is not in the IR file, even though she should have been; code 995 means that the mother was not in the household at all, in which case the child should have hv112=0. However, I see that of the 591 children with hc1<=59 and hc60=995, there are 125 who do not have hv112=0. There are 470 children with hc1<=59 and hv112=0, and 4 of them do NOT have hc60=995.
I doubt that these 125+4=129 apparent discrepancies between hc60=995 and hv112==0 are data quality problems, because codes such as these are usually forced to be consistent. If I had more time, I would look into that.
However, I hope this answers your question about the coding of hc60.
|
|
|