| Combining mother's info on child row in PR file [message #11333] |
Mon, 05 December 2016 14:20  |
lillo?S
Messages: 26
Registered: December 2015
|
Member |
|
|
Hi, from the MLPR41FL file I am trying to paste the information of the mother on the child's row using a function that I've written in R. In other words, I find the mother in the household if available (idmother) and then copy the mother's age (agemother) for each member under 17 years old having a mother in the hh (idmother is not NA). I was checking the values of agemother and I find children under 17 who have mothers who are 0 or 1 years old or even 89 or 90 years old, which does not make sense of course.
This is an extract of the dataset:
hhid hv105 hv112 hvidx idmother agemother
#1 302102 1 66 NA 1 NA NA
#2 302105 1 74 NA 1 NA NA
#3 302105 1 53 NA 2 NA NA
#4 302105 1 0 2 3 2 53
#5 302105 1 14 2 4 2 53
#6 302105 1 10 0 5 NA NA
#7 302105 1 0 3 6 3 0
#8 303 7 1 25 NA 1 NA NA
#9 303 11 1 40 NA 1 NA NA
#10 303 11 1 35 NA 2 NA NA
#11 303 11 1 12 2 3 2 35
#12 303 11 1 0 2 4 2 35
#13 303 13 4 75 NA 1 NA NA
#14 303 16 1 32 NA 1 NA NA
#15 303 16 1 16 NA 2 NA NA
#16 303 16 1 53 NA 3 NA NA
As you can see in household 302105 1 the observation #7 is 0 years old (hv105), the id of his/her mother (idmother) is 3, which is obs #4, who is 0 years old (hv105). Basically the function that I used to get the variable agemother is doing its job, but there might be inconsistencies in the data.
Let's assume that women can have children from 10 to 60, there are 419 children who have mothers who are either below 10 or above 77.
I find the same in other surveys and for other years, thereby finding that a child has a mother who is 1 or 2 or even 89 or 90 years old.
Any ideas on what can have happened here?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Combining mother's info on child row in PR file [message #11349 is a reply to message #11339] |
Wed, 07 December 2016 18:56  |
Trevor-DHS
Messages: 805
Registered: January 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
When I looked at the data in detail, I do see the problem case that you pointed out, and I see some other cases with issues, but I do not see anything like as many as you do. I used (I think) a slightly tighter check than you did - Mothers aged less than 12 years older or more than 60 years older than the child - and I only found 37 cases (see attached file). I think there are three main types of problems:
1) Reporting of the correct person as the mother. If the line number of the mother is recorded incorrectly, then the age of the mother is going to look incorrect. This probably accounts for many of the problems, particularly those where the "Mother's" age is under 10, or the age difference is less than 10.
2) Some women are reported as much older than they are - there certainly appear to be a few of these cases, e.g. where the mother is reported as age 70.
3) Age of mother is reported too young, and the gap between the age of the mother and the child is too small. There are likely to be a few of these too.
I looked at a few other datasets, and I find a few cases of problems here and there, but not many. The Mali DHS 2001 has more than most, but I only identified 37 cases with my check.
Can you check your logic again and make sure you are not incorrectly identifying problem cases. Also, remember that 98 or 99 mean Don't know and Missing respectively for variable hv105, and should be excluded from the checking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Combining mother's info on child row in PR file [message #11500 is a reply to message #11356] |
Tue, 03 January 2017 16:28 |
Trevor-DHS
Messages: 805
Registered: January 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I used a slightly different test. I first selected all children (HV105 < 18) with a mother listed in the household (HV112 in 1:97), and then output any case with a mother's age of < 10 or >= 70 or a difference in age between mother and child of < 12 or > 60 years. I get 37 cases only. If I use <=11 and >=57 I match the 39 cases.
In terms of picking cut offs, that is really your choice, but I think those choices make some sense. For the father, I think you would have to go with a much higher cutoff at the top end as there are many cases of the being recorded as 70 years or more older than the child. However, at the low end you could probably use a minimum difference of up to about 15 years. The choice is really yours for your analysis.
|
|
|
|
The DHS Program User Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
