Identifying Interviewers who collected biomarker for women/men/children [message #19680] |
Thu, 30 July 2020 11:59 |
kajori
Messages: 6 Registered: May 2017 Location: Mumbai, India
|
Member |
|
|
Hello,
I am using the Person file in NFHS 4, 2015-16 to identify teams that have collected biomarker samples from respondents.
Using state codes and supervisor codes in the following command:
egen interview_team=group(hv024 hv030)
in Person file I am trying to identify the groups that have worked in states in NFHS 4. However, according to report 789 teams have worked. Using this command I am getting 875 field teams. Can you please let me know how can I identify the 789 field teams using NFHS data?
Thanks in advance.
[Updated on: Thu, 30 July 2020 12:00] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Identifying Interviewers who collected biomarker for women/men/children [message #19702 is a reply to message #19680] |
Tue, 04 August 2020 13:41 |
Bridgette-DHS
Messages: 3185 Registered: February 2013
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Following is a response from DHS staff involved in the fieldwork and data processing of the NFHS 4 survey:
There are indeed 875 unique state/team combinations in the NFHS4 data files. However, it is probably impossible to know the correct number, because some teams had more than one ID code name. During fieldwork, the field agencies were moving people around. There are definitely instances of the same interviewers having different IDs based on what teams they were reassigned to.
For example, the state of Telangana was part of Andhra Pradesh at the time of data collection. It is likely that the 22 teams from AP and TG are the same teams. Most likely there are no teams with different IDs within each state, but it's hard to tell which teams/interviewers were shifted between states and assigned new numbers.
The team ID number is based on the supervisor, so even if the supervisor had been reassigned from one team to a new one, it doesn't mean all the old team members were also reassigned to the same new team.
It's best to regard the number in the report, 789, as an estimate.
[Updated on: Tue, 04 August 2020 14:09] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|