A Comparison of Cluster and Systematic Sampling Methods for Measuring Crude Mortality.

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10144/18813
Title:
A Comparison of Cluster and Systematic Sampling Methods for Measuring Crude Mortality.
Authors:
Rose, A; Grais, R; Coulombier, D; Ritter, H
Journal:
Bulletin of the World Health Organization
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of two different survey sampling techniques (cluster and systematic) used to measure retrospective mortality on the same population at about the same time. METHODS: Immediately following a cluster survey to assess mortality retrospectively in a town in North Darfur, Sudan in 2005, we conducted a systematic survey on the same population and again measured mortality retrospectively. This was only possible because the geographical layout of the town, and the availability of a good previous estimate of the population size and distribution, were conducive to the systematic survey design. RESULTS: Both the cluster and the systematic survey methods gave similar results below the emergency threshold for crude mortality (0.80 versus 0.77 per 10,000/day, respectively). The results for mortality in children under 5 years old (U5MR) were different (1.16 versus 0.71 per 10,000/day), although this difference was not statistically significant. The 95% confidence intervals were wider in each case for the cluster survey, especially for the U5MR (0.15-2.18 for the cluster versus 0.09-1.33 for the systematic survey). CONCLUSION: Both methods gave similar age and sex distributions. The systematic survey, however, allowed for an estimate of the town's population size, and a smaller sample could have been used. This study was conducted in a purely operational, rather than a research context. A research study into alternative methods for measuring retrospective mortality in areas with mortality significantly above the emergency threshold is needed, and is planned for 2006.
Affiliation:
Epicentre, Paris, France. angela.rose@epicentre.msf.org
Publisher:
Published by WHO
Issue Date:
Apr-2006
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10144/18813
DOI:
/S0042-96862006000400013
PubMed ID:
16628302
Additional Links:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/en
Language:
en
ISSN:
0042-9686
Appears in Collections:
Health Politics

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorRose, A-
dc.contributor.authorGrais, R-
dc.contributor.authorCoulombier, D-
dc.contributor.authorRitter, H-
dc.date.accessioned2008-02-21T12:49:24Z-
dc.date.available2008-02-21T12:49:24Z-
dc.date.issued2006-04-
dc.identifier.citationA Comparison of Cluster and Systematic Sampling Methods for Measuring Crude Mortality. 2006, 84 (4):290-6 Bull. World Health Organ.en
dc.identifier.issn0042-9686-
dc.identifier.pmid16628302-
dc.identifier.doi/S0042-96862006000400013-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10144/18813-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To compare the results of two different survey sampling techniques (cluster and systematic) used to measure retrospective mortality on the same population at about the same time. METHODS: Immediately following a cluster survey to assess mortality retrospectively in a town in North Darfur, Sudan in 2005, we conducted a systematic survey on the same population and again measured mortality retrospectively. This was only possible because the geographical layout of the town, and the availability of a good previous estimate of the population size and distribution, were conducive to the systematic survey design. RESULTS: Both the cluster and the systematic survey methods gave similar results below the emergency threshold for crude mortality (0.80 versus 0.77 per 10,000/day, respectively). The results for mortality in children under 5 years old (U5MR) were different (1.16 versus 0.71 per 10,000/day), although this difference was not statistically significant. The 95% confidence intervals were wider in each case for the cluster survey, especially for the U5MR (0.15-2.18 for the cluster versus 0.09-1.33 for the systematic survey). CONCLUSION: Both methods gave similar age and sex distributions. The systematic survey, however, allowed for an estimate of the town's population size, and a smaller sample could have been used. This study was conducted in a purely operational, rather than a research context. A research study into alternative methods for measuring retrospective mortality in areas with mortality significantly above the emergency threshold is needed, and is planned for 2006.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherPublished by WHO-
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.who.int/bulletin/en-
dc.rightsArchived on this site with permission of WHOen
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten
dc.subject.meshAdulten
dc.subject.meshAgeden
dc.subject.meshChilden
dc.subject.meshChild, Preschoolen
dc.subject.meshCluster Analysisen
dc.subject.meshConfidence Intervalsen
dc.subject.meshFemaleen
dc.subject.meshHumansen
dc.subject.meshInfanten
dc.subject.meshInfant, Newbornen
dc.subject.meshMaleen
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden
dc.subject.meshMortalityen
dc.subject.meshRetrospective Studiesen
dc.subject.meshSampling Studiesen
dc.subject.meshSudanen
dc.titleA Comparison of Cluster and Systematic Sampling Methods for Measuring Crude Mortality.en
dc.contributor.departmentEpicentre, Paris, France. angela.rose@epicentre.msf.orgen
dc.identifier.journalBulletin of the World Health Organizationen

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in MSF are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.