The 2005 EDHS is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS project that provides estimates for key indicatrs such as fertility, contraceptive use, infant and child mortality, immunization levels, coverage of antenatal and delivery care, nutrition, and prevalence of anemia. In addition, the survey was designed to provide information on the prevalence of female circumcision, domestic violence, and children’s welfare. The survey results are intended to assist policymakers and planners in assessing the current health and population programs and in designing new strategies for improving reproductive health and health services in Egypt.
Kind of data
Sample survey data
Unit of analysis
- Children under five years
- Women age 15-49
Producers and sponsors
El-Zanaty and Associates
National Population Council
Ministry of Health and Population
United States Agency for International Development, Cairo
United Nations Children's Fund
The primary objective of the sample design for the 2005 EDHS was to provide estimates of key population and health indicators including fertility and child mortality rates for the country as a whole and for six major administrative regions (the Urban Governorates, urban Lower Egypt, rural Lower Egypt, urban Upper Egypt, rural Upper Egypt, and the Frontier Governorates). In addition, seven governorates targeted for special USAID-sponsored family planning and health initiatives were over sampled, namely: Fayoum, Beni-Suef, Menya, Qena, and Aswan in Upper Egypt, and Cairo and Alexandria.
In the Urban Governorates, Lower Egypt, and Upper Egypt, the 2005 EDHS design allowed for governorate-level estimates of most of the key variables, with the exception of the fertility and mortality rates. In the Frontier Governorates, the sample size was not sufficiently large to provide separate estimates for the individual governorates. To meet the survey objectives, the number of households selected in the 2005 EDHS sample from each governorate was not proportional to the size of the population in the governorate. As a result, the 2005 EDHS sample is not self-weighting at the national level, and weights have to be applied to the data to obtain the national-level estimates presented in this report.
The sample for the 2005 EDHS was selected in three stages. The first stage included selecting the primary sampling units. The units of selection were shiakhas/towns in urban areas and villages in rural areas. A list of these units which was based on the 1996 census was updated to August 2004 using information obtained from CAPMAS, and this list was used in selecting the primary sampling units (PSUs). Prior to the selection of the PSUs, the frame was further reviewed to identify any administrative changes that had occurred after August 2004. The updating process included both office work and field visits during a one-month period. After it was completed, urban and rural units were separately stratified by geographical location in a serpentine order from the northwest corner to the southeast corner within each governorate. During this process, shiakhas or villages with a population less than 2,500 were grouped with contiguous shiakhas or villages (usually within the same kism or markaz) to form units with a population of at least 5,000. After the frame was ordered, a total of 682 primary sampling units (298 shiakhas/towns and 384 villages) were selected.
The second stage of selection involved several steps. First, detailed maps of the PSUs chosen during the first stage were obtained and divided into parts of roughly equal population size (about 5,000). In shiakhas/towns or villages with a population of 20,000 or more, two parts were selected. In the remaining smaller shiakhas/towns or villages, only one part was selected. Overall, a total of 1,019 parts were selected from the shiakhas/towns and villages in the 2005 EDHS sample.
A quick count was then carried out to provide an estimate of the number of households in each part. This information was needed to divide each part into standard segments of about 200 households. A group of 48 experienced field workers participated in the quick count operation. They were organized into 16 teams, each consisting of 1 supervisor, 1 cartographer and 1 counter. A one-week training course conducted prior to the quick count included both classroom sessions and two field practices in a shiakha/town and a village not covered in the survey. The quick-count operation took place between the end of October 2004 and January 2005.
As a quality control measure, the quick count was repeated in 10 percent of the parts. If the difference between the results of the first and second quick count was less than 2 percent, then the first count was accepted. No major discrepancies were found between the two counts in most of the areas for which the count was repeated.
After the quick count, a total of 1,359 segments were chosen from the parts in each shiakha/town and village in the 2005 EDHS sample (i.e., two segments were selected from each of the 682 PSUs with the exception of 5 PSUs for which only one segment was selected). A household listing operation was then implemented in each of the selected segments. To conduct this operation, 13 supervisors and 26 listers were organized into 13 teams. Generally, each listing team consisted of a supervisor and two listers. A one-week training course for the listing staff was held in mid-January 2005. The training involved classroom lectures and two days of field practice in three urban and rural locations not covered in the survey. The listing operation took place during a five-week period, beginning immediately after the training.
About 10 percent of the segments were relisted. Two criteria were used to select segments for relisting. First, segments were relisted when the number of households in the listing differed markedly from that expected according to the quick count information. Second, a number of segments were randomly selected to be relisted as an additional quality control test. No major discrepancies were found in comparisons of the listings.
The third stage involved selecting the household sample. Using the household listing for each segment, a systematic random sample of households was selected for the 2005 EDHS sample. All ever-married women 15-49 who were usual residents or who were present in the sampled households on the night before the interview were eligible for the EDHS
Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX B of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Out of 22,807 households selected for the 2005 EDHS, 22,211 households were found, and 21,972 households were successfully interviewed which represents a response rate of 99 percent.
A total of 19,565 women were identified as eligible to be interviewed. Out of these women, 19,474 were successfully interviewed, which represents a response rate of 99.5 percent. The household response rate exceeded 98 percent in all residential categories, and the response rate for eligible women exceeded 99 percent in all areas. In general, response rates were slightly higher in rural areas than urban areas.
Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.4 of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Dates of collection
Mode of data collection
The 2005 EDHS involved two questionnaires: a household questionnaire and an individual questionnaire. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed by MEASURE DHS+ for countries with high contraceptive prevalence. Questions on a number of topics not covered in the DHS model questionnaires were also included in the 2005 EDHS questionnaires. In some cases, those items were drawn from the questionnaires used for earlier rounds of the DHS in Egypt. In other cases, the questions were intended to collect information on new topics.
The household questionnaire consisted of three parts: a household schedule, a series of questions related to the socioeconomic status of the household, height and weight measurement, and anemia testing. The household schedule was used to list all usual household members and visitors and to identify those present in the household during the night before the interviewer’s visit. For each of the individuals included in the schedule, information was collected on the relationship to the household head, age, sex, marital status (for those 15 years and older), educational attainment, repetition and dropout (for those 6-24 years), attendance of pre-school programs (for those 3-5 years old), and child labor (for those 6-14 years). The second part of the household questionnaire obtained information on characteristics of the physical and social environment of the household (e.g., type of dwelling, availability of electricity, source of drinking water, household possessions, and the type of salt the household used for cooking). Height and weight measurements were obtained and recorded in the last part of the household questionnaire for ever-married women age 15-49 years, children born since January 2000, and never-married adolescents age 10-19 years. In a subsample of one-third of households, all eligible women, all children born since January 2000, and all adolescents age 10-19 years were eligible for anemia testing.
The individual questionnaire was administered to all ever-married women age 15-49 who were usual residents or who were present in the household during the night before the interviewer’s visit. It obtained information on the following topics:
• Respondent’s background
• Contraceptive knowledge and use
• Fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning
• Pregnancy and breastfeeding
• Immunization and child health
• Husband’s background and women’s work
• Female circumcision
• Health care access and other health concerns
• HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections
• Mother and child nutrition.
In addition, a domestic violence section was administered to women in the subsample of households selected for the anemia testing. One eligible woman was selected randomly from each of the households in the subsample to be asked the domestic violence section.
The individual questionnaire included a monthly calendar, which was used to record a history of the respondent’s marriage status, fertility, contraceptive use including the source where the method was obtained, and the reason for discontinuation for each segment of use during each month of an approximately five-year period beginning in January 2000.
A pretest was conducted during the preparation for the 2005 EDHS. After a two-week training course, the household and individual questionnaires were pretested in February 2005 in a small number of households. Four supervisors, four field editors, and 16 interviewers participated in the first pretest. The pretest was conducted in two Upper Egypt governorates (Giza and Fayoum) and two Lower Egypt governorates (Gharbia and Kalyubia). A sample of 304 households were selected: 76 households in each governorate. The data collection took about four days and a total of 268 household and 261 individual interviews were completed during the pretest.
The questionnaires for the 2005 EDHS were finalized after the pretest. Both comments from interviewers and tabulations of the pretest results were reviewed during the process of finalizing the questionnaires.
Staff from the central office were responsible for collecting questionnaires from the teams as soon as interviewing in a cluster was completed. Office editors reviewed questionnaires for consistency and completeness, and a few questions (e.g., occupation) were coded in the office prior to data entry. To provide feedback for the field teams, the office editors were instructed to report any problems detected while editing the questionnaires, which were reviewed by the senior staff. If serious errors were found in one or more questionnaires from a cluster, the supervisor of the team working in that cluster was notified and advised of the steps to be taken to avoid these problems in the future.
Machine Entry and Editing
Machine entry and editing began while interviewing teams were still in the field. The data from the questionnaires were entered and edited on microcomputers using the Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro), a software package for entering, editing, tabulating, and disseminating data from censuses and surveys.
Fifteen data entry personnel used twelve microcomputers to process the 2005 EDHS survey data. During the machine entry, 100 percent of each segment was reentered for verification. The data processing staff completed the entry and editing of data by the end of July 2005.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2005 Egypt DHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2005 EDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
If the sample of EDHS respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2005 EDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae, specifically the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation, to calculate sampling errors for means or proportions from the survey. The Jacknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
Note: See detailed estimate of sampling error calculation in APPENDIX C of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Other forms of data appraisal
Data Quality Tables
- Household age distribution
- Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
- Completeness of reporting
- Births by calendar years
- Reporting of age at death in days
- Reporting of age at death in months
Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX D of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
Egypt Ministry of Health and Population, National Population Council, El-Zanaty and Associates, and ORC Macro, Calverton, Maryland USA. Egypt Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) 2005. Dataset downloaded from www.measuredhs.com on [date].
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.