SDN_1989_DHS_v01_M
Demographic and Health Survey 1989-1990
Name | Country code |
---|---|
Sudan | SDN |
Demographic and Health Survey (standard) - DHS I
The 1989/1990 Sudan Demographic and Health Survey is the first DHS survey to be held in Sudan.
Sample survey data
The Sudan Demographic and Health Survey 1989 covers the following topics:
Due to security problems at the time of the survey, southern Sudan was excluded from the survey. The sample for the Sudan DHS survey was drawn from the six regions in northem Sudan: Darfur, Kordofan, Northern, Central, Eastern, and Khartoum. The nomadic population of northern Sudan was also excluded from the survey. The SDHS covered approximately 80 percent of the total population of the country.
The population covered by the 1989 DHS is defined as the universe of all eligible women, i.e. ever-married women 15-49 years of age who slept in the selected household the night before the interview.
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
Department of Statistics | Ministry of Finance & Economic Planning |
Name | Affiliation | Role |
---|---|---|
Macro International, Inc. | Institute for Resource Development | Technical assistance |
Name | Role |
---|---|
Government of the Republic of Sudan | Funding |
United States Agency for International Development | Funding |
United Nations Children’s Fund | Funding |
The sample design used for the Sudan Demographic and Health Survey was a stratified, clustered, self-weighted probability sample of ever-married women 15-49. Due to security problems at the time of the survey, southern Sudan was excluded from the survey. The sample for the Sudan DHS survey was drawn from the six regions in northem Sudan: Darfur, Kordofan, Northern, Central, Eastern, and Khartoum. The nomadic population of northern Sudan was also excluded from the survey. The SDHS covered approximately 80 percent of the total population of the country.
An important element in the sample selection was the utilization of a combination of sampling procedures to overcome the lack of an adequate sample frame. Threee major area groups were considered: major cities, all other urban areas, and all rural areas. The main objective of one of the sampling procedures was to allocate the sample size in each of the areas; a secondary objective was to update the data for the major cities.
Based on the most available information, the target sample size was fixed at 5,000 completed interviews. Specific numbers of clusters were selected for the Sudan DHS survey with an average sample take of 10 households for the major cities (except Khartoum), 20 for Khartoum city and the rest of the urban area, and 30 for the rural area.
The major cities were sampled with special procedure by selecting 116 areas with probability proportional to the surface area. Each listed area contained 50 households (100 in Khartoum). The area encompassed by the households listed was measured for each primary sampling unit (PSU), and the density calculated. Finally, a sample take for each area was calculated as bi = b(di/d*) where:
In the rest of the urban area, the major sampling unit was defined on the basis of the town council. A designated number of town councils were systematically selected in each province with probability proportional to size. Then two quarter councils within each town council were systematically selected with probability proportional to size (size = census population of 1983). After a household listing operation was carried out in each selected quarter council, 20 households were selected from each quarter council.
In the rural areas, rural councils were selected as PSUs with probability proportional to size (size = census population of 1983). Similar to the procedure in the rest of the urban area, two villages councils were selected for the Sudan DHS. Prior to the final selection of households, every village council's chief gave information about the actual composition of villages together with an estimation of the actual number of households in each village. According to this information, one village (or one combined group of villages) was selected. Finally in each selected village, 30 households were chosen for the sample.
In the Sudan Demographic and Health Survey, 7,280 households were selected for the sample; 6,945 of these were identified. Household interviews were completed in 6,891 identified households, which represents a response rate of 99 percent. A total of 6,131 eligible women were identified and 5,860 were successfully interviewed. The response rate at the individual level was 96 percent.
Two questionnaires in Arabic were used for the SDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire. Both were adapted from the DHS Model "B" Questionnaire, designed for use in countries with low contraceptive prevalence. The questionnaires were finalised after a pretest was carried out in June and July 1989.
a) The Household Questionnaire was used to list information including name, age, sex, and residence status for all usual members of the household and any visitors. For those ten years and older, information on marital status and level and grade of education was also recorded. The major purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify those women who were eligible for the Individual Questionnaire.
b) The Individual Questionnaire was used to collect data from ever-married women 15-49 years who were present in a sampled household the night prior to the household interview. The questionnaire collected information on the following topics:
Start | End |
---|---|
1989-11 | 1990-05 |
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
Department of Statistics | Ministry of Finance & Economic Planning |
PRETEST
In order to check the content and translation of the questionnaires, a pretest was conducted. Twelve female employees from the statistics section of the Ministry of Health were selected to participate as interviewers in the pretest. All interviewers bad at least secondary education and some had interviewing experience.
A two-week training course for the pretest interviewers was conducted in June 1989. Staff from the Ministry of Health, IRD/Macro, and the Census Office conducted the training. On completion of the training, interviews were conducted from June 25 to July 4, 1989 in both urban (El Zihaour and A1 Hilla El Gadieda) and rural lid Babikir) areas. A total of 162 individual questionnaires were completed, 82 in urban, and 80 in rural areas. The average time required to complete the individual questionnaire was 48 minutes in urban areas and 43 minutes in rural areas. After the pretest, modifications were made in the questionnaires and manuals.
FIELDWORK AND TRAINING
The training of the field staff for the main survey began on October 16 and lasted until November 14, 1989. Sixty-two women were recruited to undergo the training; most of them were university graduates and not affiliated with the government. The special training programme for six supervisors started one week later and was conducted simultaneously. The interviewers' training included five hours of classroom sessions per day, as well as a few days of field practice. In addition to those involved in conducting the pretest training, the staff from the National Population Committee also participated in training field staff.
The training programme included:
Trainees who failed to show interest, did not attend on a regular basis, did not agree to work in all provinces or failed the first three tests were disqualified. At the beginning of the third week of training, 14 of the best trainees were selected to be the field editors. They were thoroughly trained to undertake their responsibilities. At the end of the training, 48 of the 62 trainees were selected to work as interviewers and editors during the main survey fieldwork. An additional three were asked to stand by as back-up.
The fieldwork was carried out in two phases: from November 15, 1989 to January 31, 1990 and from March 19 to May 21, 1990. Phase I of the fieldwork involved interviewing in Khartoum and in the Central and Eastem regions and was carried out by seven teams. Each team consisted of a supervisor, two field editors and five interviewers. The field editors also worked as interviewers when time permitted. Phase II of the fieldwork in Kordofan and Darfur regions was initially planned to start February 10, 1990 but was delayed until mid-Mareh because of problems obtaining survey vehicles. Since one solution was to reduce the number of teams, the survey director selected 27 of the 45 interviewers to complete the fieldwork: (a) one team (seven interviewers, a supervisor and a fieldwork coordinator from the Central office) was assigned to complete the remaining rural clusters in Khartoum and to cover the entire Nor.hem region, and (b) four teams (20 interviewers/editors and four supervisors) worked in two groups in Kordofan and Darfur regions.
The central office of the SDHS in Khartoum was responsible for collecting the completed questionnaires from supervisors as soon as a sufficient number of clusters was completed in a province. The field coordinator from the central office, or staff from the regional census offices, hand-carried the batches of questionnaires to Khartoum for data entry and editing. At the central office, the questionnaires were coded and reviewed for consistency and completeness by office editors who also carried out the data entry. To provide feedback for the field teams, the office editors were instructed to report any problems detected while editing the questionnaires. These reports were reviewed by the senior staff and, when warranted, team supervisors were contacted in order to inform them of the steps to be taken to avoid these problems in the future.
The data entry and editing phase began soon after the start of the fieldwork. The data from the questionnaires were entered and edited on microcomputers using the Integrated System for Survey Analysis (ISSA), a package developed especially for the Demographic and Health Survey programme. Eight data entry personnel used three IBM-compatible microcomputers to process the SDHS survey. The data entry and editing were completed one month after the end of the fieldwork. All data processing, including preliminary tabulations, was completed by July 1990.
Sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples that could have been selected from the same population using the same design and size. For the entire population and for large subgroups, the SDHS sample is sufficiently large so that the sampling error for most estimates is small. However, for small subgroups, sampling errors are larger and, thus, affect the reliability of the data.
Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, ratio, etc.), i.e., the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used also to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic as measured in 95 percent of all possible samples with the same design will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error for that statistic.
The computations required to provide sampling errors for survey estimates which are based on complex sample designs like those used for the SDHS survey are more complicated than those based on simple random samples. The software package CLUSTERS was used to assist in computing the sampling errors with the proper statistical methodology. The CLUSTERS program treats any percentage or average as a ratio estimate, r=y/x, where y represents the total sample value for variable y and x represents the total number of cases in the group or subgroup under consideration.
In addition to the standard errors, CLUSTERS computes the design effect (DEFT) for each estimate, which is defined as the ratio between the standard error using the given sample design and the standard error that would result if a simple random sample had been used. A DEFT value of 1.0 indicates that the sample design is as efficient as a simple random sample, while a value greater than 1.0 indicates the increase in the sampling error due to the use of a more complex and less statistically efficient design. CLUSTERS also computes the relative error and confidence limits for estimates.
Sampling errors are presented below for selected variables considered to be of major interest. Results are presented for the whole country, urban and rural areas. For each variable, the type of statistic (mean, proportion) and the base population are given in Table B.1. For each variable, Tables B.2-B.4 present the value of the statistic, its standard error, the number of cases, the design effect, the relative standard errors, and the 95 percent confidence limits.
The relative standard error for most estimates for the country as a whole is small, which means that the SDHS results are reliable. There are some differentials in the relative standard error for the estimates by urban-rural residence. For example, for the variable, the proportion ever using a contraceptive method, the relative standard error as a percent of the estimated proportion for the whole country, for urban areas and for rural areas is 4.3 percent, 3.9 percent and 8.2 percent, respectively.
The confidence interval has the following interpretation. The mean number of children ever born among ever-married women is 4.404 and its standard error is 0.046. Therefore, to obtain the upper bound of the 95 percent confidence limit, twice the standard error, i.e., 0.092 is added to the sample mean. To obtain the lower bound, the same amount is subtracted from the mean. There is a high probability (95 percent) that the true mean ideal number of children falls within the interval of 4.311 and 4.496.
Nonsampling error is the result of mistakes made in carrying out data collection and data processing, including the failure to locate and interview the correct household, errors in the way questions are asked, and data entry errors. Although efforts were made during the implementation of the SDHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Name | Affiliation | URL | |
---|---|---|---|
MEASURE DHS | ICF International | www.measuredhs.com | archive@measuredhs.com |
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
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.
Name | URL | |
---|---|---|
General Inquiries | info@measuredhs.com | www.measuredhs.com |
Data and Data Related Resources | archive@measuredhs.com | www.measuredhs.com |
DDI_SDN_1989_DHS_v01_M
Name | Role |
---|---|
World Bank, Development Economics Data Group | Generation of DDI documentation |
This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here.