TUR_2003_DHS_v01_M
Demographic and Health Survey 2003
Name | Country code |
---|---|
Turkiye | TUR |
Demographic and Health Survey (standard) - DHS IV
The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey 2003 is the third survey of its kind to be conducted in Turkey (1st in 1993, 2nd in 1998).
Sample survey data
The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey 2003 covers the following topics:
The sample was designed to provide estimates for:
The population covered by the 1998 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 15-49 in the household who were identified as eligible in the household schedule were interviewed. In addition, some information was collected for households and women in a sub-sample of one-half of all households.
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
Institute of Population Studies | Hacettepe University |
General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning | Ministry of Health |
Name | Role |
---|---|
Macro International Inc. | Funding |
Name | Role |
---|---|
Government of Turkey/ State Planning Organisation | Funding |
European Union | Funding |
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
Turkey Reproductive Health Program | Ministry of Health |
A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS-2003 sample. The sample was designed in this fashion because of the need to provide estimates for a variety of characteristics for various domains. These domains, which are frequently employed in the tabulation of major indicators from the survey, are:
The major objective of the TDHS-2003 sample design was to ensure that the survey would provide estimates with acceptable precision for these domains for most of the important demographic characteristics, such as fertility, infant and child mortality, and contraceptive prevalence, as well as for the health indicators.
SAMPLE FRAME
Different criteria have been used to describe "urban" and "rural" settlements in Turkey. In the demographic surveys of the 1970s, a population size of 2,000 was used to differentiate between urban and rural settlements. In the 1980s, the cut-off point was increased to 10,000 and, in some surveys in the 1990s, to 20,000. A number of surveys used information on the administrative status of settlements in combination with population size for the purpose of differentiation. The urban frame of the TDHS-2003 consisted of a list of provincial centers, district centers, and other settlements with populations larger than 10,000, regardless of administrative status. The rural frame consisted of all district centers, sub-districts and villages not included in the urban frame. The urban-rural definitions of the TDHS-2003 are identical with those in the TDHS-1998.
Initial information on all settlements in Turkey was obtained from the 2000 General Population Census. The results of 2000 General Population Census provided a computerized list of all settlements (provincial and district centers, sub-districts and villages), their populations and the numbers of households.
STRATIFICATION
Currently Turkey is divided administratively into 81 provinces. For purposes of selection in prior surveys in Turkey, these provinces have been grouped into five regions. This regional breakdown has been popularized as a powerful variable for understanding the demographic, social, cultural, and economic differences between different parts of the country. The five regions, West, South, Central, North, and East regions, include varying numbers of provinces.
In addition to the conventional five geographic regions, a new system of regional breakdown was adopted in late 2002. In accordance with the accession process of Turkey to the European Union, the State Planning Office and the State Institute of Statistics constructed three levels of NUTS regions, which have since become official (Law No. 2002/4720). "NUTS" stands for "The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics". NUTS is a statistical region classification that is used by member countries of European Union (EU). The 81 provinces were designated as regions of NUTS 3 level; these were further aggregated into 26 regions to form the NUTS 2 regions. NUTS 1 regions were formed by aggregating NUTS 2 regions into 12 regions. Two of the NUTS 1 regions, Istanbul and the Southeastern Anatolia, were given special attention in the sample design process and a comparatively larger share of the total sample was allocated to these regions to ensure that statistically sound estimates for a larger number of indicators would be obtained than would be the case for the remaining 10 NUTS 1 regions. Policymakers, researchers and other concerned circles had voiced interest in information on demographic and health indicators for Istanbul and the Southeastern Anatolian regions in the past. Furthermore, as an add-on study, the Istanbul metropolitan area was designated by UN-Habitat as one of the mega-cities in their International Slum Survey series. In co-operation with UN-Habitat, HUIPS wished to be able to produce estimates for slum4 and non-slum areas within Istanbul; for this reason, the total sample size for Istanbul was kept at a relatively high magnitude.
One of the priorities of the TDHS-2003 was to produce a sample design that was methodologically and conceptually consistent with the designs of previous demographic surveys carried out by the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. In surveys prior to the TDHS-1993, the five-region breakdown of the country was used for stratification. In TDHS-1993, a more detailed stratification taking into account subregions was employed to obtain a better dispersion of the sample. The criteria for subdividing the five major regions into subregions were the infant mortality rates of each province, estimated from the 1990 Population Census using indirect techniques.5 Using the infant mortality estimates as well as geographic proximity, the provinces in each region were grouped into 14 subregions at the time of the TDHS-1993. The sub-regional division developed during the TDHS-1993 was used in TDHS-1998.
However, the new NUTS regions necessitated further steps for sample design, namely that the sample design of the TDHS-2003 would allow using the conventional five regions as well as the NUTS 1 regions as sample domains. The conventional five regions cannot be obtained by aggregating the 12 NUTS 1 regions. To ensure both regional breakdowns were served by the sample design, 20 mutually exclusive strata had to be created, which, when appropriately aggregated, would produce the five conventional regions or the NUTS 1 regions. It became clear during this exercise, however, that if slight modifications were made to the boundaries of the 5 regions a smaller number of strata would be sufficient for reflecting both breakdowns in the sample design. More specifically, changing the regions to which only 6 provinces out of 81 were included would make it possible to construct 15 strata and serve the same purpose. This exercise was undertaken; also, a series of statistical tests were carried out to make sure that the modification to the regional boundaries would not make any difference in terms of regional indicators.
As a result of these considerations and exercises, 40 separate strata were created for the sample design of the TDHS-2003. This included the designation of 15 "divisions" by urban and rural stratum, the two strata within Istanbul (slum and non-slum), and metropolitan cities as mutually exclusive strata. The stratification also makes possible to combine provinces, which were affected by the earthquake in 1999.
SAMPLE ALLOCATION
The target sample size of the TDHS-2003 was set at 13,160 households, some 30 percent larger than that of the TDHS-1998. This increase is mainly related with the designation of new strata, the special attention given to Istanbul and Southeast Anatolia region, and with the adjustment of optimum allocation among the NUTS 1 regions. The targeted number was allocated among the five major regions as similar as possible to the TDHS-1998 (Table B.2). However, since Istanbul and Southeast Anatolia regions are over-sampled, the number of observations is higher for West and East regions relative to the previous survey. It was also aimed to target not less than 740 households for each NUTS 1 region. Based on previous experience in sample surveys, the target number of 13,160 households was expected to yield about 11,000 completed household interviews. To have an adequate representation of clusters within each of the five major regions, it was decided to select 25 households per standard urban segment (under the assumption of each cluster consisting of 100 households) and 15 households per standard rural segment. One exception to this was the selection of 12 households from the two urban segments in Istanbul (slum and non-slum). It was also determined that any of the strata should consist of at least 4 clusters, in order to make easier the sampling error calculations
SELECTION PROCEDURES
For the first-stage sample selection, settlements were grouped within each of the 40 strata, and a systematic random sample of settlements with probability proportional to size (PPS) based on the 2000 General Population Census was selected from the settlement lists. The output from this first stage of the selection was a list of all of the settlements included in the TDHS-2003 sample along with the number of clusters to be drawn from each settlement.
The first stage selection for the two strata of Istanbul metropolitan area was performed by using a more detailed settlement list due to the need for stratification of the city into slum-and non-slum strata. Quarters of Istanbul were classified as slum or non-slum using expert opinion, simply to create probabilistic stratification and taking care of selection probabilities. Similar to settlement selection in other strata in the sample, quarters were selected systematically from these two strata in the first stage. In Turkey, settlements are not divided into small area units with well-defined boundaries (e.g., census enumeration areas) that can be used for conducting surveys. For some settlements, however, household lists were available from the Structure Schedules that were prepared in 2000 by municipalities in collaboration with the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Some of these lists were updated in 2002. For 563 clusters, SIS was able to provide household lists from the Structure Schedules. For those settlements, the household lists were subdivided into segments of approximately 100 households with the exception of the two Istanbul metropolitan strata, where the segments included approximately 50 households. The list of these segments constituted the frame for the selection of the 563 clusters. For each of the selected clusters, SIS provided a list of the dwellings units with their full addresses (quarter, area, avenue/street, building and door number).
SIS was not able to provide household lists from the Structure Schedules for settlements without municipalities from which 137 clusters were to be drawn for the TDHS-2003. For these settlements, the list of households had to be prepared in the field. In the case of small settlements (less than 250 households), the entire settlement was listed. In the case of the small number of settlements in which there were more than 250 households, 250 households were listed and an estimate of the remaining number of households in the settlement was obtained through a quick count.
LISTING AND MAPPING ACTIVITIES
Although the SIS had dwelling lists for many clusters, they did not have the corresponding maps. For this reason, the selected clusters had to be formed with streets that were not always adjacent to each other. Moreover, the lists provided by the SIS did not reflect changes that may have occurred during the period from the 2000 or 2002 to the survey date. Two types of changes were possible: those that could be updated during listing, such as the construction of a new building on the street, a change in the use of a building (e.g., a flat can be used as an office instead of a dwelling), or changes in the names of streets, and those that were more problematic, e.g., the appearance of new quarters in urban centers.
In an effort to develop strategies for dealing with these as well as other possible problems that might arise, a pilot listing activity was undertaken in the capital, Ankara, before the actual listing activity began. The final listing forms, sketch map formats, and listing and mapping manuals were developed based on this pilot activity.
Forty university students/graduates were trained for the main listing activity. Listing teams were formed following a three-day training program in the beginning of November 2003. Each team was provided with maps describing the location of the settlements they were expected to visit, as well as other materials needed for the listing. Sixteen listing teams were formed, each including one mapper and one lister. The listing operation started on 5th of November and it was carried under the supervision of the research assistants and regional coordinators from the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies.
The cluster (standard segment) size was around 100 households (50 households for Istanbul metropolitan) for most of the clusters in urban areas. Only five urban clusters had extremely low numbers of households; in order to obtain 100 households in these clusters, adjacent streets were added to the original cluster. In some of the selected villages, the total populations were too small, and the original cluster did not include 100 households. In these cases, the village that was nearest to the selected village was included in the sample, and the names of these villages were provided to the listing teams; the lists of 100 households were completed from the two neighboring villages.
The listing operation was implemented in three stages due to seasonal conditions and completed in April 2004. Overall, the quality of the listing work produced by the listers was good although it varied somewhat largely in response to problems the listing teams experienced in working in some geographic areas.
In all, 13,049 households were selected for the TDHS-2003. At the time of listing phase of the survey, 11,659 households were considered occupied and, thus, available for interview. Of the 11,659 occupied households, 93 percent (10,836 households) were successfully interviewed. The main reasons the field teams were unable to interview some households were because some dwelling units that had been listed were found to be vacant at the time of the interview or the household was away for an extended period.
In the interviewed 10,836 households, 8,447 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview, i.e. they were ever-married, in reproductive ages (15-49) and present in the household on the night before the interview. Interviews were successfully completed with 8,075 of these women (95.6 percent). Among the eligible women not interviewed in the survey, the principal reason for non-response was the failure to find the women at home after repeated visits to the household.
The TDHS-2003 sample is not a self-weighted one. In particular, a disproportionate number of sample units were chosen from some of the strata, since there would have been inadequate numbers of observations for these areas if the target number of households had been proportionally allocated across regions.
Two main types of questionnaires were used to collect the TDHS-2003 data: a) the Household Questionnaire and b) the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive ages. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model "A" Questionnaire, which was designed for the DHS program for use in countries with high contraceptive prevalence. Additions, deletions and modifications were made to the DHS model questionnaire in order to collect information particularly relevant to Turkey. Attention also was paid to ensuring the comparability of the TDHS-2003 findings with previous demographic surveys carried out by the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. In the process of designing the TDHS-2003 questionnaires, national and international population and health agencies were consulted for their comments.
All TDHS-2003 questionnaires were developed in Turkish and translated into English.
a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, recent migration and residential mobility, employment, marital status, and relationship to the head of household of each person listed as a household member or visitor. The objective of the first part of the Household Questionnaire was to obtain the information needed to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview as well as to provide basic demographic data for Turkish households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire included questions on never married women age 15-49, with the objective of collecting information on basic background characteristics of women in this age group. The third section was used to collect information on the welfare of the elderly people. The final section of the Household Questionnaire was used to collect information on housing characteristics, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water, and the type of toilet facilities, and on the household's ownership of a variety of consumer goods. This section also incorporated a module that was only administered in Istanbul metropolitan households, on house ownership, use of municipal facilities and the like, as well as a module that was used to collect information, from one-half of households, on salt iodization. In households where salt was present, test kits were used to test whether the salt used in the household was fortified with potassium iodine or potassium iodate, i.e. whether salt was iodized.
b) The Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women obtained information on the following subjects:
The Individual Questionnaire also included a monthly calendar, which was used to record fertility, contraception, and marriage for a period of 6 to 6.5 years (depending on the month of interview) beginning in January 1998 up to the survey month. In addition, fieldwork teams measured the heights and weights of children under age five and of all women at ages 15-49.
Start | End |
---|---|
2003-12 | 2004-05 |
Name |
---|
Hacettepe University, Institute of Population Studies |
PRE-TEST
In July 2003, a three-day pre-test was conducted to ensure that the questions in the TDHS2003 questionnaires were in a logical sequence, that the wording of the questions was comprehensible, appropriate and meaningful, and that the pre-coded answers were adequate.
Eleven interviewers were trained at the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies for a period of ten days. The training period included both classroom training and interviews in the field. The interviewers were mostly university students and graduates. In addition to the interviewers, research assistants, who would later become supervisors and regional coordinators, also received training.
Fieldwork for the pre-test was carried out in one district in central Ankara, one district in squatter housing areas of Ankara, and one village in Ankara province. A total of 176 households and 123 ever-married women interviews were completed during the pre-test. Frequency distributions and cross tabulations were obtained shortly after the completion of the interviews. Based on the evaluation of these results and on the feedback obtained from the interviewers, as well as from the Ministry of Health, several minor changes were made to the TDHS-2003 questionnaires.
STAFF RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING
Candidates for the positions of interviewers, field editors, supervisors and measurers were solicited in announcements sent to all universities in Ankara. All candidates for the field staff positions were interviewed in four groups by the staff of the Institute of Population Studies using interview guidelines prepared for this purpose. Individuals who met a number of the requirements and had the necessary qualifications were accepted into the training program.
All candidates for the field staff positions were at least high school graduates and the majority was university students and university graduates. Previous survey experience was not among the qualifications for the candidates for the position of interviewers in order to ensure that the trainees had no biases that might result from their previous experience. Approximately 120 applicants were accepted for the training program.
Training of the candidates for the fieldwork positions was conducted in November 2003 for three weeks at the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. The training program included general lectures related to the demographic situation in Turkey, family planning and mother and child health, questionnaire training, role playing and mock interviews, field practice in areas not covered in the survey and quizzes to test the progress and capabilities of the candidates. A variety of materials were used during the training sessions, including manuals for supervisors and editors, and for interviewers.
All trainees received the same classroom training during the first two weeks of the training period; at the end of the third week, supervisors, field editors, and measurers were selected from among the candidates, and a number of unsuccessful candidates were eliminated at this stage. Separate classroom training sessions were organized for supervisors, field editors, and measurers. After the completion of classroom training, a two-day pilot study was conducted in the urban and rural areas of Ankara to complement the training program. Based on the performance of candidates during the training and pilot study, 98 individuals were selected for the main fieldwork activities.
FIELDWORK
Fieldwork for the TDHS-2003, including initial interviews, call-backs and re-interviews began in the first week of December 2003, and was completed at the middle of May 2004. Fieldwork teams visited 80 of the 81 provinces in Turkey.
Fieldwork activities were completed in four stages (Table B.4). In the first stage, data collection was carried out by 14 teams, each consisting of a supervisor, a field editor, a measurer, and 4 or 5 female interviewers, depending on the workload of that specific team. The first stage of the fieldwork was completed by the end of January 2004, at which point a number of fieldwork staff, as agreed initially, discontinued working in the field. Six new teams were set up from among the staff of the 14 teams that had worked in the first stage of fieldwork. In the first two stages, 60 percent of all clusters were covered by fieldwork teams. The teams at the second and following stages had the same composition as those in the first stage. These teams continued with data collection activities until the mid of May 2004.
The fieldwork was planned by taking into consideration the climatic conditions in Turkey. Therefore, in the first months the fieldwork was concentrated in the provinces located in the West, the South and the Central Anatolia regions where the winter conditions were expected not to have adverse effects on field operations. The North and the Eastern Anatolia provinces were included to the fieldwork as time passed. The fieldwork was finalized without any interruptions in the period under consideration.
Senior academic staff of the Institute was responsible for visiting the fieldwork teams in turn, checking the quality of data collected, and reporting periodically to the field director in Ankara.
A total of 700 clusters were selected for the TDHS-2003 sample. Of these, interviews were successfully completed in 688 clusters. Due to problems of access, 10 clusters were not listed and, consequently, were not visited by the fieldwork teams; in addition, two clusters that had been listed could not be visited by the fieldwork teams.
The questionnaires were returned to the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies by the fieldwork teams for data processing as soon as interviews were completed in a province. The office editing staff checked that the questionnaires for all the selected households and eligible respondents were returned from the field.
The data were entered and edited on microcomputers using the Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) software. CSPro is designed to fulfill the census and survey data processing needs of data-producing organizations worldwide. CSPro is developed by MEASURE partners, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, ORC Macro's MEASURE DHS+ project, and SerPro S.A.. CSPro allows range, skip, and consistency errors to be detected and corrected at the data entry stage. The machine entry and editing activities were initiated within three weeks after the beginning of the fieldwork, and were completed a week after the completion of the fieldwork. During data entry process, full verification was reached by entering each questionnaire to the computers twice by different data editors.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the TDHS-2003 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. A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used 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 will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the TDHS-2003 sample is the result of a three-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the TDHS-2003 is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (SAMPERR). This module used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
The Jackknife repeated replication method derives estimates of complex rates from each of several replications of the parent sample, and calculates standard errors for these estimates using simple formulae. Each replication considers all but one cluster in the calculation of the estimates. Pseudo-independent replications are thus created. In the TDHS, there were 688 non-empty clusters. Hence, 688 replications were created.
In addition to the standard error, SAMPERR 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. SAMPERR also computes the relative error and confidence limits for the estimates.
Sampling errors for the TDHS-2003 are calculated for a number of variables considered to be of primary interest. Results for women are presented in an appendix to the Final Report for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, for each of the five regions, and for the twelve NUTS1 regions. For each variable, the type of statistic (mean, proportion, or rate) and the base population are given in Table C.1 of the Final Report. Tables C.2-C.21 present the value of the statistic (R), its standard error (SE), the number of unweighted (N) and weighted (WN) cases, the design effect (DEFT), the relative standard error (SE/R), and the 95 percent confidence limits (R±2SE), for each variable. The DEFT is considered undefined when the standard error considering simple random sample is zero (when the estimate is close to 0 or 1). In general, the relative standard errors for most estimates for the country as a whole are small, except for estimates of very small proportions. There are some differentials in the relative standard errors for the estimates for sub-populations. For example, for the contraceptive prevalence rate (CPR), i.e. the proportion of currently married women aged 15-49 who were using any method of contraception at the time of the interview, the relative standard error for the country as a whole, for urban areas, and for rural areas are 0.6 percent, 0.7 percent, and 1.3 percent, respectively.
To obtain the 95 percent confidence limits for the CPR, one adds and subtracts twice the standard error to the sample estimate, i.e. 0.710 ± 2x0.006. The results indicate that there is a high probability (95 percent) that the true value of the CPR for the country as a whole lies between 69.8 percent and 72.1 percent.
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 TDHS-2003 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 | Affiliation | URL | |
---|---|---|---|
General Inquiries | info@measuredhs.com | www.measuredhs.com | |
Data and Data Related Resources | archive@measuredhs.com | www.measuredhs.com | |
Institute of Population Studies | Hacettepe University | hips@hacettepe.edu.tr | http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/eng/index.html |
DDI_WB_TUR_2003_DHS_v01_M
Name | Role |
---|---|
World Bank, Development Economics Data Group | Generation of DDI documentation |
2012-04-11
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.