Khayelitsha Integrated Family Survey 2002-2005
South Africa, 2002 - 2005
Get Microdata
Reference ID
ZAF_2002-2005_KIFS_v01_M
Producer(s)
Professor Anne Case
Collection(s)
Metadata
Created on
Jan 27, 2012
Last modified
May 01, 2014
Page views
87412
Downloads
1402
- Data files
- khay02030405_hh_p_pinc_spl_200906
- khay05_ad_spl_200906
- khay02030405_ad_200906
- khay02030405_ch_200906
- khay02030405_ch_spl_200906
- khay02030405_hh_comrd_200906
- khay02030405_hh_died_200906
- khay02030405_hh_h_200906
- khay02030405_hh_h_spl_200906
- khay02030405_hh_moved_200906
- khay02030405_hh_moved_spl_200906
- khay02030405_hh_mrd_200906
- khay02030405_hh_p_pinc_200906
comment2: Comments: Part 2 (comment2)
Data file: khay02030405_ch_200906
Overview
Valid:
332
Type:
Discrete
Start:
659
End:
902
Width:
244
Range:
-
Format:
character
Questions and instructions
Categories
| Value | Category | Cases | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (DD/MM | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| (DD/MM/YY) appears here twice-- as the first dose of the vaccine listed and as the third. We have kept the date for the third dose untouched, while the date for the first dose listed in the immunization chart was left as ., except for the ye | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| (DD/MM/YY) but does not specify what vaccine this is. (It is possible that this vaccine actually corresponds to the 9-month dose of the measles vaccine, but this is not entirely clear, so we leave data here untouched.) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| (time end/minute). 2. Though immunization schedule for this child looks odd, no changes were made to these data. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| (without keeping the date), to indicate that t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| (yes, but not available; you cannot see it). 2.After indicat | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ), which the interviewer skipped. Otherwise, no marks were made on any specific vaccines. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , to allow analysts the freedom to interpret them as they see best fit. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , I have marked this variable as . here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , but assign a value of 1 to var polio2given to indicate that child did receive the dose. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , indicating that birthweight information was taken from recall. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , since we do not know when exactly it was given. 3.Interviewer note | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , since we have specific breastfeeding data and know from L9 that child was breastfed with supplements for 3 months. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| , too, is highly unlikely. This variable was thus coded as . 2.Immunization schedule looks very sporadic here. In the immunization chart, interviewer indicates that that child received an other vaccine and though the date is marked here | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . | 7 |
2.1%
|
|
| . Interviewer had indicated that child's original bir | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . 2. It looks like the second date that appears under DTP is not correct. It falls out of line chronologically with the first dose of this vaccine. By changing the date of this second dose from 91/01/01 (YY/MM/DD) to 91/10/01, it makes it co | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . 3.Also note that the child received no HepB vaccines: across the different b | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . I assume here that a fourth dose of each of these vaccines was administered on that date. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . It is unclear whose handwriting this is. Physician's original measurements are reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . Physician's corrections are reflected here. We now have tha | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . There are two identical dates listed (07/10/98). We understand that, at birth, the child was given both a dose of the BCG vac | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . This change is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| . Though no specific marks were made next to any individual vaccine, to indicate again adult's claim that child's immunization is complete, | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| /03 (DD/MM/YY) and three doses of DTP were given on 05/06/03. This seems highling unlikely. While for each of these vaccines we have kept these dates for last dose, we recorded the date for the two earlier doses as ., but to indicate that t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| /1998 (eight days before the first dose), as originally indicated by the interviewer. This 11/11/99 date for the dose also makes it consistent with the date the last dose of polio was given. This correction is reflected above. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 09/04/98 (DD/MM/YY). This looks like a mistake and appears to be the 5th year booster for the polio vaccine, instead. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 1 to capture this. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 2.Interviewer also adds under L6 that mother does not remember child's birthweight. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 2.It looks like there's a mistake in the first dose of DTP. It comes only 4 days after the second dose listed in the chart. It seems that, instead of 27/11/98 (DD/MM/YY), this vaccine was actually administered on 27/10/98, which coincides | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 2c.Interviewer had written on L9 (breas | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 3. 2.Under L6 on birthweight, interviewer does not identify the source of information. Since the child's health card is not in the house, I indicated that birthweight was taken from recall and assigned this variable a value of 2. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 3.If this child was indeed born in 1988, we should not have administered this module. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 3.In the immunization chart, interviewer indicates that two doses of the DTP vaccine were administered to the child on the same date (18/04/94, DD/MM/YY). This is not possible. While we have kept the date for the second dose, we have not do | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 49.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 56.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| 93.05cm, 56.05cm, and 52.03cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. These figures were slightly edited and made to be 93.50cm, 56.5cm and 52.30cm, respectively, since these are m | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ; here we assume that the year is 2000, and this is reflected above. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| B vaccine. 2.Under BCG interviewer indicates in the primary date column of the immunization chart that child was given a dose on 17/06/93 (DD/MM/YY), at birth, and in the booster date column that another dose was given on 20/10/98, at a li | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Cape. Interviewer also notes that adult doesn’t remember child's birthweight. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Cape. They also note that adult can't remember for how long child was exclusively breastfed. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| DD/MM/YY). 2.Note that the immunization schedule for the measles vaccine is very odd. Not only is it out of chronological order, but interviewer indicates that a dose of the vaccine was given to child at approximately 6 months, 7 months, 8 mont | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| From this I infer | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Height, waist and head circumference were slightly edited and made to be 52.50cm, 40.5cm, 39.50cm, respectively, which are more likely to have been the actual measurements taken. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Here, no marks are made on any specific vacc | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| I did not mark for any of the vaccines' earlier doses that we suspect the child has taken, since physician did not get a chance | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| IT IS UNCLEAR WHY THIS MODULE WAS ADMINISTERED TO THIS CHILD, SINCE THIS CHILD IS OLDER THAN 12. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| In cov8, she had indicated that this child could be HIV+. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Information on exclusive breastfe | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Interviewer had originally written 3.5kg. Edits made to the original module are reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| It does not se | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 145.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| It looks like height may have been changed from 140cm to 140.5 here. What looks to be a correction made by the physician is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| It looks like the interviewer recorded the 18-month boosters for polio and DTP in the wrong places in the immunization chart, by being off by just one box. We correct this here, and in this dataset, we record that both these boosters were give | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Next to L3.1 (child's waist), there is also a question mark. I have left the original data here as they were. 2.In the immunization chart, interviewer indicates that child was given an other vaccine. Though the date is specified, what t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Next to it she i | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| No marks were made on specif | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Original immunization data were left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Physician, in a different handwriting, included here child's height and weight. Measurements were completed on July 13, 2002 and not at the time of the interview. 3.Interviewer indicates that interview was conducted in 1998, which is clearly in | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Since this is clearly not the case, I have changed the answer here, and have indicated that birthweight was obtained from recall (2) instead. 2. Interviewer had originally recorded child's waist as being 54.05cm. It is highly unlikely t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| The immunization chart for this child is blank. There are some faint random marks on the chart itself, but these do not seem to be intentional. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| There is likely a discrepancy in the length of breastfeeding the mother reported to the interviewer at the time of the interview and later to the physician at the time of the visit | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| This is impossible. While we record that one dose of BCG was given to child at birth, we understand the second dose was recorded here by mistake and that it should have been recorded in the box immediately underneath the BCG vaccine in the cha | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| This weight was changed to 2.860kg instead. 3.Data in the breastfeeding questions look a little odd. Interviewer indicated that child breastfed for a total of 2 months in L8 and in L9 indicated that child was exclusively breastfed for 4 mon | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| Though interviewer l | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| What type of booster this is isn't defined here. 3.The second dose of the measles vaccine was noted as being adminstered in May/June 2000. We have kept June 2000 as the date this vaccine was given to the child. 4.The first dose of the DTP v | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| a day after the interview was conducted. The first vaccine ever administered to the child (BCG) was on 27/05/91. Since it is not uncommon for BCG vaccine to be administered the day after the child was born, our best guess is that there was | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| a vaccine registered under BCG, Measles, and other, which we include in this dataset. In the first box for the polio vaccine interviewer also records a number: 12. It is difficult to tell what this refers to, but it looks like a vaccine | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| accine is given at 5 years of age, on the same date as the 5-year booster for DTP, it is highly likely that this is the 5-year polio booster. For now, since this is not entirely clear, we have kept this date listed under other and analysts c | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 65.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| across all the boxes for DTP, she writes 18/02/03 and diagonally across all the boxes for the Hep B vaccine, she writes: 18/03/03. The best sense that we can make of this is that the polio, DTP and HepB vaccines were administered concurre | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ad a very difficult time transposing child's immunization records from his/her original Road to Health Card to the immunization chart provided in the interview guide: four doses of polio were said to be administered on the same day (12/06/02; | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| alue of . It's worth noting that under L9, interviewer did indicate that exclusive breatfeeding took place for 3 months. 2.Under other immunization, interviewer notes that an other vaccine was given on 11/03/03 (DD/MM/YY) and describe | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| and identifies it as measles. We incorporate this information under measles and not under other. 3.Interviewer records child's height as being 0.92cm. This is impossible. We changed it to 92 cm here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| and said to be admin | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| answer to L4 was thus changed from 1 (yes, has a card) to 3 (card not available). | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| are also reflected here. 2.Interviewer indicates that two other vaccines were given to the child; while the dates are provided, it is not specified what vaccines these are. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| are encouraged to review these data. 2.Interviewer indicated that two vaccines were administered at birth and included these under the BCG vaccine in the immunization chart. This looks like a mistake. Here we understood that at birth one dos | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| as administered is, the date is left blank here, but the variable polio2given is assigned a value of 1 to capture that the vaccine was indeed given. 2.Two doses of the DTP vaccine were administered on the same day (16/11/01). This is not | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| asles and DTP were also given to the child. 2. Interviewer included last dose of DTP under other vaccination in the immunization chart. In this dataset, it is included under DTP. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| at birth, that the the other dose listed here actually corresponds to Polio0. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| at birth, that the the other dose listed here actually corresponds to Polio0. This is reflected here. 2.The date that the interviewer has for the second dose of the polio vaccine is incorrect. She had written that this vaccine was administe | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| at child was exclusively breastfed for 8 months, which is impossible. Next to this is a question mark. My best guess is that the interviewer swaped the answers. The child was likely breastfed for 8 months, but we do not know for certain how | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ate the date when measurements were taken for a second time. 2.Under question L8 (on length of breastfeeding), interviewer indicates that child is still on breast. We have indicated this here in question L7 (var breastfed) by assigning it | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ations recorded for this child were administered before the child's birth. To avoid further confusion for this case ID, we have left the child's date of birth as well as the entire immunization records untouched. 2. While for the most part, i | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| b.The interviewer includes question marks in the boxes for | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| being polio. Instead of including it under other, this vaccine is included as polio4 -- the most recent dose of the polio vaccine the child received. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| booster column, actually corresponds to the (belated) 18-month booster of the polio vaccine, so we record it here as such. 2.Interviewer records under other immunization that a vaccine was given to child on 14/08/96, but does not identify w | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| boosters. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| but unfortunately there is nothing to indicate when the child was actually measured. 2.Two doses of the DTP vaccine were said to be administered on the same date (13/10/93, DD/MM/YY). While we keep the date for the second dose, we record the | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| card is new/duplicate. It doesn't state immunizations given. Only polio stated. Foster mother is not even sure that the DOB [date of birth] given is exactly. In this dataset, we list all the vaccines contained in the survey's immunization | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| cell for BCG and polio instead). Corrections are reflected in this dataset. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ch older child. It is difficult to guess child's age, since we also have no immunization records for this case ID. As such, the date of birth for this child was set to . in this dataset. **Analysts are strongly encouraged to revist this chi | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| changes information on breastfeeding. While interviewer had written that child had been exclusively breastfed for 1 week, physician indicates that this was actually for a month. Physician also indicates that breastfeeding with supplements (ot | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| child in 2000 (withouth specifying day and month), adds that vaccine was given as part of the EPI2000. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| cine were given (on 22/02/99, 06/04/99, and again on 22/02/99, DD/MM/YY)-- at birth, 6 weeks, and birth again, respectively. While we keep the first two dates listed under this vaccine, we eliminate the second dose that was said to be given | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ck to early 1993, with the earliest dose administered on 06/01/93. For now, immunization data was left untouched, but child's year of birth was changed to 1992. 2.It looks like the interviewer had trouble transposing vaccine boosters from th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| clear. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| column that a 5-year booster for th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| column, were said to be | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| complete it or whether child received no immunizations at all. I have left the data untouched here. 2.Next to the measurement questions (height, weight, waist, head circumference), which are left blank, interviewer writes: child not at home; | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| constitutes the first dose for both polio and BCG vaccines. This is reflected here. b) U | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| crossed out. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| cted on 11/05/03, sixteen days before the registered vaccinations. This is clearly wrong. Since we do not know the day and month in which these doses were administered, we record them here as ., though we keep the year as 2003 and assign a v | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| d child's height and head circumference as being, respectively, 90.05cm and 52.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. These figures were slightly edited and made to be 90.50cm | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| d described it as DT. It is not clear to which vaccine the second date refers to, so it was left under other, and the type of vaccine is left unidentified. Note, too, that this second vaccine was administered more than a year before the ch | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| d head circumference match those of the interviewer, she changes the child's height from 74cm to 73cm and the child's weight from 9.90kg to 11kg. Physician's corrections are reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| d here. Even with this change in birth year, however, interviewer indicates that the child was first administered a vaccine on 14/03/00, which would be a day before the child was actually born. For now, the change in the child's year of birt | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| d. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| data in the immunization chart look odd and it seems like a mistake was made when recording the date for these vaccines. It looks like all three vaccines were actually administered concurrently, with the first dose given on 12/07/00, a second | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| deed given to the child at birth, but that the second dose listed here actually refers to Polio0, also given to child at birth. This is reflected in this dataset. 2.In the box for the measles vaccine, interviewer writes down three dates when | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| der the vaccines themselves and not under other in this dataset. 2. Note that two doses of the polio vaccine and the DTP vaccine were given on 25/06/97. While we keep this date for the second dose of each of these vaccines, we record the da | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| dose actually refers to the first dose of polio (polio0) and is listed here as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| doses of HepB on 27/01/03 (DD/MM/YY). This is not possible. Here we have kept the date for the second dose registered under this date, but have recorded the dates for the first of these doses as ., and indicated that they were indeed given, | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| doses of polio were given to the child at birth. This is impossible. We corrected this and indicate in this dataset that a dose of polio and a dose of BCG were given to the child at birth, instead. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e actually belongs under polio, in the box directly underneath BCG in the chart. We record record the first dose given at birth as BCG and the second (18-month) dose under polio here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e and recorded by the physician. No date is listed next to these measurements to indicate when they were taken. b.Physician also edited child's birthweight data, changing it from the original 2.04kg to 2.400kg. Her correction is reflected | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e booster column. It is much more likely that this vaccine refers to the polio 18-month booster, and this is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e date under other1. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e first (and only) dose of measles, R5037. 2.Note that the interviewer indicates that three doses of the BCG vaccine were given to the child: two at birth (28/09/00, DD/MM/YY) and one at approximately 18months, as indicated in the booster colu | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e in this context this makes most sense, this is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e likely to have been the actual measurement. 2. Under other immunizations, interviewer indicates that two doses of HBV were given to child. HBV here refers to the Hepatitis B vaccine and is recorded as such here. Note that the first date | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e new measurements were actually taken.) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e of exclusive breastfeeding with no supplements. This is not possible. Physician indicates that child was breastfed exclusively for two months at the hospital plus four additional months with no supplements, for a total of 6 months of exclus | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e of vaccine this is isn't specified. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e polio vaccine (Apr9/98) looks strange. Chronologically it does not follow the timing of other doses administered of this vaccine. Original data here were left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| e second dose, which is listed in the Booster column of the immunization chart actually corresponds to the 18-month booster for polio, and we record it here as such. 2.The way that the dates for the polio, DTP and Hep B vaccines were recorde | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ead, to capture this. 2.In the comment box (cov_8) interviewer had indicated that child was not available for measurements (height, weight, waist, head circumference). Data for these, however, is provided in the module. It seems like meas | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ealth is excellent. I included this as part of the general health question here. Original question had not been administered at the time of the first interview. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ed to child on 11/06/02 (DD/MM/YY) but what vaccine this is isn't specified. 3.There is a typo in the date for the measles vaccine. Interviewer had indicated that it was given on 17/08/95, more than three years before the child was even born. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ed to the child and this is reflected here. | 2 |
0.6%
|
|
| edited and made to be 134.50cm and 59.50cm, respectively, since these are more likely to have been the actual measurements. 2. Under other immunization, interviewer indicates that the child was given a school beginner vaccine on 11/07/95. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ee days. The answer to L7 (variable breastfed) was changed here from 3 to 1, since it is clear that the child did breastfeed but is no longer doing so. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| een breastfed, she had written does not know on questions that asked about total length of breastfeeding and about length of exclusive breastfeeding. On the cover of the module for this case ID, there's a note at the bottom of the page: con | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| egree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 95.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| eight) were taken by the physician on 27/07/02 (DD/MM/YY), and not at the time of the interview. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ely. 2.In the immunization chart, interviewer had indicated that a second dose of the polio vaccine (Polio1) was administered to the child on 08/02/00 (DD/MM/YY), which is before the child was even born. It is difficult to tell where the mist | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| er, respectively, were: 87.5cm, 16.20kg, 54cm. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ere administered to this child. This is reflected in this dataset. 2. Under other immunizations, interviewer indicated that child was given a pre-school booster on 27/09/00. Since the pre-school booster normally consists of a dose of the | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ere as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| es of the BCG vaccine was given to the child on the same date. While we do record one of the doses under BCG, the other one is most likely Polio0, and this, again, is reflected here. This child's overall immunization data is very odd. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ese under Hepatitis B vaccine, and not under other. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| estion L5, on whether child's immunization is up-to-date, interviewer circles both yes and no. The circle by yes looks more like that in other answers in the module. And written underneath the no answer, interviewer adds: I have refe | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| estionnaire the source of birthweight information. Since child has an immunization card, it was assumed that this is where the information was taken from and this is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| et born them. We changed the year to 1997, since this also coincides with the date in which the last dose of the polio vaccine was given to this child. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ewhat strange. Next to the immunization chart, at the height of the polio and DTP vaccines, interviewer writes: NOTE: THIS IS HOW IT'S WRITTEN ON THE CARD. Here we understand that the interviewer had a lot of trouble transposing the dates | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| for breastfeeding with supplements | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| for this varia | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| for this variable. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| for this variable. **IT LOOKS LIKE 1173-04-01 AND 1173-05-01 ARE TWINS.** | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| for this variable. **IT LOOKS LIKE 1173-04-01 AND 1173-05-01 ARE TWINS.** | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ft untouched. 3.In the immunization chart, under other vaccine, interviewer wrote than an other vaccine was administered on 19/11/01 (DD/MM/YY), at about 18 months and added, as a descriptor, T6193. It is difficult to tell what vaccine | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ghly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 72.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. 3.Note that the date for the first dose of | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| given two vaccines, but does not specify what they were. 3.Interviewer indicates that child's birthweight was 3.8kg, but she did not indicate what the source of this information was. Since the child was not born at home and has a detailed hea | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| gned a value of 1 to capture this. 2. Interviewer had originally recorded child's head circumference as being 52.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Head circumference wa | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| h dose seems to actually belong under polio, in the box directly underneath BCG in the chart. We record record the first dose given at birth as BCG and the second (18-month) dose under polio here. 2.In the immunization card, interviewer inclu | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| had originally recorded child's height as being as being 132.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 132.50cm, which is more likely to | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| had originally recorded child's height as being 132.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 132.50cm, which is more likely to have been | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| had originally recorded child's height as being 139.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 139.50cm, which is more likely to have been | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| hat this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height and wasit measurements were slightly edited and made to be 97.50cm and 61.50cm, which are more likely to have been the actual measurements. 3.While interviewer | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| having been administered on 16/08/01. This leads us to believe that on 21/06/01, the first dose of polio, HepB and DTP were administered concurrently; the second dose for all of these vaccines were administered, again togother, on 19/07/01; a | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| he 5th year booster, which includes a dose of the polio and DT vaccines and have included it here as such. Also note that written vertically, next to the immunization chart, by the booster column is another date: 24/03/95. We interpret tha | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| he booster column, another at 18 months. This looks like a mistake. The 18-month dose looks more like a polio 18-month booster and it is recorded here as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| he changed child's height from 2.81cm to 81.1cm and child's weight from 11.60kg to 10.65kg. Physician also changes information on breastfeeding. While interviewer had written that child had been exclusively breastfed for 1 week, physician in | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| he first dose of thr polio vaccine instead. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| height actually is, so I have imputed a . value for this variable here. 2.Interviewer notes that the second dose of the polio vaccine was administered on 21/4/00 (DD/MM/YY). This is a couple of years before child was even born. The year | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| here Polio and DTP vaccines should be recorded is a date: 16/01/94 (DD/MM/YY). By this, we understand that on this date, an extra dose of both of these vaccines was given to the child. 3.Mother reports not knowing for how long child was exclu | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| here, but data on breastfeeding with supplements is left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| here, while data on breastfeeding with supplements was left untouched. 2.Physician noted that, according to child's older sister, child's health is excellent. I noted this down under | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| here, while the answer on breastfeeding with supplements is left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| hild's height from 137cm to 139.4cm and the child's weight from 32.35kg to 31.2kg. Physician's corrections are reflected here. 2.Next to the question on general health (L13) interviewer adds: Noses are always blocked. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| hild, for some reason, was not measured or weighed. 2.Physician also corrects tha data on breastfeeding in this module. Whereas interviewer had indicated that child was never exclusively breastfed and that child was breastfed for 24 months wi | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| his is a mistake. This dose most likely refers to the 18-month polio booster, and should have been recorded in the box immediately below the BCG vaccine. While we keep the first dose administered at birth under BCG, we attribute the 18-month | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| his round of the study were conducted. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ht as being 103.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 103.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| htly edited and made to be 151.50cm and 71.50cm, respectively, which are more likely to have been the actual measurements. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ician's correction is reflected here. 2.All immunization records indicate that there must be a typo in the child's birthdate. Interviewer indicated under L1 that it was 04/12/1998. Since first vaccines were administered on 04/02/98 I assume | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| id to be administered on 04/02/02 (DD/MM/YY); three doses of DTP on 04/03/02 (as interviewer writes the date diagonally across all three date boxes for this vaccine); and three doses of HepB were noted as having been administered on 10/04/02. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ific vaccine. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| iginal data were left untouched. 3.Two doses of the polio vaccine were said to be administered on the same date: 14/05/03 (DD/MM/YY). While we keep the date for the second of these doses, we record the date for the first dose as . but indi | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ike it was given in 2002 (same year all other vaccines were also given to this child). Though the year is included here, the day and month were left blank. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ikely to have been the actual measurement. 2. It looks like the interviewer had trouble transposing vaccine boosters from the child's original health card to the immunization chart we have in our interview guide. Here we interpret that child wa | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunizat | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunization was administered to child on Aug10/1993, at 20 months, but does not specify what vaccin | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunization, but under polio, DTP, and measles, respectively. Note that the dates when the measles vaccine was given are not in chronological order | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunization, interviewer also has another date listed (Feb12/99), but fails to specify what vaccine this is. Again, I have recorded this date | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunization, interviewer also indicates that a dose of HBV was given on 30/05/96. We record this vaccine under Hepatitis B. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| immunization, interviewer indicates that child was given a second dose of the measles vaccine (with code 4313) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| impossible. It looks like the answers here were reversed. It is much more likely that child was breastfed for a total of 18 months and that he/she was breastfed with no supplements for one of these months. This is edit is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| in chronological order. I have left the data untouched here; the same is true for VitA. 3.In the immunization chart, under other vaccination, interviewer indicates that a vaccine was administered on 30/07/01 (DD/MM/YY) but does not specify | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| in chronological order. Original data were left untouched here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| in this data set. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| in this database. 2.Interviewer lists two vaccines under BCG: one at birth, and one at 18months (in the booster column of the chart). It looks like this is a mistake and that the 18-month booster actually corresponds to the polio va | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| inally recorded child's height, waist, and head circumference as being, respectively,130.05cm, 58.05cm, and 53.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. These figures were slight | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| indeed write that one dose of BCG was given to child at birth, we record that the other dose administered then actually corresponds to Polio0. Interviewer also indicates in the immunization chart that two BCG boosters were given to child (10/ | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| indicates the date in which an other vaccine was given to the child. While the name of the vaccine is not indicated here, the interviewer includes the following as a descriptor: 18/12. It is hard to tell what vaccine this is. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ine it was. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ines were administered to the child, and include it here as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ing 137.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 137.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| interviewer indicates that child's height is .96cm. This is impossible; I have changed the answer to 96cm. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| is highly, highly unlikely. Here we understand that one dose of BCG was given to the child on this date and that the second date in the immunization chart actually refers to a dose of the polio vaccine. 2.Interviewer indicates that three dos | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| is is reflected in the data here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| is not available, she also indicates that the source of child's birthweight was the health card. This is not possible. The value of this variable was changed from 1 to 2 to indicate that the information came from recall (2), instead. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| is recorded here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| itten that the first dose of the polio vaccine was administered on 11/07/99 (DD/MM/YY), even though child was only born on the 31st of that month. This is impossible. We record the date for this vaccine as ., though we assign a value of 1 | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| know whether child's immunizations are up to date. Next to the blank immunization chart, she adds: Don't know. Her card is in Eastern Cape. 3.Next to L11 (on creche or childcare) interviewer notes that child is at school. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| l data were left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| l, and this is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| leave the date here as ., we assign a value of 1 to var HepB3given to indicate that the child did, indeed, receive this dose of the vaccine. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| left as .. 2. In the immunization chart, under other immunizations, interviewer lists two other dates (02/09/98 and 08/05/02, DD/MM/YY) when vaccines were administered, but does not specify what vaccine was given. We have left the descrip | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| likely to have been the actual measurement. 2.Measles immunization records for this child look very strange. Interviewer indicates that the child was given a dose of the vaccine at 6months, 9 months, 23 months and at about 4 years. Though th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| looks incorrect. It looks like this dose actually corresponds to the 18-month booster for polio, and we record it here as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| lso look a little odd. The first dose of the polio vaccine was said to be administered on 29/12/87 (DD/MM/YY), 10 years before the child was actually born. The year here was changed to 1997, which now makes the day compatible with the day the | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| lue of 1 instead. 2.While interviewer indicated that child's health card was not available at the time of the interview, it is indicated in this module that child's birthweight was taken from the card. This is not possible. This variable (s | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| m, 39cm. These new measurements were taken on 16/08/03 (DD/MM/YY) and not at the time of the interview. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| m. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring children in their homes. Head circumference was slightly edited and made to be 52.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| made any marks on any specific vaccine here, but instead gave the var fully immunized -- NO CARD a value of 1. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| measles are identical to those under DTP and polio, and this would be a very awkward schedule for the measles vaccine. In this data set, these dates are listed under HepB and not under Measles; it looks like interviewer may have incorrectly tr | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| module, questions L8 and L9 were skipped and assigned a value of . 2.In the immunization chart, under other vaccines, interviewer indicates three other vaccines were administered: on 28/02/03 (DD/MM/YY), Polio4 and DTP4, and on 02/05/02, | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| months. This looks like a mistake and seems like this actually refers to the 18-month polio booster, instead. This is reflected in this dataset. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| n is coded as 1 to indicate the vaccine was given to the child, though the date is unknown. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| n on 11/01/03 (DD/MM/YY), which is after the interview itself took place. It looks like there is a typo in the year and that the date should actually be 11/01/00, which would make it consistent with the day doses of the DTP and HepB vaccine we | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| n their homes. Height was slightly edited and made to be 103.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ne this is. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| nistered and would be represented here out of chronological order in the chart. It seems more likely that the vaccine was administered on 21/06/93, the same date that a dose of both the DTP and measles vaccines were also administered. This is | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| nistered. Dates are not listed chronologically and the last date listed 12/06/02 (DD/MM/YY) is the same as the first date listed. For now, we have left dates untouched. Note that the date for the first vaccine listed under other (12/06/01) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| now that it wasn't at the time of the interview. 2. Interviewer had originally recorded child's waist as being 59.05cm and child's head circumference as being 54.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measuring | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| nth and day were swaped, and that the date should actually be 13/09/98, which would also make it compatible with the date a dose of the HepB and measles vaccines were given. We incorporate this change here. 3.It looks like the interviewer had | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| o 5kg, which makes a little more sense here, though the weight still seems very low. 3.Interviewer skips question L7 (whether or not child breastfed), but since we have an indication of how long child was breastfed for in items L8 and L9, we i | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| o at birth. Analysts should decide whether they want to eliminate this record entirely. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| odd schedule for the vaccine. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| odule coincides. 2.Under the question on exclusive breastfeeding (L9), interviewer indicates that child was breastfed with no other drink or food supplements for 14 months--which is impossible-- and left L8 (on overall length of breastfeeding) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| of 3) to reflect this. Following the skip pattern instructed in the module, L8 and L9 were left blank. Interviewer adds that child was never exclusively breastfed: child was on breast and drink at his birth. 2.Under other immunizat | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| of measles. Instead of leaving it under other, I include it here under measles 3. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| of the polio and measles vaccines were also given. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| of these modules is similar but not identical. Original data were left untouched here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| on (L1) and the question on breastfeeding (L7), interviewer writes: No records. Next to L5 on whether caregiver thinks child's immunizations are up to date, she adds: Do not know. This child does not have a birth certificate or health c | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| on card. 3.Written vertically next to the immunization chart, next to the booster column but not within its response boxes, interviewer adds a date: 13/06/02 (DD/MM/YY). We understand that this corresponds to the 18-month booster of both th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| orrected figures, respectively, are: 125cm; 21.5cm; 49cm, with no second measurement listed for head circumference. These answers are reflected here. Since the head circumference was originally recorded as 0.52cm, which is impossible, it was c | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ot indicate the date when measurements were retaken. 2.Under other immunization, interviewer indicates that child was given the pre-school [booster] on 16/04/99 (DD/MM/YY). Since this booster is composed of both a dose of DT and Polio, th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ote that interviewer had a difficult time recording the boosters for the polio vaccine in the survey immunization chart, actually including the 18-month booster (30/04/99, DD/MM/YY) accidentally under BCG. b)On the side of the chart, parallel | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| otes that that this happened for one day. We record it as 0.03 month here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| other immunization | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| patible with the the first dose of DTP. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| r child's birthweight and that child does not have a health card. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| r instance, all vaccination dates recorded in the module take place before child was even born. Since this chart is incomplete and the data in it is sparce and seems to be incorrect, we decided to disregard it entirely, thinking this would int | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| reastfeeding, as is the month of breastfeeding with supplements (with other drink and food) that is reported in L9. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| recorded under BCG actually corresponds to the 5-year booster for polio, and it is recorded here as such. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| respectively, and not under other. 2.Under the BCG vaccine (which is found directly above the boxes for the polio vaccine), in the Booster date column, interviewer indicates that child was given a vaccine on 08/05/00. She indicates that t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| rote over it in pen: 118.50cm. The corrected response is reflected here. 3.In L4, interviewer writes that yes, child has an immunization card, but since none of the child's immunization records were recorded and neither was child's birthweig | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| rview (09/08/02 -- DD/MM/YY), child was actually weighed on 31/08/02. 3.Interviewer indicates that child is still breastfeeding in L7 and indicates that he/she was exclusively breastfed for 4 months. Under L9, he indicates that child was br | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| s even born. It looks like there is a typo in the year, and that it should actually be 1997. We have kept the date for this dose as 26/03/97, making this correction, since this is also the date when doses of DTP and HepB are given to the ch | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| s, data here were left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| seems to be recorded in the child's immunization chart under BCG by mistake. As such, we do not record this date in this immunization chart. 2.The recording of the measles vaccine is also confusing in the immunization chart. Interviewer had | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| she lost the original card and birth certificate. She is going to use copy of child's birth card to get birth certificate in order to apply for the child grant. Since this is what the child's new health card indicates, I have simply marked | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| since it is not exactly clear when these doses were administered. Since it's highly unlikely that the child was administered two doses of BCG at birth, it looks like there is a mistake in the chart: we interpret th | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| since neither the physician nor the interviewer provide another answer in its place. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| since this is are more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| since this is when the family makes the visit to the clinic. (See data for other members of this household.) Physician also changes information on breastfeeding. While interviewer indicates that exclusive breastfeeding took place during 3 wee | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| st dose at birth is indeed for the BCG vaccine, the second dose at birth refers to the Polio0 vaccine, and these are recorded here as such. In addition to the first dose of BCG at birth, though a little strange, we also keep the 10.5 month dos | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ster column of the chart). It looks like this is a mistake and that the 18-month booster actually corresponds to the polio vaccine, which is in the box immediately underneath BCG. This dose (given on 15/02/01) is recorded here as such. 3.Nex | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| surement.) | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| t dose that vaccine was administered (19/01/92, DD/MM/YY). While this date was kept for the first dose, the date for the third dose were recorded as .. To indicate that a third dose was given, however, we assign a value of 1 to var DTP3gi | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| t page of the interview guide, there is a note that says: Child code should be 04 [03 is an adult.]. This is the child code that is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| t this untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| t this. 2.In the immunization chart, interviewer indicated that child was given an other vaccine on 10/06/02, but does not specify what type of vaccine it is. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| taken from the health card. This is reflected here. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ted, and indicate that that child breastfed for a total of six months, out of which 3 weeks were of exclusive breastfeeding, with no other drink or food. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| tered. For now, data have been left unmodified. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ters, instead. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| that the polio, DTP and HepB vaccines were administered concurrently, and that the dates correspond to the first, second and third dose of each vaccine. This is how we interpret these records in this dataset: the first dose of polio, DTP and | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the 18-month dose of measles, but this is not entirely clear, so we leave data untouched.) 2.Next to the immunization chart, at the height of where dates for the DTP vaccine are administered, interviewer also notes down an extra date (17/0 | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the Eastern Cape. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the HepB vaccine was given on Oct2/02. Note that the interview itself took place before then, on August of that year. This is clearly a mistake and there seems to be a typo in the year. We changed this to Oct2/01, which also makes it consis | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the answer on breastfeeding with supplements is left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the caregiver. 2.Next to a blank immunization chart, interviewer notes: Not up to date according to her mother (Immunization). (No card.) 3. Interviewer had originally recorded child's height as being 132.05cm. It is highly unlikely that t | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the child. These were included under the category of Hepatitis B vaccine, and not under other. 3. Interviewer had originally recorded child's height as being 124.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measur | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the doses registered in the chart. The year for this dose was changed to 1994, which makes the administration date for this vaccine compatible with the date the fourth dose of both the polio and DTP vaccines were also given to the child. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the interviewer had trouble transposing vaccine boosters from the child's original health card to the immunization chart we have in our interview guide. Here we interpret that child was administered the 18-month booster for the polio and DTP va | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the original answer for breastfeeding with supplements was left untouched. 2.Respondent did not have child's health card and did not know child's birthweight. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the polio and DTP vaccines on 25/02/03 (DD/MM/YY), even though these are listed under polio and BCG in the guide. (To better understand our interpretation, analysts might want to compare the layout of the immunization chart included in the Sou | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the rest of the data here. 2.Interviewer had indicated, in L6 that child's birthweight was 350.5kg, which is impossible. This was changed to 3.505kg here. 3.Note that the immunization records, particularly for measles, are strange for this | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the rest of the data here. 2.Interviewer notes that child's height is 0.58cm. This is impossible: height was changed to 58cm. 3.Note that the immunization schedule for this child is very strange. Interviewer indicates that child was administ | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| the second dose of polio vaccine was administered. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ther doses listed come with no description at all. Data reflected here have been left untouched. 2.Interviewer had originally recorded child's height as being 98.05cm. It is highly unlikely that this degree of accuracy was used when measurin | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| this dose was indeed given, by assigning a value of 1 to var polio0given. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| this is where this information was drawn. This is reflected here. 2.Interviewer indicates that an other vaccine was given to child on 28/09/00 (DD/MM/YY), but we are not told what vaccine this is. Interviewer adds:Not specified in the cli | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| this. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| though we make no marks on any specific vaccines. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ths and weigh 14kg, for instance. From immunization records, it looks like the child was born in 2000, instead. This change in year of birth is reflected here. 2.It looks like this child had some complications at birth --refer to cov_8 to s | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| to capture this. | 3 |
0.9%
|
|
| to capture this. 3.On the immunization chart, interviewer writes diagonally, across the first- and second- dose boxes for the p | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| to capture this. 2.In the immunization chart, interviewer indicates that two doses of the BCG vaccine were given to the child at birth. This is | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| to indicate that the child did, indeed, receive a dose of the vaccine. 2. In the immunization chart, under the first box for DTP, the interviewer does not indicate the | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| to indicate the child received it. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| to reflect this. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ttom of the chart: This card is not clear enough. I can't understand it very well. Original data were left untouched. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| uring the birth. Interviewer left the answer here blank and we imputed a 0 to indicate that child was never exclusively breastfed 3.Next to L13, on general health, which is poor for this child, interviewer also wrote: Eye problem. 4. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| used when measuring children in their homes. Waist measurement t was slightly edited and made to be 68.50cm, which is more likely to have been the actual measurement. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| ut not available), since next to this question, she adds: card is not here- is at 01's [other respondent's] home. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| vaccine were given on the same day. This is not possible. Here, we interpreted that a dose of DTP was given to child on 21/09/94 and another dose at 14/06/95, following the expected 9-month and 18-month schedule. The other two suspicious, re | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| value of this variable here from 1 (yes) to 3 (yes, but not available). | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| var Mea1given to indicate that this dose was indeed given. 2.The way that the dates for the polio, DTP and Hep B vaccines were recorded in the immunization chart is somewhat strange. Here we understand that the interviewer had a lot of troubl | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was also checked but it looks crossed out. Here I noted the information was taken from the health card, since detailed immunization information was also taken from it. 3.On breastfeedin | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was changed to 25/10/01, which is also consistent with the date the first dose of DTP and HepB were administered. 3.Interviewer indicates that two other vaccines were given to the child, but does not indicate what they were. The schedule of | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was given on 8/4/02 (at about 14 weeks.) It seems like a mistake was made in recording these data in the immunization chart. Here, we understand that that the polio, HepB and DTP vaccines were administered concurrently in each of these separ | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was given to child on 11/06/02, but does not specify what type of vaccine it is. 3.It looks like the interviewer had trouble transposing vaccine boosters from the child's original health card to the immunization chart we have in our interview | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was imputed here to reflect that child was, indeed, breastfed, making it consiste | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| was thus changed to 1998, making the date of this vaccine compatible with the day the second dose of the HepB vaccine was also administered. 2.Interviewer notes that third dose of DTP vaccine was given on 27/4/98, while the second dose was sai | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| we have included these as a fourth dose of polio and a fourth dose of DTP here. In the case of DTP, we assume the interviewer made a small typo by | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| we record the day and month for these vaccines as ., we keep the year in this dataset. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| wer did not write down where birthweight was obtained, but since child has a health card, this variable was assigned a value of 1. 3.Immunization records also look very strange here. Two doses of the BCG vaccine were said to be adminiter | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| were slightly edited and made to be 109.50cm and 51.50cm, respectively, since these are more likely to have been the actual measurements | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| were, respectively: 148cm, 34kg, 62cm. | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| which I include here, instead, under polio and not under other. 3. It looks like 0607-07-01 and 0607-08-01are twins, otherwise there may be a mistake in the data. 3. Interviewer had originally recorded child's height as being 101.05cm | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| which I include here, instead, under polio. 3.While interviewer had originally written down that child's waist was 54cm (in L3.1), it looks like a correction was made and the answer was changed to 48cm. This is reflected here. 4. It looks | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| with a little u | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| xclusively breastfed for 2 weeks and then breastfed with supplements (other food or drink) for another two months. 2.Interviewer indicated in the immunization chart that child was administered two doses of BCG at birth. This is highly unlikel | 1 |
0.3%
|
|
| y immunized -- NO CARD a value of 1, though no marks are made on any specific vaccine. Note that interviewer skipped question L5, on whether caregiver thought child's immunizations were up-to-date. Again, a value of 1 was imputed for this | 1 |
0.3%
|
Warning: these figures indicate the number of cases found in the data file. They cannot be interpreted as summary statistics of the population of interest.