SCDHEC Home page










SCAN PRAMS Tables

About PRAMS

Purpose and History of PRAMS
SC PRAMS Background and Project Description
Detailed PRAMS Methodology
SC PRAMS Technical Notes

Purpose and History of PRAMS

Preface
Since 1987, the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) has served as a state-specific data source for maternal and child health (MCH) issues.
PRAMS is a population-based survey of women delivering a live-born infant. This survey collects information on women's experiences and behaviors before, during, and shortly after pregnancy. Thus, states participating in PRAMS gain unique and invaluable information for public health administrators, policy makers, and researchers as they develop programs and policies to improve the health of women and children.

The South Carolina Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (SC PRAMS) Project plays a significant role in SC DHEC's public health surveillance activities. The SC PRAMS Project monitors and disseminates information on maternal behavioral risk factors occurring during pregnancy and on a child's early infancy period related to birth outcomes. Thus, the SC PRAMS Project provides sound and reliable maternal and infant health data, which can be used by health professionals for the planning and evaluation of perinatal health programs and for making policy decisions affecting the health of mothers and babies in South Carolina.

The quantitative and qualitative collection, analysis, and use of maternal and child health data are fundamental to the development of an infrastructure to solve women and children's health problems at the state and local levels. Data analysis should be a central component of efforts to identify maternal and child health needs, to design appropriate program interventions, to manage and evaluate those interventions, and to monitor our progress toward achieving the Year 2000 Objectives (1). PRAMS is designed not only to generate state-specific data but also to allow comparisons among states through the use of standardized data collection methods.

It is important to remember that information in this module is representative of all South Carolina mothers delivering live infants in South Carolina. Thus, generalizations can be made to this group only. Also, keep in mind that all survey information is based on self-reports from the women.

Purpose of the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS)
PRAMS is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiative to reduce infant mortality and low birthweight. PRAMS is an ongoing, population-based risk factor surveillance system designed to identify and monitor selected maternal experiences and behaviors that occur before and during pregnancy and the child's early infancy among a stratified sample of mothers delivering a live birth.

Epidemiologic surveillance is the ongoing and systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health data used for describing and monitoring a health event or behaviors associated with a health event or condition. This information is used for planning, implementing, and monitoring health programs and for informing policy. The dissemination of PRAMS data is an essential step in translating findings from PRAMS into public health action.

PRAMS was developed in 1987 in response to distressing statistics. For example, the U.S. infant mortality rate was no longer declining as rapidly as it had in past years, and the prevalence of low birth weight infants showed little change. At the same time, maternal behaviors such as smoking, drug use, and limited use of prenatal and pediatric care services were recognized as contributors to these slow rates of decline.

PRAMS was initiated to help state health departments establish and maintain an epidemiologic surveillance system of selected maternal behaviors and experiences. PRAMS was designed to supplement data from vital records and to generate data for planning and assessing perinatal health programs in each participating state. Findings from PRAMS are meant to be used to enhance our understanding of maternal behaviors and their relationship with adverse pregnancy outcomes. PRAMS data can also be used to aid in the development and assessment of programs designed to identify high-risk pregnancy and reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes and to inform policy in each participating state.

Return to the Top

History of PRAMS
Funding for PRAMS became available to the Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1987. Funding was made available through cooperative agreements and all state and territorial health departments and the District of Columbia were eligible to apply. In the late summer of 1987, funds were awarded to the District of Columbia, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Oklahoma, and West Virginia to establish PRAMS surveillance. The PRAMS core questionnaire was developed in 1987 with the participation of numerous individuals within and outside of CDC. To create the questionnaire, potential topics and variables were identified and researched by staff in the Division of Reproductive Health at CDC. Data collection was initiated in the fall of 1988. Because surveillance methods were not well established for the target population of PRAMS, states were encouraged to experiment with different methodologies. For this reason, the first period of data collection from fall 1988 to summer 1990 was considered somewhat of a pilot phase and was referred to as Phase I. South Carolina was not a participant in Phase I.

After a year of data collection, the questionnaire was evaluated and with input from all participating states, it was revised and became Phase II. At this time, the PRAMS software was also updated so that there was one generic version of the software that all states used. In summer 1990, the new software was installed, and shortly thereafter states began using the revised questionnaire. Meanwhile, the state of Alaska had approached CDC about establishing a PRAMS project with their own funding. In the fall of 1990, Alaska became the seventh state to actively collect PRAMS data.

In 1991, additional funds became available through the Infant Health Initiative to expand PRAMS. All of the original states were awarded PRAMS funds, as were six new states: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, New York, South Carolina, and Washington. Alaska was also awarded funds to continue the PRAMS surveillance initiated with state funds. Meanwhile, at the beginning of 1991, California approached CDC about establishing PRAMS surveillance in certain regions of the state using their own funding. Between January and September 1993, the six new states and California began PRAMS data collection. Alabama, Georgia, New York and California included a hospital-based component.

This second funding cycle for PRAMS was established for five years. As operations became more standardized, the concept of a standard protocol was developed. In the fall of 1994, the states convened to determine topic priorities for the questionnaire revision (the Phase 3 questionnaire). For the next year, question modules were developed and tested. PRAMS states implemented the Phase III questionnaire between November 1995 and July 1996. The PRAMS software was upgraded in 1995 to operate in a Windows environment and be LAN compatible. The new software was installed in the fall of 1995.

In fall 1996, funds were awarded for a new five-year PRAMS funding cycle. Although additional funds were not available to expand the number of states, CDC decided to reduce the awards to existing PRAMS states so as to expand PRAMS into new states. Hospital-based surveillance (AL, GA, NY & CA) required more resources per sampled woman than mail/telephone, and therefore, support for the methodology was discontinued in 1996. In addition, two existing PRAMS states were phased out while one state decided not to reapply for funding for the new project period. In October 1996, funds were awarded to ten existing states to continue PRAMS activities and to the five new states of Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, New Mexico, and North Carolina to establish PRAMS surveillance.

After the 1996 awards, the demand for PRAMS continued to be high. In response to numerous requests for unfunded technical assistance (TA) from states that were interested in proceeding with PRAMS without CDC funding, CDC brought Louisiana into PRAMS as an unfunded TA state. CDC provided all the technical assistance needed to implement the project and Louisiana provided the funding. In 1999, two additional states started PRAMS under this unfunded TA mechanism: Ohio and Utah.

In 1999, additional funds became available for the expansion of PRAMS into new states. Awards were made for a two year funding cycle to five new states: Hawaii, Maryland, Nebraska, New York City, and Vermont. In 2000, funding became available to fund two additional states from the 1999 announcement. Delaware and Mississippi were brought on at that time. CDC also provided federal funding for the three states that were conducting PRAMS under the unfunded technical assistance mechanism: Louisiana, Ohio, and Utah. Revision of the Phase III survey began in 1999 and PRAMS states implemented the Phase IV questionnaire with January 2000 births.

In the fall of 2000, CDC announced expansion of funding for PRAMS under the Safe Motherhood legislation. The value of PRAMS data has been well documented and the demand for PRAMS continues to grow. With this funding cycle, CDC had three aims. First, CDC wanted to expand into new states. Funds were awarded to 31 states to conduct the standard mail/telephone surveillance: six new states (Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Texas) as well as the 25 states and cities that were already conducting PRAMS. Second, CDC wanted to allow states an opportunity to develop and implement enhanced surveillance activities. Colorado was awarded funds to develop a component to enhance their standard surveillance activities. Third, CDC developed a point-in-time survey to provide an opportunity for states not suited for ongoing surveillance to collect PRAMS data. Montana and North Dakota were funded to conduct point-in-time surveys. PRAMS surveillance currently covers 62% of all U.S. births.

Acknowledgments
First and foremost, the SC PRAMS project staff is grateful to those South Carolina mothers who kindly took the time to complete the survey. Their invaluable information which is summarized, herein, provides a greater understanding of the health of mothers and infants in South Carolina.

For the technical support and assistance in this report, the SC PRAMS Team is indebted to the CDC PRAMS Team, in the Division of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The SC PRAMS Project staff consist of the following individuals: James E. Ferguson, DrPh (PRAMS Project Director), Sylvia J. Sievers, PhD (PRAMS Project Coordinator) and Mirela Dobre, MD (PRAMS Data Manager). The CDC-based PRAMS Team members have provided valuable technical assistance and consultation on all aspects of the SC PRAMS project. In addition, the SC PRAMS staff has collaborated with maternal and child health program directors throughout the agency (SC DHEC). Currently, the University of South Carolina Survey Research Lab conducts all telephone interviewing.

This module was completed by Sylvia J. Sievers, PhD and Mirela Dobre, MD in collaboration with the Division of Biostatistics and Health GIS, Office of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems, and the Bureau of Maternal and Child Health. Special appreciation for their guidance and support in this endeavor goes to Jared Shoultz, Mary Kate Dillard, CHES, Megan Fisher, MPH, and Petko Kostadinov, Steven Black, Guang Zhao, PhD, Jim Ferguson, DrPh and Murray Hudson, MPH.

References:
1. Lipscomb LE, Johnson CH, Morrow B, Colley Gilbert B, Ahluwalia IB, Beck LF, Gaffield ME, Rogers M, Whitehead N. PRAMS 1998 Surveillance Report. Atlanta: Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2000.
2. Beck LF, Johnson CH, Morrow B, Lipscomb LE, Gaffield ME, Colley Gilbert B, Rogers M, Whitehead N. PRAMS 1999 Surveillance Report. Atlanta, GA: Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2003.

Return to the Top

SC PRAMS Background & Project Description

Background
In 1999, South Carolina's infant mortality rate was 10.3 deaths per 1,000 live births. From 1989 to 1996, the overall infant mortality rate declined steadily. However, in 1997 the rate jumped to 9.5 (from 8.3 in 1996), remained unchanged for 1998, and increased again to 10.3 in 1999. The race specific infant mortality rate for white babies was 6.8 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1999; while for blacks and other infants the rate was 16.4 deaths per 1,000 births in 1999. As compared to infants of white mothers, infants of minority mothers are more than twice as likely to die before they reach one year of age (2). A major determinant of infant death is birthweight at birth. Infants with a birthweight of less than 2,500 grams (LBW) are at increased risk of death and future chronic disabilities. A comprehensive report on the prevention of low birthweight calls for a better understanding of the behavioral, social, and health service utilization factors that may contribute to the health disparities among minority women and women of lower socioeconomic status (3).

Project Description
The SC PRAMS Project, conducted by the Office of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems, Division of Biostatistics and Health GIS, was established in 1991 through a collaborative agreement between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC). The SC PRAMS Project was designed to collect, monitor, analyze, and disseminate information on a wide variety of maternal behaviors and health experiences that may be associated with different birth outcomes.

PRAMS generates statewide estimates of important perinatal health topics among women delivering a live infant. Each participating state uses a standardized data collection method developed by CDC. Approximately 2,100 South Carolina mothers delivering live infants in the state are sampled from the birth registry and surveyed each year. Self-reported information is collected from mail and telephone surveys. At 2 to 6 months after delivery, each sampled mother is mailed a package containing an explanatory letter introducing the survey and the 14-page survey itself. A second and third questionnaire package is mailed to mothers who do not respond to the previous mailed survey. The questionnaire consists of 69 structured and standardized questions (see Appendix A) and is designed to collect information on selected maternal behaviors and experiences during pregnancy and during the child's early infancy period. PRAMS interviewers telephone mothers who do not respond to any of the mailed surveys and administer the questionnaire by telephone. Sample data is weighted to adjust for sampling probabilities, nonresponse and noncoverage (see Appendix B). A special statistical survey software, SUDAAN, is used to conduct analyses on each year of completed survey data.

The questionnaire consists of a core component and a state-specific component. The core portion is used by all participating PRAMS states. Each state develops a state-specific portion that addresses its particular data needs. Since its inception, the PRAMS questionnaire has undergone several revisions, referred to as "phases." Revisions to the questionnaire have occurred primarily to capture data on recent guidelines or emerging issues concerning maternal and child health (such as knowledge of folic acid's relationship to birth defects) and to improve respondents' comprehension of questions. In January 2000, states implemented the fourth phase of the questionnaire. For South Carolina, survey data collection was initiated in January, 1993 (Phase II). Seven years of survey data have been completed. The response rates have increased from 69% in 1993 to 71.6% in 1999, with an overall response rate for all years, 1993-1999, of 71.5%.

Policymakers can use the data in this report to monitor progress toward national, state, and local pregnancy-related health objectives, including the reduction and prevention of high-risk pregnancies and adverse pregnancy outcomes. We view dissemination of these data as a key step in the translation of PRAMS data into public health action, which is a primary goal for PRAMS. We hope this module will be a valuable reference in public health planning and policy development.

It is important to remember that information in this module is representative of all South Carolina mothers delivering live infants in South Carolina. Thus, generalizations can be made to this group only. Also, keep in mind that all survey information is based on self-reports from the women.

Return to the Top

Detailed PRAMS Methodology

PRAMS Data Collection Methodology
One of the strengths of PRAMS is that each participating state uses a standardized data collection methodology. This standardized approach allows for comparisons among states and for optimal use of the data for single-state or multistate analysis. Each state follows the standardized data collection methodology but can also customize some portions of it to tailor the procedures to the needs of the state. For example, the basic methodology recommends three mailings of the questionnaire packet; however, only two mailings are required. PRAMS is a mixed-mode surveillance system that combines two modes of data collection. Each month, a stratified sample is drawn from the current birth certificate file.

For each of these monthly samples, or "batches," a sequence of mail and telephone contacts is attempted. CDC developed and installed a customized tracking system, PRAMTrac, in each state to assist with scheduling mailings and telephone calls, preparing letters, and tracking responses. The primary data collection method is a mail survey. Up to three self-administered surveys are mailed to sampled women, and then mail nonrespondents are contacted by telephone. Here is the sequence of contacts for PRAMS surveillance:

  1. Preletter. This letter introduces PRAMS to the sampled mother and informs her that a questionnaire will soon arrive.
  2. Initial Mail Questionnaire Packet. This packet is sent to all sampled mothers 3 to 7 days after the preletter. Its contents are described on the next page.
  3. Tickler. The tickler serves as a thank you/reminder note. It is sent 7 to 10 days after the initial mail packet.
  4. Second Mail Questionnaire Packet. This packet is sent 7 to 14 days after the tickler to all sampled mothers who did not respond.
  5. Third Mail Questionnaire Packet (Optional). This third packet is sent to all remaining nonrespondents 7 to 14 days after the second questionnaire was sent.
  6. Telephone Follow-Up. Telephone follow up is initiated for all nonrespondents 7 to 14 days after the mailing of the last questionnaire.

The series of mailings commences 2 to 6 months after the mother delivers her infant. Most mothers respond within 3 to 5 months after giving birth. The questionnaire contains items asking about the early postpartum period; thus, the mailings are timed to ensure that all women can respond for this period. The data collection cycle from the mailing of the preletter to the close of telephone follow up lasts approximately 65 to 85 days. The mail questionnaire packet contains several items.

* A multipurpose cover letter describes PRAMS, explains how and why the mother was chosen, elicits the mother's cooperation, describes procedures for filling out and returning the questionnaire, explains any incentive or reward, and provides a telephone number for additional information. This letter is modified slightly for the second and third mailings, primarily by adding an additional appeal for response.
* Each state's questionnaire booklet is 14 pages long, has a colorful cover designed by the state, is slightly smaller than an 8-1/2" x 11" sheet of paper, and contains an extra page for comments from the mother. A self-addressed return envelope with postage is provided.
* A question-and-answer brochure contains additional information and answers the most frequently asked questions about PRAMS. It can be an important tool to convince the mother to participate.
* A calendar serves as a memory aid for answering the questions.
* Some type of participation incentive (sent to all sampled mothers) or reward (sent to all respondents) is included in the packet or explained in the cover letter. Examples are coupons for certified birth certificates, participation in a raffle for a cash award, prepaid telephone cards, bibs, cash (a dollar bill), and magnetic picture frames. South Carolina uses a cash incentive. Telephone follow-up begins after the last questionnaire is mailed. States use various sources of telephone numbers to obtain valid numbers. Calls to a particular number are staggered over times of the day and days of the week. The calling period for a batch runs from 2 to 3 weeks. Up to 15 attempts are made to contact a mother. Often, telephone interviewers arrange call-back interviews to accommodate the mother's schedule.

Return to the Top

The PRAMS Questionnaire
With the help of numerous persons within and outside CDC, the original PRAMS questionnaire was developed in 1987. An extensive list of topics was identified and researched for the questionnaire. From this list, questions were developed and tested and ultimately placed on the questionnaire. Participating states used this questionnaire (Phase 1) from fall 1988 through 1989. After an evaluation of the Phase 1 questionnaire, CDC and the participating PRAMS states developed the Phase 2 questionnaire and put it in the field during 1990. Although the questionnaire maintained its original structure, selected questions were revised, some were deleted, and new questions were added. South Carolina began data collection using Phase II.

In 1994, CDC again collaborated with the participating PRAMS states to develop a Phase 3 questionnaire. This revision was more extensive than the revision of 1989. As with the development of the first and second questionnaires, a list of potential topics was extensively researched. Based on this research, questions were revised or dropped, and new questions were added. As before, the questionnaire retained its original structure. In fall 1995 and early 1996, states began to use the Phase 3 questionnaire. States implemented the fourth revision of the questionnaire with January 2000 births.

The questionnaire consists of two parts, a core portion that is the same for all states and a state-specific portion tailored to each state's needs. Topics addressed in the PRAMS core questionnaire include barriers to and content of prenatal care, obstetric history, maternal use of alcohol and cigarettes, nutrition, economic status, maternal stress, and early infant development and health status. For the state-specific portion of the questionnaire, states have two options: They can develop and test their own questions, or they can select from a series of 124 "standard" questions on 27 topics that have already been developed and tested by CDC. These questions reflect additional topics of interest to states. They were originally developed during the revision process for Phase 3, and additional questions have been added since that time.

In addition to the questionnaire created for the mail packet, a telephone version of the core and state-specific questions was also developed for telephone interviews. The interviewer-administered questionnaire must be formatted differently than the self-administered questionnaire. It includes prompts and instructions for the interviewer that are not read aloud to the respondent. The interviewer-administered questionnaire format ensures that all interviewers deliver questions and instructions uniformly and consistently with the mail questionnaire. As South Carolina's Hispanic population increases, we have worked with the CDC team to develop Spanish materials for mail and telephone contacts.

PRAMS Weighting Process
Each participating state draws a stratified systematic sample of 100 to 250 new mothers every month from a frame of eligible birth certificates. Most states, including South Carolina, over sample low weight births, and many states stratify by mother's race or ethnicity. South Carolina stratifies by infant birthweight. Annual sample sizes range from 1,500 to 3,200, divided among two to six strata. Mothers' responses are linked to extracted birth certificate data for analysis. Thus, the PRAMS data set also contains a wealth of demographic and medical information collected through the state's vital records system.

The availability of this information for all births is the basis for drawing stratified samples and, ultimately, for generalizing results to the state's entire population of births. The availability of birth certificate data for all sampled women, whether they responded or not, is key to deriving nonresponse weights. For each respondent, the initial sampling weight is the reciprocal of the sampling fraction applied to the stratum. Sampling fractions in PRAMS range from 1 in 1 (for very low-birthweight strata in small states) to about 1 in 300 (for normal birthweight, non minority strata in populous states).

Corresponding sampling weights, then, would range from 1 to 300. Nonresponse adjustment factors attempt to compensate for the tendency of women having certain characteristics (such as being unmarried or having less education) to respond at lower rates than do women without these characteristics. Where multivariate analysis shows that these characteristics affected the propensity to respond in a particular stratum, the adjustment factor is the ratio of the sample size in that category to the number of respondents in the category. If analysis shows that no characteristic distinguishes respondents from nonrespondents, the adjustment factor is the ratio of the sample size in that stratum to the number of respondents in the stratum.

In the first case, each category so identified has an adjustment factor; in the second, there is a single factor for the whole stratum. The rationale for applying nonresponse weights is the assumption that nonrespondents would have provided similar answers, on average, to respondents' answers for that stratum and adjustment category. To ensure that cells with few respondents are not distorted by a few women's answers, small categories are collapsed until each cell contains at least 25 respondents. The magnitude of the adjustment for nonresponse depends on the response rate for a category. If 80% (4/5) of the women in a category respond, the nonresponse weight is 1.25 (5/4). Categories with lower response rates have higher nonresponse weights.

The frame noncoverage weights were derived by comparing frame files for a year of births with the calendar year birth tape that states provided to CDC. Omitted records are usually due to late processing and are evenly scattered across the state, but sometimes they are clustered by particular hospitals or counties or even by time of the year. The effect of the noncoverage weights is to bring totals estimated from sample data in line with known totals from the birth tape. In mail/telephone surveillance, the magnitude of noncoverage is small (typically from 1% to 5%), so the adjustment factor for noncoverage is not much greater than 1.

To derive these weights, we carried out such a frame omission study to look for problems that occurred during frame construction for all states. Multiplying together the sampling, nonresponse, and noncoverage components of the weight yields the analysis weight. The analysis weight can be interpreted as the number of women in the population who have characteristics similar to those of the respondent. All weighted results in this report were produced with SUDAAN. SUDAAN is used for analyzing PRAMS data because it accounts for the complex sampling designs that states employ. It uses first-order Taylor series approximations to calculate appropriate standard errors for the estimates it produces.

References:
Beck LF, Johnson CH, Morrow B, Lipscomb LE, Gaffield ME, Colley Gilbert B, Rogers M, Whitehead N. PRAMS 1999 Surveillance Report. Atlanta, GA: Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2003.

Return to the Top

SC PRAMS Technical Notes

This section presents an overview of:
(1) The sampling approach used in PRAMS.
(2) The derivation of the analysis weights applied to the weighted dataset.
(3) The distribution of response rates.

Sampling
The SC PRAMS project utilizes a systematic stratified sampling strategy that takes birthweight into consideration. This is the most appropriate and efficient sampling strategy when the goal is to ensure large sample strata from groups that occur at low frequency in the total population (e.g. very low birthweight (VLBW) infants (<1,500 grams) account for close to 2% of the total live births). Therefore, SC PRAMS has sampled women having live MLBW (moderately low birthweight infants (1,500-2,499 grams) and VLBW infants at a higher rate than women having normal birthweight infants (2500 grams or more). Over-sampling of the low frequency strata ensures that reliable estimates of statistics can be presented separately for women having LBW infants.

Table A. Sampling fractions applied to each birthweight strata.
Birthweight Sampling fraction
Very low birthweight (<1500 grams) 1/1
Moderately low birthweight (1500-2499 grams) 1/6
Normal birthweight (>=2500 grams) 1/70



Computation of Analysis Weights
The SC PRAMS survey is designed to provide statewide estimates of the characteristics of women delivering live infants -- for example, the percentages of mothers who initiated prenatal care in the first, second, and third trimester, respectively; or the percentage of mothers who drank alcohol three months before they got pregnant or during the last trimester. To make such estimates each respondent must be assigned an "analysis weight." This is a multiplier that is the number of women in the population she represents after adjustments for survey design, non-response and frame coverage.

The analysis weight is the product of three sub-components weights. Each sub-component weight accounts for a different factor. The first sub-component adjusts for the sample design, the second adjusts for non-response, and the third for omissions in the sampling frame (i.e. non-coverage of the sampling frame). The PRAMS staff received technical assistance from the CDC to develop and compute the analysis weights applied in the weighted dataset. The three steps involved in deriving the analysis weights are described next:

A. Adjustment for sample design: the first component is called the sampling weight and it corresponds to the reciprocal of the sampling fraction (shown on the previous page). For example, in the moderately low birthweight stratum, 1 out of every 6 mothers is sampled. The sampling weight applied to respondents in this particular stratum is 6.

B. Adjustment for non-response: the second component is called the unit non-response weight. The failure of the mother in the sample to complete a questionnaire is called unit non-response. Response adjustment cells were identified from extensive analysis of maternal characteristics affecting response rate within each birthweight stratum. The important maternal characteristics affecting response rates were maternal age, education, marital status, and race. The unit non-response weight is the product of the sampling weight times the inverse of the response rate specific to that response adjustment cell (based on maternal age, race, education, and marital status).

For example, if the weight for a respondent from the moderately low birthweight stratum was 6 and that respondent was in a response adjustment cell with a 65 percent response rate, then the non-response adjusted weight for that respondent would be 9.2 (6/0.65). The lower the response rate for a particular r cell, the average of the answers of the respondents is the same as the average of the answers of the non-respondents. As a rule, if there are fewer than 25 respondents in any response adjustment cell, the response adjustment category is combined with one or more other response categories until all response categories have at least 25 respondents. This ensures enough respondents in each category so that the average of their responses is not unduly influenced by a few women who participated.

C. Adjustment for omissions in the sampling frame (incomplete frame): The third component is called the sampling frame non-coverage weight. This weight adjusts for women whose live births were not included in the sampling frame (birth registry). The South Carolina birth registry system in the Office of Vital Records is efficient and expedient; therefore, the corrected sampling frame is very similar to the original frame. As a result, the ratio is close to 1 and the adjustment for non-coverage is very small. Response adjustment cell, the larger the adjustment for non-response. Computation of the unit response weights rests on the assumption that within a stratum and non-response adjustment

Return to the Top

SC Home  |  SC DHEC  |  PHSIS  |  SCAN  |  MICA  |  Contact Us


Document's URL:
Page Maintained by SCAN Project Team