-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Description
Problem
The original definition of C11 is sum(contra_choice != "unknown" & contra_choice == imm_method). That is: count the number of cases where contraception choice was not unknown and contraception choice matched the immediate method.
The problem is that it doesn't account for how the values of the fields have been interpreted by the analyst or abstractors. 90% of the counts for the above definition of C11 also occur in a row where counseling is FALSE. This leads me to believe that the value of "other" was used in the data set when it should be "unknown".
Current Mitigation
The following definition is currently used for C11 to handle the lack of counseling. Which impacts Measure 8:
C11 = sum(counseling & contra_choice != "unknown" & contra_choice == imm_method)
Solution
This needs to be addressed in the following ways:
Definitions
- The meaning of the contra_choice values needs to be defined.
- The valid values of contra_choice when counseling is FALSE need to be defined.
Data Corrections
- A transform for the existing data needs to be approved: e.g. when counseling is FALSE, change value of contra_choice to "unknown".
- A confirmation that the existing entries of "other" in the imm_method field are correct.
Alternatively: Data could be re-uploaded with conformant use of other in contra_choice and imm_method fields. Effectively fixing the data issue at the source.