↓ Skip to main content

Trends in Demographic and Health Survey data quality: an analysis of age heaping over time in 34 countries in Sub Saharan Africa between 1987 and 2015

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Trends in Demographic and Health Survey data quality: an analysis of age heaping over time in 34 countries in Sub Saharan Africa between 1987 and 2015
Published in
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-3091-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Lyons-Amos, Tara Stones

Abstract

This paper evaluates one aspect of data quality within DHS surveys, the accuracy of age reporting as measured by age heaping. Other literature has explored this phenomenon, and this analysis build on previous work, expanding the analysis of the extent of age heaping across multiple countries, and across time. This paper makes a comparison of the magnitude of Whipple's index of age heaping across all Demographic and Health Surveys from 1986 to 2015 in Sub-Saharan Africa. A random slope multilevel model is used to evaluate the trend in the proportion of respondents within each survey rounding their age to the nearest age with terminal digit 0 or 5. The trend in the proportion of misreported ages has remained flat, in the region of 5% of respondents misreporting their age. We find that Nigeria and Ghana have demonstrated considerable improvements in age reporting quality, but that a number of countries have considerable increases in the proportion of age misreported, most notably Mali and Ethiopia with demonstrate increases in excess of 10% points.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Researcher 3 19%
Unspecified 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 5 31%
Unspecified 5 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,112,099
of 13,505,974 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#509
of 3,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,996
of 386,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#54
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,505,974 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,059 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 386,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 407 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.