{"doc_desc":{"title":"Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006","idno":"LAO_LSB_MICS-III-2006_m_EN_v1.0","producers":[{"name":"Mr. Houmnylat RATTANAVONG","abbr":"Lac","affiliation":"","role":"Data base specialist"},{"name":"Mr. Dueansavanh THAMACHACK","abbr":"Duean","affiliation":"","role":"Data base specialist"}],"prod_date":"2010-03-10","version_statement":{"version":"Version 1.0 (March 2010)"}},"study_desc":{"title_statement":{"idno":"LAO_LSB_MICS-III-2006_v1.0","title":"Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006","alternate_title":"MICS III"},"authoring_entity":[{"name":"Lao Statistics Bureau","affiliation":"Ministry of Planning and Investment"}],"oth_id":[{"name":"Technicians","affiliation":"Ministries, Provincial and District level","email":"","role":""},{"name":"","affiliation":"Civil and Administrative Offices","email":"","role":""},{"name":"United Nations Children's Fund","affiliation":"United Nations","email":"","role":"Capacity building and technical support"},{"name":"Center for Disease Control and Prevention","affiliation":"United States of America","email":"","role":"Capacity building and technical support"}],"production_statement":{"producers":[{"name":"Ministry of Health","abbr":"MOH","affiliation":"","role":"Co-producer"}],"copyright":"(c) 2010, Lao Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Planning and Investment, Lao PDR","funding_agencies":[{"name":"United Nations Children's Fund","abbr":"UNICEF","role":""},{"name":"US Center for Disease Control and Prevention","abbr":"CDC","role":""}]},"distribution_statement":{"contact":[{"name":"Deputy Director, Data Services Division","affiliation":"Lao Statistics Bureau","email":"nscit@etllao.com","uri":"https:\/\/www.lsb.gov.la"}]},"series_statement":{"series_name":"Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey - Round 3 [hh\/mics-3]","series_info":"The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006 (MICS 2006) is the third Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey undertaken by the Lao Statistics Bureau (LSB) of the Ministry of Planning and Investment in close collaboration with the Hygiene and Diseases Prevention Department of Ministry of Public Health. For the purposes of MICS3 during this round, a number of additional nutrition indicators were included, with the aim of strengthening the national nutrition programme planning and management."},"version_statement":{"version":"v1.1:  Edited data, first version, for internal use only.","version_date":"2010-03-10"},"study_info":{"topics":[{"topic":"nutrition [8.7]","vocab":"CESSDA","uri":"http:\/\/www.nesstar.org\/rdf\/common"},{"topic":"HEALTH [8]","vocab":"CESSDA","uri":"http:\/\/www.nesstar.org\/rdf\/common"},{"topic":"specific diseases and medical conditions [8.9]","vocab":"CESSDA","uri":"http:\/\/www.nesstar.org\/rdf\/common"},{"topic":"housing [10.1]","vocab":"CESSDA","uri":"http:\/\/www.nesstar.org\/rdf\/common"},{"topic":"EDUCATION [6]","vocab":"CESSDA","uri":"http:\/\/www.nesstar.org\/rdf\/common"}],"abstract":"The Survey was undertaken with the purpose to provide up-to-date information for assessing the situation of children and women in the Lao PDR; to furnish data needed for monitoring progress toward goals established in the Millennium Declaration, the goals of A World Fit For Children (WFFC), and other internationally agreed upon goals, as a basis for future action; and to contribute to the improvement of data and monitoring systems in the Lao PDR and to strengthen technical expertise in the design, implementation, and analysis of such systems. \n\nThe survey results will serve as the baseline information for state and government policy and programming towards improving the health and life conditions of children and women. In addition, we believe that the survey will provide key sources and reference information for researchers and academics to conduct in-depth analysis and research studies in specific areas.","coll_dates":[{"start":"2006-03","end":"2006-06","cycle":""}],"nation":[{"name":"Lao People's Democratic Republic","abbreviation":"LAO"}],"geog_coverage":"National Urban\/Rural Three Regions: North, Central, South With road access\/without road access","geog_unit":"Lao PDR Northern Lao Central Lao Southern Lao","analysis_unit":"- Households\n- Children\n- Women","universe":"All private households in Lao PDR.","data_kind":"Sample survey data [ssd]","notes":"The Household Questionnaire included the following modules: \no Household List \no Education \no Water and Sanitation \no Household Characteristics \no Malaria-related questions \no Child Labour \no Child Discipline \no Disability \no Salt Iodization \n\nThe Questionnaire for Individual Women was administered to all women aged 15-49 years living in the households, and included the following modules: \no Pregnancy \no Tetanus Toxoid \no Maternal and Newborn Health \no Attitudes Towards Domestic Violence \no Anthropometry \no Specimen Collection for Analysis \n\nThe Questionnaire for Children under five years old was administered to mothers or caretakers of children under 5 years of age1 living in the households. Normally, the questionnaire was administered to mothers of under-5 children; in cases when the mother was not listed in the household roster, a primary caretaker for the child was identified and interviewed. The questionnaire included the following modules: \no Birth Registration and Early Learning \no Child Development \no Vitamin A \no Breastfeeding \no Care of Child Illness \no Malaria among Under Five \no Immunization \no Anthropometry \no Sample Collection from Children"},"method":{"data_collection":{"data_collectors":[{"name":"Lao Statistics Bureau","abbr":"LSB","role":"","affiliation":"Ministry of Planning and Investment"},{"name":"Ministry of Health","abbr":"MOH","role":"","affiliation":""}],"sampling_procedure":"The sample size needed for each region was 2,000 households - thus yielding about 6,000 in total. The average cluster size in the Lao MICS was determined as 20 households, based on a number of considerations, including the budget available, and the time that would be needed per team to complete one cluster. Dividing the total number of households by the number of households per cluster, it was calculated that the selection of a total number of 100 clusters would be needed in each region. \n\nEqual allocation of the total sample size to the three regions was targeted. Therefore, 100 clusters were allocated to each region, with the final sample size calculated at 6,000 households (100 clusters * 3 regions * 20 households per cluster). In each region, the clusters (primary sampling units) were distributed to urban and rural with road access and without road access domains, proportional to the size of urban and rural with road access and without road access populations in that region. The table below shows the allocation of clusters to the sampling domains.","coll_mode":["Face-to-face [f2f]"],"research_instrument":"The Household Questionnaire included the following modules: \no Household List \no Education \no Water and Sanitation \no Household Characteristics \no Malaria-related questions \no Child Labour \no Child Discipline \no Disability \no Salt Iodization \n\nThe Questionnaire for Individual Women was administered to all women aged 15-49 years living in the households, and included the following modules: \no Pregnancy \no Tetanus Toxoid \no Maternal and Newborn Health \no Attitudes Towards Domestic Violence \no Anthropometry \no Specimen Collection for Analysis \n\nThe Questionnaire for Children under five years old was administered to mothers or caretakers of children under 5 years of age1 living in the households. Normally, the questionnaire was administered to mothers of under-5 children; in cases when the mother was not listed in the household roster, a primary caretaker for the child was identified and interviewed. The questionnaire included the following modules: \no Birth Registration and Early Learning \no Child Development \no Vitamin A \no Breastfeeding \no Care of Child Illness \no Malaria among Under Five \no Immunization \no Anthropometry \no Sample Collection from Children \n\nThe questionnaires are based on the MICS3 model questionnaire2. From the MICS3 model English version, the questionnaires weretranslated into Lao language and were pre-tested in four villages of Vientiane Capital during January 2006. Based on the results of the pre-test, modifications were made to the wording and translation of the questionnaires. A copy of the Lao PDR MICS questionnaires is provided in Appendix F. \n\nIn addition to the administration of questionnaires, fieldwork teams tested the salt used for cooking in the households for iodine content, and measured the weights and heights of children aged under 5 years.","sources":[{"name":"","origin":"","characteristics":""}],"act_min":"The data were collected by nine teams; each was comprised of four interviewers, one driver, one laboratory technician, one editor\/measurer and a supervisor. Fieldwork began in March 2006 and concluded in June 2006.","weight":"Please refer to the section \"Calculation of Sample Weights\" in Appendix A of the MICS III Final Report found in the technical documents."},"method_notes":"Data were entered using the CSPro software. The data were entered on 14 microcomputers and carried out by 14 data entry operators and four data entry supervisors. In order to ensure quality control, all questionnaires were double entered and internal consistency checks were performed. Procedures and standard programs developed under the global MICS3 project and adapted to the Lao PDR questionnaire were used throughout. Data processing began simultaneously with data collection in May 2006 and was completed in August 2006. Data were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software program, Version 14, and the model syntax and tabulation plans developed by UNICEF for this purpose.","analysis_info":{"response_rate":"Of the 5,995 households selected for the sample, 5,991 were found to be occupied. Of these, 5,894 were successfully interviewed for a household response rate of 98.4 percent. In the interviewed households, 7,703 women (age 15-49) were identified. Of these, 7,387 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 95.9 percent. In addition, 4,204 children under age five were listed in the household questionnaire. Questionnaires were completed for 4,136 of these children, which corresponds to a response rate of 98.4 percent. Overall response rates of 94.3 and 96.8 are calculated for the women's and under-5's interviews respectively (Table HH.1). Response rates were similar across all regions and areas.","sampling_error_estimates":"The sample of respondents selected in the Lao PDR Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey is only one of the samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. The extent of variability is not known exactly, but can be estimated statistically from the survey results.\n\nThe following sampling error measures are presented in this appendix for each of the selected indicators:\n\n\tStandard error (se): Sampling errors are usually measured in terms of standard errors for particular indicators (means, proportions etc). Standard error is the square root of the variance.  The Taylor linearization method is used for the estimation of standard errors.\n\tCoefficient of variation (se\/r) is the ratio of the standard error to the value of the indicator\n\tDesign effect (deff) is the ratio of the actual variance of an indicator, under the sampling method used in the survey, to the variance calculated under the assumption of simple random sampling. The square root of the design effect (deft) is used to show the efficiency of the sample design. A deft value of 1.0 indicates that the sample design is as efficient as a simple random sample, while a deft value above 1.0 indicates the increase in the standard error due to the use of a more complex sample design.\n\tConfidence limits are calculated to show the interval within which the true value for the population can be reasonably assumed to fall. For any given statistic calculated from the survey, the value of that statistics will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error (p + 2.se or p - 2.se) of the statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design. \n\nFor the calculation of sampling errors from MICS data, SPSS Version 14 Complex Samples module has been used. The results are shown in the tables that follow. In addition to the sampling error measures described above, the tables also include weighted and unweighted counts of denominators for each indicator. \n\nSampling errors are calculated for indicators of primary interest, for the national total, for the regions, and for urban, rural with road access and rural without road access areas. Two of the selected indicators are based on households, 7 are based on household members, 3 are based on women, and 15 are based on children under 5. All indicators presented here are in the form of proportions. Table SE.1 shows the list of indicators for which sampling errors are calculated, including the base population (denominator) for each indicator. Tables SE.2 to SE.9 show the calculated sampling errors."}},"data_access":{"dataset_use":{"conf_dec":[{"txt":"The Statistics Law of Lao PDR guarantees that identities of respondents are kept confidential.\n\nBefore being granted access to the dataset, all users have to formally agree: \n1. To make no copies of any files or portions of files to which s\/he is granted access except those authorized by the data depositor. \n2. Not to use any technique in an attempt to learn the identity of any person, establishment, or sampling unit not identified on public use data files. \n3. To hold in strictest confidence the identification of any establishment or individual that may be inadvertently revealed in any documents or discussion, or analysis. Such inadvertent identification revealed in her\/his analysis will be immediately brought to the attention of the data depositor.","required":"yes","form_no":"","form_uri":""}],"contact":[{"name":"Director General","affiliation":"Lao Statistics Bureau","email":"","uri":"https:\/\/www.lsb.gov.la"}],"cit_req":"Lao Statistics Bureau and UNICEF, 2008. Lao PDR Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006, Final Report. Vientiane, Lao PDR: Lao Statistics Bureau and UNICEF.","conditions":"The dataset has been anonymized and is available as a Public Use Dataset. It is  accessible to all for statistical and research purposes only, under the following terms and conditions:\n1. The data and other materials will not be redistributed or sold to other individuals, institutions, or organizations without the written agreement of the Lao Statistics Bureau. \n2. The data will be used for statistical and scientific research purposes only. They will be used solely for reporting of aggregated information, and not for investigation of specific individuals or organizations. \n3. No attempt will be made to re-identify respondents, and no use will be made of the identity of any person or establishment discovered inadvertently. Any such discovery would immediately be reported to the Lao Statistics Bureau. \n4. No attempt will be made to produce links among datasets provided by the Lao Statistics Bureau, or among data from the Lao Statistics Bureau and other datasets that could identify individuals or organizations. \n5. Any books, articles, conference papers, theses, dissertations, reports, or other publications that employ data obtained from the Lao Statistics Bureau will cite the source of data in accordance with the Citation Requirement provided with each dataset. \n6. An electronic copy of all reports and publications based on the requested data will be sent to the Lao Statistics Bureau. \n\nThe Lao Statistics Bureau, the Ministry of Health, and the relevant funding agencies bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.","disclaimer":"The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses."}}},"schematype":"survey"}