A not quite as quick but much cleaner alternative to the expanded programme on immunization (EPI) cluster survey design
A not quite as quick but much cleaner alternative to the expanded programme on immunization (EPI) cluster survey design
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/ije/25.1.198
复制
发表时间：
1996-02-01
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
Shuaib, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Turner, AG;Magnani, RJ;Shuaib, M
背景。尽管扩大免疫规划 (EPI) 整群调查方法已成功用于评估发展中国家的免疫规划覆盖水平，但该方法的某些特征（如通常执行的 ii）使其成为大型全国性调查和/或具有多个测量目标的调查的最佳选择。我们需要的是严格的整群抽样方法和 EPI 整群调查方法之间的“中间地带”。严格的整群抽样方法被认为在许多发展中国家常规使用是不可行的。本文建议对基本 EPI 集群调查设计进行一些相当简单的修改，使其建立在坚实的概率基础上，并使其能够轻松适应不同和/或多个测量目标，而不会产生过高的成本或明显增加调查操作的复杂性。拟议的修改主要涉及样本选择第二阶段选择住户的方式。结论。由于修改后的抽样策略保持了传统整群抽样方法的科学严谨性，同时保留了 EPI 调查方法的许多理想特征，因此该方法可能是首选的“中间立场”调查设计，与许多应用相关，特别是旨在随时间监测多种健康指标的调查。修改后设计中的实地工作负担仅略高于 EPI 整群调查，并且远低于传统整群调查。
Background. Although the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) cluster survey methodology has been successfully used for assessing levels of immunization programme coverage in developing country settings, certain features of the methodology, as ii is usually carried out, make it a less-than-optimal choice for large, national surveys and/or surveys with multiple measurement objectives. What is needed is a 'middle ground' between rigorous cluster sampling methods, which are seen as unfeasible for routine use in many developing country settings, and the EPI cluster survey approach.Methods. This article suggests some fairly straightforward modifications to the basic EPI cluster survey design that put it on a solid probability footing and render it easily adaptable to differing and/or multiple measurement objectives, without incurring prohibitive costs or adding appreciably to the complexity of survey operations. The proposed modifications concern primarily the manner in which households are chosen at the second stage of sample selection.Conclusions. Because the modified sampling strategy maintains the scientific rigor of conventional cluster sampling methods while retaining many of the desirable features of the EPI survey methodology, the methodology is likely to be a preferred 'middle ground' survey design, relevant for many applications, particularly surveys designed to monitor multiple health indicators over time, The fieldwork burden in the modified design is only marginally higher than in EPI cluster surveys, and considerably lower than in conventional cluster surveys.