Comparison of complete and spatial sampling frames for estimation of the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Vasna Joshua, Kamaraj Pattabi, Yuvaraj Jeyaraman, Prabhdeep Kaur, Tarun Bhatnagar, Suresh Arunachalam, Sabarinathan Ramasamy, Venkateshprabhu Janagaraj, Manoj V Murhekar
{"title":"Comparison of complete and spatial sampling frames for estimation of the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus.","authors":"Vasna Joshua,&nbsp;Kamaraj Pattabi,&nbsp;Yuvaraj Jeyaraman,&nbsp;Prabhdeep Kaur,&nbsp;Tarun Bhatnagar,&nbsp;Suresh Arunachalam,&nbsp;Sabarinathan Ramasamy,&nbsp;Venkateshprabhu Janagaraj,&nbsp;Manoj V Murhekar","doi":"10.4081/gh.2022.1097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A complete sampling frame (CSF) is needed for the development of probability sampling structures; utilisation of a spatial sampling frame (SSF) was the objective of the present study. We used two sampling methods, simple random sampling (SRS) and stratified random sampling (STRS), to compare the prevalence estimates delivered by a CSF to that by a SSF when applied to self-reported hypertension and diabetes mellitus in a semi-urban setting and in a rural one. A CSF based on Geodatabase of all households and all individuals was available for our study that focused on adults aged 18-69 years in the two settings. A single digitized shapefile of solely household regions/structures as SSF was developed using Google Earth and employed for the study. The results from the two sampling frames were similar and not significantly different. All 95%CI calculations contained the prevalence rates of the two medical conditions except for one occasion based on STRS and CSF. The SRS based on CSF showed a minimum 95% CI width for diabetes mellitus, whereas SSF showed a minimum 95% CI width for hypertension. The coefficient of variation exceeded 10.0% on six occasions for CSF but only once for SSF, which was found to be as efficient as CSF.</p>","PeriodicalId":56260,"journal":{"name":"Geospatial Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geospatial Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/gh.2022.1097","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A complete sampling frame (CSF) is needed for the development of probability sampling structures; utilisation of a spatial sampling frame (SSF) was the objective of the present study. We used two sampling methods, simple random sampling (SRS) and stratified random sampling (STRS), to compare the prevalence estimates delivered by a CSF to that by a SSF when applied to self-reported hypertension and diabetes mellitus in a semi-urban setting and in a rural one. A CSF based on Geodatabase of all households and all individuals was available for our study that focused on adults aged 18-69 years in the two settings. A single digitized shapefile of solely household regions/structures as SSF was developed using Google Earth and employed for the study. The results from the two sampling frames were similar and not significantly different. All 95%CI calculations contained the prevalence rates of the two medical conditions except for one occasion based on STRS and CSF. The SRS based on CSF showed a minimum 95% CI width for diabetes mellitus, whereas SSF showed a minimum 95% CI width for hypertension. The coefficient of variation exceeded 10.0% on six occasions for CSF but only once for SSF, which was found to be as efficient as CSF.

估算高血压和糖尿病患病率的完整和空间抽样框架的比较。
开发概率抽样结构需要一个完整的抽样框架(CSF);利用空间采样帧(SSF)是本研究的目的。我们使用两种抽样方法,简单随机抽样(SRS)和分层随机抽样(STRS),来比较CSF和SSF在半城市环境和农村环境中对自我报告的高血压和糖尿病的患病率估计。基于所有家庭和个人地理数据库的CSF可用于我们的研究,该研究的重点是两种环境中18-69岁的成年人。使用Google Earth开发了一个单独的家庭区域/结构的数字化形状文件,作为SSF,并用于研究。两个采样帧的结果相似,没有显著差异。除了基于STRS和CSF的一种情况外,所有95%CI计算都包含这两种疾病的患病率。基于脑脊液的SRS显示糖尿病的最小95% CI宽度,而SSF显示高血压的最小95% CI宽度。CSF有6次变异系数超过10.0%,而SSF只有1次变异系数超过10.0%,SSF与CSF一样有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geospatial Health
Geospatial Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
48
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The focus of the journal is on all aspects of the application of geographical information systems, remote sensing, global positioning systems, spatial statistics and other geospatial tools in human and veterinary health. The journal publishes two issues per year.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信