Adjusting National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey sample weights for women of childbearing age.

Q1 Mathematics
Jennifer Parker, Amy Branum, Daniel Axelrad, Jonathan Cohen
{"title":"Adjusting National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey sample weights for women of childbearing age.","authors":"Jennifer Parker,&nbsp;Amy Branum,&nbsp;Daniel Axelrad,&nbsp;Jonathan Cohen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Maternal risk factors have been tabulated for women of childbearing age using defined age ranges. However, statistics for factors strongly related to age may be overly influenced by values for the youngest and oldest women in a range, because pregnancies are most likely for ages 20-35.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This report evaluates adjustment methods, based on the probability of pregnancy, for calculating estimates of risk factors for women of childbearing age.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adjusted and unadjusted estimates for environmental and nutritional variables were calculated from the 1999-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for women aged 16-49. U.S. births were used to determine the probability of pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Adjusted and unadjusted estimates differed for some, but not all, examined variables. More marked differences were observed for the environmental variables compared with the nutritional variables. Adjusted estimates were within about 5% of the unadjusted estimates for the nutritional variables. Adjusted geometric means for lead and mercury were about 7%-10% lower, and for polychlorinated biphenyl (or PCB) about 25% lower, than their respective unadjusted geometric means. With few exceptions, different adjustment methods led to similar estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When calculating statistics for women of childbearing age, the decision to adjust for age or not to adjust appears to be more important than the choice of adjustment method. Although the results suggest only small differences among adjustment methods, approaches based on the NHANES design and sample weighting methodology may be the most robust for other applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":23577,"journal":{"name":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","volume":" 157","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Maternal risk factors have been tabulated for women of childbearing age using defined age ranges. However, statistics for factors strongly related to age may be overly influenced by values for the youngest and oldest women in a range, because pregnancies are most likely for ages 20-35.

Objective: This report evaluates adjustment methods, based on the probability of pregnancy, for calculating estimates of risk factors for women of childbearing age.

Methods: Adjusted and unadjusted estimates for environmental and nutritional variables were calculated from the 1999-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for women aged 16-49. U.S. births were used to determine the probability of pregnancy.

Results: Adjusted and unadjusted estimates differed for some, but not all, examined variables. More marked differences were observed for the environmental variables compared with the nutritional variables. Adjusted estimates were within about 5% of the unadjusted estimates for the nutritional variables. Adjusted geometric means for lead and mercury were about 7%-10% lower, and for polychlorinated biphenyl (or PCB) about 25% lower, than their respective unadjusted geometric means. With few exceptions, different adjustment methods led to similar estimates.

Conclusion: When calculating statistics for women of childbearing age, the decision to adjust for age or not to adjust appears to be more important than the choice of adjustment method. Although the results suggest only small differences among adjustment methods, approaches based on the NHANES design and sample weighting methodology may be the most robust for other applications.

调整全国育龄妇女健康与营养调查样本权重。
背景:已将育龄妇女的产妇危险因素按确定的年龄范围制成表格。然而,与年龄密切相关的因素的统计数据可能受到范围内最年轻和最年长妇女的值的过度影响,因为怀孕最有可能发生在20-35岁之间。目的:本报告评估了基于怀孕概率的调整方法,用于计算育龄妇女危险因素的估计。方法:根据1999-2008年16-49岁女性的国家健康与营养检查调查(NHANES)计算环境和营养变量的调整和未调整估计值。美国出生的婴儿被用来确定怀孕的概率。结果:调整和未调整的估计对于一些,但不是全部,检查变量不同。与营养变量相比,环境变量的差异更为显著。营养变量的调整估计值在未调整估计值的5%以内。调整后的铅和汞的几何均值比各自未调整的几何均值低约7%-10%,多氯联苯(PCB)的几何均值低约25%。除了少数例外,不同的调整方法导致类似的估计数。结论:在对育龄妇女进行统计时,是否进行年龄调整的决定似乎比调整方法的选择更重要。虽然结果表明调整方法之间只有很小的差异,但基于NHANES设计和样本加权方法的方法可能是其他应用中最稳健的。
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
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Studies of new statistical methodology including experimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, and contributions to statistical theory. Studies also include comparison of U.S. methodology with those of other countries.
×
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