IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v47y2022i4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring contraceptive use in India: Implications of recent fieldwork design and implementation of the National Family Health Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Kaushalendra Kumar

    (International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS))

  • Abhishek Singh

    (International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS))

  • Amy Tsui

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

Abstract

Background: India’s National Family Health Surveys (NFHS) have provided critical population-level data to inform public policy and research. Although fertility declined, NFHS-4 (2015–2016) reported lower modern contraceptive and female sterilization use compared with NFHS-3 (2005–2006). Objective: This study assesses selected survey design and interviewer factors’ influences on respondent reporting of modern contraceptive and female sterilization use. Methods: With data on 582,144 married childbearing-aged females, the analysis pursues multivariable logistic models of both outcomes using survey covariates, assesses interviewer deviance residuals, and estimates multi-level cross-classified random intercept models for state, cluster and interviewer effects. Results: Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for reporting modern use in NFHS-4 versus NFHS-3 were 1.21 (1.17–1.26) and 1.66 (1.59–1.74) for sterilization. The AOR for each interview month after survey launch was 1.16 (1.15–1.17) for modern use and 1.18 (1.16–1.19) for sterilization. The AOR for respondents interviewed in the first versus second survey phase was 1.35 (1.30–1.40) for modern methods and 1.12 (1.07–1.17) for female sterilization. Interviewer deviance residuals for both contraceptive outcomes were larger in NFHS-4 than NFHS-3. Eliminating problematic interviews raised modern use 2.0% points and sterilization 1.3% points. Larger state, community cluster and interviewer effects were observed for NFHS-4 versus NFHS-3. Conclusions: The five-fold expansion of NFHS-4’s sample likely challenged pre-existing survey protocols and may have lowered modern method use by up to 6% points and female sterilization by 2% points. Contribution: The roles of survey fieldwork and interviewers, as sources of measurement error, are important to consider when interpreting change observed in cross-sectional estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaushalendra Kumar & Abhishek Singh & Amy Tsui, 2022. "Measuring contraceptive use in India: Implications of recent fieldwork design and implementation of the National Family Health Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(4), pages 73-110.
  • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:47:y:2022:i:4
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2022.47.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol47/4/47-4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2022.47.4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susan Godlonton & Manuel A. Hernandez & Mike Murphy, 2016. "Anchoring Bias in Recall Data: Evidence from Central America," Department of Economics Working Papers 2016-11, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    2. Abigail R Greenleaf & Aliou Gadiaga & Georges Guiella & Shani Turke & Noelle Battle & Saifuddin Ahmed & Caroline Moreau, 2020. "Comparability of modern contraceptive use estimates between a face-to-face survey and a cellphone survey among women in Burkina Faso," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Simona Bignami & Georges Reniers & Alexander A. Weinreb, 2003. "An Assessment of the KDICP and MDICP Data Quality," Demographic Research Special Collections, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 1(2), pages 31-76.
    4. Susan Godlonton & Manuel A Hernandez & Mike Murphy, 2018. "Anchoring Bias in Recall Data: Evidence from Central America," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 479-501.
    5. Jayanta Kumar Bora & Nandita Saikia, 2018. "Neonatal and under-five mortality rate in Indian districts with reference to Sustainable Development Goal 3: An analysis of the National Family Health Survey of India (NFHS), 2015–2016," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francisco Ceballos & Manuel A. Hernandez & Cynthia Paz, 2021. "Short‐term impacts of COVID‐19 on food security and nutrition in rural Guatemala: Phone‐based farm household survey evidence," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(3), pages 477-494, May.
    2. Dang, Hai-Anh H & Carletto, Calogero, 2022. "Recall Bias Revisited: Measure Farm Labor Using Mixed-Mode Surveys and Multiple Imputation," IZA Discussion Papers 14997, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Hossain, Marup & Mullally, Conner & Mabiso, Athur, 2024. "Occupational and asset adjustments in Tamil Nadu, India: The role of a finance and rebuilding program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    4. Ye, Xiaoyang & Zhai, Muxin & Feng, Li & Xie, A’na & Wang, Weimin & Wu, Hongbin, 2022. "Still want to be a doctor? Medical student dropout in the era of COVID-19," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 122-139.
    5. Rao, Lakshman Nagraj & Gentile, Elisabetta & Pipon, Dave & Roque, Jude David & Thuy, Vu Thi Thu, 2020. "The impact of computer-assisted personal interviewing on survey duration, quality, and cost: Evidence from the Viet Nam Labor Force Survey," GLO Discussion Paper Series 605, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    6. Mustapha Alhassan & Christopher R. Gustafson & Karina Schoengold, 2022. "Effects of information on smallholder irrigation farmers’ willingness to pay for groundwater protection," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 191-203, March.
    7. José Pulido & Tomasz Swiecki, 2019. "Barriers to Mobility or Sorting? Sources and Aggregate Implications of Income Gaps across Sectors and Locations in Indonesia," 2019 Meeting Papers 1298, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    8. Delavallade, Clara & Godlonton, Susan, 2023. "Locking crops to unlock investment: Experimental evidence on warrantage in Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Arthi, Vellore & Beegle, Kathleen & De Weerdt, Joachim & Palacios-López, Amparo, 2018. "Not your average job: Measuring farm labor in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 160-172.
    10. Vasilaky, Kathryn & Harou, Aurélie & Alfredo, Katherine & Kapur, Ishita, 2023. "What works for water conservation? Evidence from a field experiment in India," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    11. Godlonton, Susan & Hernandez, Manuel A. & Paz, Cynthia, 2021. "Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi," IFPRI discussion papers 2055, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Teresa Molina Millán & Karen Macours, 2017. "Attrition in randomized control trials: Using tracking information to correct bias," FEUNL Working Paper Series novaf:wp1702, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    13. Jayanta Kumar Bora & Rajesh Raushan & Wolfgang Lutz, 2019. "The persistent influence of caste on under-five mortality: Factors that explain the caste-based gap in high focus Indian states," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Shelley Clark, 2010. "Extra-marital sexual partnerships and male friendships in rural Malawi," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 22(1), pages 1-28.
    15. Swati Dutta, 2022. "Risk factors for child survival among tribal dominated states in India: a pooled cross sectional analysis," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 391-416, September.
    16. Philip Anglewicz, 2012. "Migration, Marital Change, and HIV Infection in Malawi," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 49(1), pages 239-265, February.
    17. Alexander A. Weinreb & Guy Stecklov, 2009. "Social inequality and HIV-testing," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(21), pages 627-646.
    18. Molina Millán, Teresa & Macours, Karen, 2017. "Attrition in Randomized Control Trials: Using Tracking Information to Correct Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 10711, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Jethro Banda & Georges Reniers & Stephane Helleringer & Abena Amoah & Albert Dube & Sarah Brumfield & Amelia Crampin, 2021. "Knowledge, risk perceptions, and behaviors related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Malawi," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(20), pages 459-480.
    20. Shauni Van Doren & David De Coninck & Kirsten Hermans & Anja Declercq, 2021. "Examining Care Assessment Scores of Community-Dwelling Adults in Flanders, Belgium: The Role of Socio-Psychological and Assessor-Related Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-19, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    population survey; contraceptive use; measurement; survey design;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:47:y:2022:i:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.