Statistical and practical issues in the design of a national probability sample of births for the Vanguard Study of the National Children's Study

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 13, 2010, Pages 1368-1376

  Montaquila, Jill M ^a,b   Brick, J Michael ^a,b   Curtin, Lester R ^c  

^a WESTAT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS   (United States)

Author keywords

Area probability sample; Listing; Multistage sample; Primary sampling unit; Segment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH; CHILD HEALTH; HOUSEHOLD; HUMAN; ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE; PERINATAL PERIOD; PILOT STUDY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL PERIOD; PROBABILITY SAMPLE; CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; COHORT ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MATERNAL CARE; MATERNAL WELFARE; POSTNATAL CARE; PRENATAL CARE; PROCEDURES; UNITED STATES;

CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; COHORT STUDIES; DATA COLLECTION; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; MATERNAL WELFARE; PILOT PROJECTS; POSTNATAL CARE; PRECONCEPTION CARE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL CARE; SAMPLING STUDIES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77953175274     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3891     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Ellenberg JH, Hirschfeld S. Proceedings of 'The challenges and promises of a follow-up study of a randomly selected cohort of 100 000 pre and post conception women and their offspring through 21 years of life: Design, implementation and analysis issues of the National Children's Study': forward and study update. Statistics in Medicine 2010; this issue.
2. Michael RT, O'Muircheartaigh CA. Design priorities and disciplinary perspectives: the case of the US National Children's Study. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 2008; 171(2):465-480.
3. Westat. Sampling strategies for the proposed National Children's Study. Report prepared for the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 25 October 2002.
4. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized Linear Models. Chapman & Hall: New York, 1989.
5. Korn EL, Graubard BI. Analysis of Health Surveys. Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, 1999.
6. Curtin LR, Feinleib M. Considerations in the design of longitudinal surveys of health. In Statistical Models for Longitudinal Studies of Health, Chapter 2. Dwyer JH, Feinleib M, Lippert P, Hoffmeister H (eds). Oxford University Press: New York, 1992; 49-87.
7. O'Muircheartaigh C, Eckman S, Weiss C. Traditional and enhanced field listing for probability sampling. Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association, Alexandria, Virginia, 2002; 2563-2567.
8. Iannacchione VG, Staab JM, Redden DT. Evaluating the use of residential mailing addresses in a metropolitan household survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 2003; 67:202-210.
9. Dohrmann S, Han D, Mohadjer L. Residential address lists versus traditional listing: enumerating households and group quarters. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, Alexandria, Virginia, 2006; 2959-2964.
10. O'Muircheartaigh C, English N, Eckman S, Upchurch H, Garcia E, Lepkowski J. Validating a sampling revolution: benchmarking address lists against traditional listing. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, Alexandria, Virginia, 2006; 4189-4196.
11. Johnson B, Montaquila J, Heller A. An automated procedure for forming contiguous sampling units for area probability samples. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, Alexandria, Virginia, 2007.