1 / 15

The Cognitive Survey for Mauritius – test and results

This study presents the results of the cognitive survey conducted in Mauritius in April 2006, including sample size, questionnaire used, selection criteria, and respondent profiles.

lhalpin
Download Presentation

The Cognitive Survey for Mauritius – test and results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Cognitive Survey for Mauritius – test and results Presented by: Mr Chettun Kumar ARIANAICK Statistician

  2. The Cognitive survey • The survey was conducted in April 2006 • The sample size was 24 • The questionnaire provided by Washington Group was used except that the 2000 population census question on disability was added • The questionnaire was translated in creole, a local language • Three interviewers and one supervisor was required for the fieldwork • I had the overall responsibility for the survey including the fieldwork

  3. The sample frame • The sample frame used was the 2000 Housing and Population Census data • The population census records with at least one person with disabilities within the household were merged with the corresponding housing census records in order to obtain the geographical location of the household

  4. Selection criteria • Given that around 40% of the population lives in rural areas, out of the 3 regions selected one was urban • The selection was done in such a way as to cover the wide spectrum of disability as well as to be representative of age and sex distribution of the population

  5. Locating the respondents • Each interviewer was provided with a list of 8 respondents • The list had the following information: the names of the head of household, the address and the hh size together with the age, sex and type of disability of the person with disabilities • The interviewers reported having no problem identifying the person with disabilities within the household • 25 % of respondents could not be contacted and were replaced

  6. The interviews • The interviewer filled in the section asking for the list of persons in the household first in order to locate the respondent • The interviewer then went through the questionnaire, asking the questions as they appear, i.e, asking questions about the respondent himself/herself and then again about another member in the household (proxy) • Each interview lasted around one hour

  7. Data processing • The completed questionnaires were edited by the interviewer, the supervisor as well as by myself in the office • The edited questionnaires were entered on the excel worksheet provided by Washington Group

  8. Answers to the core question on ability to communicate (TSCOMM/TPCOMM) • Out of the 24 respondents, 16 reported as having difficulty communicating • Only one proxy respondent had difficulty communicating • Among the 16 respondents having difficulty communicating, the detailed breakdown was: some diff – 6; lots of diff – 9; cannot do at all – 1

  9. Answers to the question: Why did you answer that way? • Answer 0: No communication problem – 8 • Answer 1: People need to repeat/ nerve problems/ forget things quickly - 6 • Answer 2: • Deaf/dumb/uses sign language/diff. communicating - 6 • Weak following dialysis/ Not talk too much - 1 • Mental problems ( helped by other persons) - 2 • Answer 3: I am handicapped (suffers from acute epilepsy)- 1 Total 24

  10. Comparing responses to TSDIFF and TSEFF for respondents who reported having difficulty communicating in core question

  11. Comparing responses to TSSAY and TSCONVO for respondents who reported having difficulty communicating in core question

  12. Correlation matrix

  13. Respondent No 21 Profile Age 28 yrs Sex – male Education – 6 years Not working – health reasons Never married Low income group Has vision problem Had hand surgery and two screws inserted in his hand Refrains from going out because of operation Respondent No 23 Profile Age 52 yrs Sex – male Education – 6 years Own account worker Married Low income group Has vision/ hearing/cognitive/self care problems Had a motorcycle accident Uses crutches I forget quickly. My wife complains on this issue Problematic responses: Yes to core question and no to extended questions (pattern N)

  14. Relation between response patterns and demographic/socio-economic characteristics of respondents • In order to simplify analysis, the response patterns have been categorised into three groups – good, fair and bad • Given the small sample size, test for association between response pattern and demographic/socio-economic characteristics could not be undertaken given the presence of cells with frequency less than 5

  15. Thank you for your attention

More Related