TANZANIA-COGNITIVE TEST RESULTS

1. TANZANIA-COGNITIVE TEST RESULTS QUESTIONS ON HEARING By. Ms. Albina Chuwa October, 2006

2. How was the Pre-test was Done • Pre-test started in August/September 2006 • We received a consultant from WG to assist us on the preparations of the Cognitive test • We also received training and interview instructions from Miller – Washington Group expert.

3. How was the Pre-test was Done • Recruitment of the Interviewers: • Four experienced Statistician from National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) did the interview • Main stakeholder (Ministry of Health and Social Welfare) was first contacted to provide initial information about all institutions dealing people with disability

4. How was the Pre-test was Done • Training: • Took 4 hours CD obtained from Miller was used together with inputs from consultant • Mock interview was done among trainees this was to ensure the questions understood well before carrying the actual pre-test

5. Selection of the Respondents • A random purposive sample of 25 respondents were drawn from institutions dealing with people with disability and private households. • For each interview, there were two recordings (Self-report and Proxy – report)

6. How was Data Collection Done • Each interviewer was provided with enough questionnaire • Consultant was observing the interview although the questionnaire was not translated into Kiswahili.

7. How was Data Collection Done • Official letter from Director General and information about the whole pre-test was sent to respondents prior to the data collection • Interpreter was used for two respondents with hearing impairment

8. How was Data Collection Done • Data collections took about three days • Each interview took about one hour. Much time was taken for those respondents who had hearing impairments.

9. Data Processing • Data processing was done simultaneously with data collection • Data entry was done using WG Format – EXCEL. • Raw data was sent to WG

10. RESULTS

11. Figure 1.1: Distribution of Self-Report by Pattern - Hearing

13. Figure 1.2: Distribution of Proxy-Report by Pattern - Hearing

14. Discussions • Self – Report • Majority of the respondents reported no sign of impairment and reported no disability (72%) • Respondents showed clear impairment and reported disability (12%)

15. Self- report • Respondents did not report disability but admits some functioning problems; and this accounted for four percent • We have noted that pattern “D” many respondents reported conversation problems in the crowded room. This could happened to any person.

16. Discussion – Proxy -Report • 64 percent of proxy-reporting showed pattern “A” that no sign of impairment and reports no disability. • While • 16 percent of proxy-reporting showed clear impairment and reported disability.

17. Discussion – Proxy -Report • 20 percent of proxy-reporting showed that respondents did not report disability but admits some functioning problems like conversation in the crowded room.

18. General Comments on the WG Core Questions • Questions on hearing aid was not common in Tanzania. This type of questions could be captured if sample size was large enough. • To read categories to respondents would tend to bias results. This would be applicable for a country where literacy rate is very high

19. General Comments on the WG Core Questions • In Tanzania WG Core questions will be included in the Disability Pilot Survey that will be conducted in Tanzania 2006/07. • The actual disability survey will be done after success of the pilot test.

20. Remembering and Concentration Questions • Option of sometimes created confusions among respondents

21. END • Thank you for listening