Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits

This article describes a two-step calibration-weighting scheme for a stratified simple random sample of hospital emergency departments. The first step adjusts for unit nonresponse. The second increases the statistical efficiency of most estimators of interest. Both use a measure of emergency-departm...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kott Phillip S., Day C. Daniel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2014-09-01
Series:Journal of Official Statistics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0032
id doaj-44ba39c4d4674c0eabc25e223cff887a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-44ba39c4d4674c0eabc25e223cff887a2021-09-06T19:41:47ZengSciendoJournal of Official Statistics2001-73672014-09-0130352153210.2478/jos-2014-0032jos-2014-0032Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department VisitsKott Phillip S.0Day C. Daniel1RTI International, 6110 Executive Blvd., Rockville, MD 20852, U.S.ASubstance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville MD 20857, U.S.AThis article describes a two-step calibration-weighting scheme for a stratified simple random sample of hospital emergency departments. The first step adjusts for unit nonresponse. The second increases the statistical efficiency of most estimators of interest. Both use a measure of emergency-department size and other useful auxiliary variables contained in the sampling frame. Although many survey variables are roughly a linear function of the measure of size, response is better modeled as a function of the log of that measure. Consequently the log of size is a calibration variable in the nonresponse-adjustment step, while the measure of size itself is a calibration variable in the second calibration step. Nonlinear calibration procedures are employed in both steps. We show with 2010 DAWN data that estimating variances as if a one-step calibration weighting routine had been used when there were in fact two steps can, after appropriately adjusting the finite-population correct in some sense, produce standard-error estimates that tend to be slightly conservative.https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0032frame variableresponse modelprediction modelgeneral exponential modelfinite population correction
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kott Phillip S.
Day C. Daniel
spellingShingle Kott Phillip S.
Day C. Daniel
Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
Journal of Official Statistics
frame variable
response model
prediction model
general exponential model
finite population correction
author_facet Kott Phillip S.
Day C. Daniel
author_sort Kott Phillip S.
title Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
title_short Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
title_full Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
title_fullStr Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
title_full_unstemmed Developing Calibration Weights and Standard-Error Estimates for a Survey of Drug-Related Emergency-Department Visits
title_sort developing calibration weights and standard-error estimates for a survey of drug-related emergency-department visits
publisher Sciendo
series Journal of Official Statistics
issn 2001-7367
publishDate 2014-09-01
description This article describes a two-step calibration-weighting scheme for a stratified simple random sample of hospital emergency departments. The first step adjusts for unit nonresponse. The second increases the statistical efficiency of most estimators of interest. Both use a measure of emergency-department size and other useful auxiliary variables contained in the sampling frame. Although many survey variables are roughly a linear function of the measure of size, response is better modeled as a function of the log of that measure. Consequently the log of size is a calibration variable in the nonresponse-adjustment step, while the measure of size itself is a calibration variable in the second calibration step. Nonlinear calibration procedures are employed in both steps. We show with 2010 DAWN data that estimating variances as if a one-step calibration weighting routine had been used when there were in fact two steps can, after appropriately adjusting the finite-population correct in some sense, produce standard-error estimates that tend to be slightly conservative.
topic frame variable
response model
prediction model
general exponential model
finite population correction
url https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0032
work_keys_str_mv AT kottphillips developingcalibrationweightsandstandarderrorestimatesforasurveyofdrugrelatedemergencydepartmentvisits
AT daycdaniel developingcalibrationweightsandstandarderrorestimatesforasurveyofdrugrelatedemergencydepartmentvisits
_version_ 1717765431598514176