Cell Phone Sampling in Kentucky Health SurveyPresentation Transcript
Reflecting the Community: Demographic Variations in Landline and Cell-OnlyHouseholds for a Statewide Telephone Survey Sarah Walsh, MPH, CHES, Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky Jennifer Chubinski, MS, The Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnati Michelle Vargas, Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati Eric Rademacher, PhD, Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati
Presenter DisclosuresThe following personal financialrelationships with commercial interestsrelevant to this presentation existedduring the past 12 months: NO RELATIONSHIPS TO DISCLOSE.
Kentucky Health Issues Poll (KHIP)• Questions vary by year, but include: – Health status – Socioeconomic variables – Public opinion on health related topics• KHIP gives policymakers and advocates valuable data for keeping health on the public agenda.
KHIP Methodology• Conducted annually, since 2008• Random Digit Dial Telephone survey (RDD) – Cell phone sampling started 2009• Data collection done by the Institute for Policy Research (IPR) at the University of Cincinnati• Analysis done by Foundation staff
KHIP sample over time 1,632 landline interviews2008 January 16-February 11, 2008 1,464 landline; 205 cell-only interviews 2009 October 8-November 6, 2009 1,469 landline; 208 cell-only interviews 2010 December 3-22 and 27-28, 2010 ≈ 1,200 landline; ≈ 300 cell any 2011 interviews September 27-present
Cell-only Households, 2009-2010Blumberg SJ, Luke JV, Ganesh N, et al. Wireless substitution: State-level estimates from the National Health InterviewSurvey, January 2007-June 2010. National health statistics reports; no 39. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for HealthStatistics. 2011. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.html
Why Cell?• KY high cell-only state• Vulnerable populations and more likely cell phone-only users important to our mission – Low-income – Minority – Young adults• More reliable sample of population
Results (unweighted)• Cell phone sample increased size (as compared to a landline only sample) of: – Minority (races not white, and Hispanic) ≈ 1% – **Young adults ≈3-4% – Men ≈2% – Low-income adults (under 100 and 200% FPG) ≈1% – Uninsured ≈2% ** strongest effect
2009 Results Weighted Weighted Landline Only Combined Sample Currently Uninsured 28.0% 27.5%Uninsured in Past Year 31.5% 31.7% Below 100% FPL 27.1% 26.4% Below 200% FPL 47.4% 47.3%
2010 Results Weighted Weighted Landline Only Combined Sample Currently Uninsured 21.3% 22.5%Uninsured in Past Year 29.8% 31.6% Below 100% FPL 23.6% 24.7% Below 200% FPL 48.1% 49.1%
Results (weighted)• Most differences lost in weighting procedure – Weights based on 2008 American Community Survey (ACS) – Sample weighted on age, race, sex, education, regional distribution, number of adults and phone lines in the household.• HOWEVER, the cell phone sample reduced the magnitude of the weights
Lessons Learned- KHIP 2011• Cell sampling changed from cell only to cell mostly• Larger percentage of cell phones• Larger cost with cell sampling, but cost is going down – Previously 5x a landline response – Currently 3x a landline response
Draw your own conclusions• Raw data available in free statistical portal – Online Analysis and Statistical Information System (OASIS) www.oasisdataarchive.org
Draw your own conclusions• Data available for mapping in free mapping portal- HealthLandscape www.healthlandscape.org
Questions?Sarah Walsh Jennifer ChubinskiSenior Program Officer, Local Director of CommunityData for Local Action Initiative Research(502) 326-2583 (513) email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org