Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Macintyre, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Macintyre, K.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Policy and Planning; 14(4): 363-373
© Oxford University Press 1999

Rapid assessment and sample surveys: trade-offs in precision and cost

Kate Macintyre

Department of International Health and Development, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA

Health policies in many developing countries are increasingly designed and evaluated by data collected using household surveys. This trend is closely associated with three factors: the increasing complexity of health systems, the increase in pressure for better accountability and improved health system management, and the continuing existence of poorly maintained vital statistics systems. But national household- or individual-level surveys are expensive. These factors have, unsurprisingly, coincided with an increase in the use of rapid survey methods. Although rapid methods have been used frequently, few studies have tested the quality of data obtained by them, and none have compared the cost of the rapid surveys with non-rapid surveys in a developing country context. This paper presents the trade-offs in cost and quality of information obtained from a rapid assessment survey in Ecuador.

The results from the rapid survey were compared with results obtained from a national survey conducted six months earlier. The objective was to see what alternative policies might be arrived at if the data from the rapid survey were used in place of the large survey. In addition, the relative costs of obtaining that information were measured. Results indicate that the majority of demographic and contraceptive use measures are similar between the two surveys. The rapid survey was three times as cost-efficient as the traditional survey, if relative bias is not taken into account. However, there appears to be selection bias in the choice of households, which distorts the probability of predicting contraceptive use by residence, and makes it appear that rural women are as likely to use contraception as their counterparts in urban Ecuador. This result has implications for the credibility of rapid surveys, and suggests that their use needs to be tailored for particular programmes and policies, and overseen with, at least, a modicum of statistical caution.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Asia Pac J Public HealthHome page
E. Pepall, R.W. James, and J. Earnest
Guidelines for Conducting Rapid Participatory Appraisals of Community Health Needs in Developing Countries: Experience from Tulikup, Bali
Asia Pac J Public Health, September 1, 2006; 18(3): 42 - 48.
[PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.