Welcome to the Forum of ESRD Networks Website

Work Environment

Registered Nurses
For other uses, see Meteorological Administration. University of Oklahoma Press. With more than million hungry people, India has the largest number of hungry in the world. However, it excludes some small subpopulations that may have very different drug use patterns. This change is designed to improve the accuracy of estimates both for methamphetamine and for the misuse of stimulants that are likely to be available by prescription.

How can we help you?

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Home

Fulbright Program Designed to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries. Study Abroad The U. Department of State offers full scholarships for American high school students to study abroad. ECA Impact by State. Thank you to the U. The YALI application is now open! CBHSQ also makes confidential restricted-use data available in two ways.

In the R-DAS, data are not available for downloading, but estimates can be generated by State and other restricted variables that are specified by the data user. Estimates that are generated by the R-DAS do not require any further review for protection of respondent confidentiality.

More details on both of these programs are available at http: In these categories, hashish is included with marijuana, and crack is considered a form of cocaine. Inhalants include a variety of substances, such as nitrous oxide, amyl nitrite, cleaning fluids, gasoline, spray paint, other aerosol sprays, and glue. Respondents are asked to report use of inhalants to get high but not to report times when they accidentally inhaled a substance.

The four categories of prescription-type drugs pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives cover numerous medications that currently are or have been available by prescription. They also include drugs within these groupings that originally were prescription medications but currently may be manufactured and distributed illegally, such as methamphetamine, which is included under stimulants.

Respondents are asked to report only "nonmedical" use of these drugs, defined as use without a prescription of the individual's own or simply for the experience or feeling the drugs caused. Use of over-the-counter drugs and legitimate use of prescription drugs are not included. NSDUH reports combine the four prescription-type drug groups into a category referred to as "psychotherapeutics. Estimates of "illicit drug use" reported from NSDUH reflect the use of any of the nine drug categories listed above.

Below is a bar graph. Click here for the text describing this graph. Below is a line graph. The prevalence of past month cocaine use among youths aged 12 or 13 rounds to less than 0.

Sample sizes for American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders, and persons of two or more races were too small for reliable trend presentation for these groups.

Below is a pie graph. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health NSDUH includes questions about the recency and frequency of consumption of alcoholic beverages, such as beer, wine, whiskey, brandy, and mixed drinks. A "drink" is defined as a can or bottle of beer, a glass of wine or a wine cooler, a shot of liquor, or a mixed drink with liquor in it.

Times when the respondent only had a sip or two from a drink are not considered to be consumption. For this report, estimates for the prevalence of alcohol use are reported primarily at three levels defined for both males and females and for all ages as follows:. These levels are not mutually exclusive categories of use; heavy use is included in estimates of binge and current use, and binge use is included in estimates of current use.

This chapter is divided into two main sections. These persons are under the legal drinking age in all 50 States and the District of Columbia. The past month binge alcohol use estimate for 12 or 13 year olds was 0. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health NSDUH includes a series of questions about the use of tobacco products, including cigarettes, chewing tobacco, snuff, cigars, and pipe tobacco.

Cigarette use is defined as smoking "part or all of a cigarette. Estimates of substance use initiation also known as incidence or first-time use are often considered leading indicators that can be used to assess the volume of new users by drug or drug category, track emerging patterns of use, and forecast the associated treatment needs in various population subgroups. These estimates can also be useful to target prevention efforts and evaluate prevention programs. Recent initiates are defined as those who reported use of a particular substance for the first time within 12 months preceding the date of interview.

There is a caveat to the past year initiation measure worth mentioning. Because survey respondents are aged 12 or older, the past year initiation estimates reflect only a portion of the initiation that occurred at age 11 and none of the initiation that occurred at age 10 or younger.

This underestimation primarily affects estimates of initiation for cigarettes, alcohol, and inhalants because they tend to be initiated at a younger age than other substances. This chapter includes estimates of the number and rate of past year initiation of illicit drug, tobacco, and alcohol use among the total population aged 12 or older and by selected age and gender categories from the NSDUH, comparing with prior years. Also included are initiation estimates that pertain to persons at risk for initiation.

Persons at risk for initiation of use of a particular substance are those who never used the substance in their lifetime plus those who used that substance for the first time in the 12 months prior to the interview. In other words, persons at risk are those who had never used as of 12 months prior to the interview date.

Some analyses are based on the age at the time of interview, and others focus on the age at the time of first substance use. Readers need to be aware of these alternative estimation approaches when interpreting NSDUH incidence estimates and pay close attention to the approach used in each situation. Titles and notes on figures and associated detailed tables document which method applies.

For trend measurement, initiation estimates for each year to are produced independently based on the data from the survey conducted that year. Regarding the age at first use estimates, means, as measures of central tendency, are heavily influenced by the presence of extreme values in the data for persons aged 12 or older. Including data from initiates aged 26 to 49 in this broad age group also can cause instability of estimates of the mean age at initiation among persons aged 12 to 49, but this effect is less than that of including data from initiates aged 50 or older.

Nevertheless, caution is needed in interpreting these trends for persons aged 12 to Note, however, that this constraint affects only the estimates of mean age at initiation. Other estimates in this chapter, including the numbers and percentages of past year initiates, are not affected by extreme ages at initiation and therefore are reported for all persons aged 12 or older.

Another important consideration in examining incidence estimates across different drug categories is that substance users typically initiate use of different substances at different times in their lives.

Thus, the estimates for past year initiation of each specific illicit drug cannot be added to obtain the total number of overall illicit drug initiates because some of the initiates previously had used other drugs. The initiation estimate for any illicit drug represents the past year initiation of use of a specific drug that was not preceded by use of other illicit drugs.

For example, a respondent who reported initiating marijuana use in the past 12 months is counted as a marijuana initiate. The same respondent also can be counted as an illicit drug initiate with marijuana as the first drug only if his or her marijuana use initiation was not preceded by use of any other drug cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, or sedatives.

The first specific drug refers to the one that was used on the occasion of first-time use of any illicit drug. Numbers refer to persons who used a specific drug for the first time in the past year, regardless of whether initiation of other drug use occurred prior to the past year. Below is a stacked bar graph.

Interventions to prevent substance use generally are designed to ameliorate the influence of risk factors and enhance the effectiveness of protective factors. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health NSDUH includes questions for youths aged 12 to 17 to measure the risk and protective factors that may affect the likelihood that they will engage in substance use.

This chapter presents findings on youth prevention-related measures. Where applicable, findings from are compared with estimates from prior years since Included in this chapter are measures of the perceived risk of substance use cigarettes, alcohol, and specific illicit drugs , perceived availability of substances including being approached by someone selling drugs , perceived parental disapproval of youth substance use, attitudes about peer substance use, involvement in fighting and delinquent behavior, religious involvement and beliefs, exposure to substance use prevention messages and programs, and parental involvement.

Also presented are findings on the associations between selected measures of risk and protective factors and substance use from NSDUH. However, the cross-sectional nature of these data precludes making any causal connections between these risk and protective factors and substance use. One factor that can influence whether youths will use tobacco, alcohol, or illicit drugs is the extent to which they believe these substances might cause them harm.

NSDUH respondents were asked how much they thought people risk harming themselves physically and in other ways when they use various substances in certain amounts or frequencies.

Response choices for these items were "great risk," "moderate risk," "slight risk," or "no risk. Youths who were enrolled in school in the past year included those who were home schooled. Substances include alcohol and illicit drugs, such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, and the nonmedical use of prescription-type psychotherapeutic drugs.

The questions related to dependence ask about health and emotional problems associated with substance use, unsuccessful attempts to cut down on use, tolerance, withdrawal, reducing other activities to use substances, spending a lot of time engaging in activities related to substance use, or using the substance in greater quantities or for a longer time than intended.

Dependence is considered to be a more severe substance use problem than abuse because it involves the psychological and physiological effects of tolerance and withdrawal. This chapter provides estimates from the NSDUH of the prevalence and patterns of substance use disorders occurring in the past year and compares these estimates against the results from the through surveys.

It also provides estimates of the prevalence and patterns of the receipt of treatment in the past year for problems related to substance use. Note that the terms "substance use disorders," "substance dependence or abuse," and "alcohol or illicit drug dependence or abuse" are used interchangeably.

Due to rounding, the stacked bar totals may not add to the overall total. Estimates described in this section refer to treatment received for illicit drug or alcohol use, or for medical problems associated with the use of illicit drugs or alcohol. This includes treatment received in the past year at any location, such as a hospital inpatient , rehabilitation facility outpatient or inpatient , mental health center, emergency room, private doctor's office, prison or jail, or a self-help group, such as Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous.

Persons could report receiving treatment at more than one location. Specialty treatment includes treatment only at a hospital inpatient , a rehabilitation facility inpatient or outpatient , or a mental health center.

Individuals who reported receiving substance use treatment but were missing information on whether the treatment was specifically for alcohol use or illicit drug use were not counted in estimates of either illicit drug use treatment or alcohol use treatment; however, they were counted in estimates for "drug or alcohol use" treatment. This section discusses the need for and receipt of treatment for a substance use problem at a "specialty" treatment facility. Specialty treatment is defined as treatment received at any of the following types of facilities: It does not include treatment at an emergency room, private doctor's office, self-help group, prison or jail, or hospital as an outpatient.

An individual is defined as needing treatment for an alcohol or drug use problem if he or she met the DSM-IV APA, diagnostic criteria for alcohol or illicit drug dependence or abuse in the past 12 months or if he or she received specialty treatment for alcohol use or illicit drug use in the past 12 months. In this section, an individual needing treatment for an illicit drug use problem is defined as receiving treatment for his or her drug use problem only if he or she reported receiving specialty treatment for illicit drug use in the past year.

Thus, an individual who needed treatment for illicit drug use but received specialty treatment only for alcohol use in the past year or who received treatment for illicit drug use only at a facility not classified as a specialty facility was not counted as receiving treatment for illicit drug use. Similarly, an individual who needed treatment for an alcohol use problem was counted as receiving alcohol use treatment only if the treatment was received for alcohol use at a specialty treatment facility.

Individuals who reported receiving specialty substance use treatment but were missing information on whether the treatment was specifically for alcohol use or drug use were not counted in estimates of specialty drug use treatment or in estimates of specialty alcohol use treatment; however, they were counted in estimates for "drug or alcohol use" treatment. In addition to questions about symptoms of substance use problems that are used to classify respondents' need for treatment based on DSM-IV criteria, NSDUH includes questions asking respondents about their perceived need for treatment i.

In this report, estimates for perceived need for treatment are discussed only for persons who were classified as needing treatment based on DSM-IV criteria but did not receive treatment at a specialty facility. Similarly, estimates for whether a person made an effort to get treatment are discussed only for persons who felt the need for treatment and did not receive it. Previous chapters in this report presented findings from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health NSDUH that describe trends and demographic differences for the incidence and prevalence of use for a variety of substances.

In this chapter, comparisons are presented of NSDUH trend results with substance use results from other surveys of youths and young adults. As a result, the through estimates are not comparable with estimates from and earlier surveys. Therefore, the primary focus of this report is on comparisons of measures of substance use across subgroups of the U. This can be difficult because the other surveys typically have different purposes, definitions, and designs. Research has established that surveys of substance use and other sensitive topics often produce inconsistent results because of different methods that are used.

Thus, it is important to understand that conflicting results often reflect differing methodologies, not incorrect results. Despite this limitation, comparisons can be very useful. Consistency across surveys can confirm or support conclusions about trends and patterns of use, and inconsistent results can point to areas for further study.

MTF surveys students in the 8th, 10th, and 12th grades in classrooms during the spring of each year. MTF also collects data by mail from a subsample of adults who had participated earlier in the study as 12th graders. Although the two surveys occasionally have shown different trends in youth substance use over a short time period, these two sources of youth behavior have shown very similar long-term trends in prevalence. NSDUH and MTF rates of substance use generally have been similar among young adults, and the two sources also have shown similar trends for this age group.

The most recent survey was completed in Kann et al. For comparison purposes, MTF data on 8th and 10th graders are combined to give an age range close to 12 to 17 years, the standard youth age group for NSDUH. For youth alcohol and cigarette use in the past month, both surveys showed lower rates in compared with all other years from to Although the MTF rate has been consistently higher than the NSDUH rate because of methodological differences between the surveys, the relative changes over time have been similar.

NSDUH and MTF data showed generally consistent trends for past month use of Ecstasy, with decreases in use from to the middle of the decade, then increases in use from to , declines between and , and no change between and For past month use of cocaine, both surveys showed declines between and to Rates of past month use of inhalants also were lower in both surveys in than in to , although NSDUH showed a continued decline from to that was not shown in MTF.

For LSD, most rates of current use in to were similar to the rates in for both surveys. The extent to which youths believe that substances might cause them harm can influence whether or not they will use these substances. Declining levels of perceived risk among youths historically have been associated with subsequent increases in rates of use. Among youths aged 12 to 17, the percentage reporting in NSDUH that they thought there was a great risk of harm in smoking marijuana once or twice a week declined from MTF data for combined 8th and 10th graders showed a similar decline in perceived great risk of harm of regular marijuana use over this time period, from YRBS data for the combined grades 9 through 12 showed decreases in past month alcohol use YRBS showed a decline in past month marijuana use between This increase between and was consistent with the increase in MTF across that same period.

Although changes in NSDUH survey methodology preclude direct comparisons of recent estimates with estimates before , it is important to put the recent trends in context by reviewing longer term trends in use. NSDUH data prior to the design changes in and on youths aged 12 to 17 and MTF data on high school seniors showed substantial increases in youth illicit drug use during the s, reaching a peak in the late s.

Both surveys then showed declines throughout the s until about , when rates reached a low point. With the start of annual data collection in NSDUH in , along with the biennial YRBS and the annual 8th and 10th grade samples in MTF, trends among youths are well documented since the low point that occurred in the early s. Although they employ different survey designs and cover different age groups, the three surveys are consistent in showing increasing rates of marijuana use during the early to mids, reaching a peak in the late s but lower than in the late s.

This peak in the late s was followed by declines in use after the turn of the 21st century and fairly stable rates in the most recent years. NSDUH data for youths aged 12 to 17 are not presented for to because of design changes in the survey. These design changes preclude direct comparisons of estimates from to with estimates prior to The most prevalent category of misused prescription drugs among youths in was pain relievers.

NSDUH and MTF both collect data on misuse of prescription drugs, but they use somewhat different definitions and questioning strategies. For example, NSDUH defines misuse as use of prescription drugs that were not prescribed for the respondent or use of these drugs only for the experience or feeling they caused; MTF defines misuse as use not under a doctor's orders.

MTF also does not estimate overall prescription drug misuse. For the data on narcotics other than heroin, there was a questionnaire change in the MTF that resulted in increased reporting of misuse of narcotics other than heroin, such that estimates prior to are not strictly comparable with estimates for and beyond.

Both surveys showed lower rates of nonmedical use in compared with rates in to The rate of nonmedical use of pain relievers in in the past year among 12 to 17 year olds in NSDUH was 4. In MTF, the rate for nonmedical use of narcotics other than heroin in the past year was 7. The rates among 12th graders did not differ from to and from to ; see Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, and Schulenberg for a comparison of rates between and Data for MTF are for "narcotics other than heroin.

Potential reasons for differences from the data for youths are the relatively smaller MTF sample size for young adults and possible bias in the MTF sample due to noncoverage of school dropouts and a low overall response rate; the MTF response rate for young adults is affected by nonresponse by schools, by students in the 12th grade survey, and by young adults in the follow-up mail survey. Both surveys showed an increase in past month marijuana use among young adults from to from Both surveys showed declines in past month cigarette use between and , with NSDUH showing a decline from Both surveys showed no significant change in rates of past month cigarette use among young adults between and There also was no significant change between and in the rate of current alcohol use among young adults in either survey.

Trend data for adults aged 19 to 24 in MTF showed similar rates in to Excluded from the survey are persons with no fixed household address e. Because the coordinated design enabled estimates to be developed by State in all 50 States plus the District of Columbia, States may be viewed as the first level of stratification and as a variable for reporting estimates.

In , the actual sample sizes in these States ranged from 3, to 3, For the remaining 42 States and the District of Columbia, the target sample size was Sample sizes in these States ranged from to in This approach ensured there was sufficient sample in every State to support State estimation by either direct methods or small area estimation SAE 9 while at the same time providing adequate precision for national estimates. These regions were contiguous geographic areas designed to yield approximately the same number of interviews.

Within each SSR, 48 census tracts were selected with probability proportional to population size. One area segment was selected within each sampled census tract with probability proportional to population size. Eight reserve sample segments per SSR were fielded during the survey year.

Four of these segments were retained from the survey, and four were selected for use in the survey. These sampled segments were allocated equally into four separate samples, one for each 3-month period calendar quarter during the year. That is, a sample of addresses was selected from two segments in each calendar quarter so that the survey was relatively continuous in the field. In each of the area segments, a listing of all addresses was made, from which a national sample of , addresses was selected.

Of the selected addresses, , were determined to be eligible sample units. In these sample units which can be either households or units within group quarters , sample persons were randomly selected using an automated screening procedure programmed in a handheld computer carried by the interviewers.

The number of sample units completing the screening was , Youths aged 12 to 17 years and young adults aged 18 to 25 years were oversampled at this stage, with 12 to 17 year olds sampled at an actual rate of Similarly, persons in age groups 26 or older were sampled at rates of The overall population sampling rates were 0. Nationwide, 88, persons were selected. In addition, State samples were representative of their respective State populations.

The data collection method used in NSDUH involves in-person interviews with sample persons, incorporating procedures to increase respondents' cooperation and willingness to report honestly about their illicit drug use behavior.

Confidentiality is stressed in all written and oral communications with potential respondents. Respondents' names are not collected with the data, and computer-assisted interviewing CAI methods are used to provide a private and confidential setting to complete the interview. Introductory letters are sent to sampled addresses, followed by an interviewer visit. The computer uses the demographic data in a preprogrammed selection algorithm to select zero to two sample persons, depending on the composition of the household.

This selection process is designed to provide the necessary sample sizes for the specified population age groupings. All interviewers carry copies of this letter in Spanish. If the interviewer is not certified bilingual, he or she will use preprinted Spanish cards to attempt to find someone in the household who speaks English and who can serve as the screening respondent or who can translate for the screening respondent. In households where a language other than Spanish is encountered, another language card is used to attempt to find someone who speaks English to complete the screening.

If the sample person prefers to complete the interview in Spanish, a certified bilingual interviewer is sent to the address to conduct the interview. Immediately after the completion of the screener, interviewers attempt to conduct the NSDUH interview with each sample person in the household.

The interviewer requests that the sampled respondent identify a private area in the home to conduct the interview away from other household members. The interview averages about an hour and includes a combination of CAPI computer-assisted personal interviewing, in which the interviewer reads the questions and ACASI audio computer-assisted self-interviewing.

The core consists of initial demographic items which are interviewer-administered and self-administered questions pertaining to the use of tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives. Topics in the remaining noncore self-administered sections include but are not limited to injection drug use, perceived risks of substance use, substance dependence or abuse, arrests, treatment for substance use problems, pregnancy and health care issues, and mental health issues.

Noncore demographic questions which are interviewer-administered and follow the ACASI questions address such topics as immigration, current school enrollment, employment and workplace issues, health insurance coverage, and income. Thus, the interview begins in CAPI mode with the FI reading the questions from the computer screen and entering the respondent's replies into the computer. No personal identifying information about the respondent is captured in the CAI record.

Screening and interview data are encrypted while they reside on laptops and mobile computers. Data are transmitted back to RTI on a regular basis using either a direct dial-up connection or the Internet.

All data are encrypted while in transit across dial-up or Internet connections. After the data are transmitted to RTI, certain cases are selected for verification. For completed interviews, respondents write their home telephone number and mailing address on a quality control form and seal the form in a preaddressed envelope that FIs mail back to RTI. All contact information is kept completely separate from the answers provided during the screening or interview.

Samples of respondents who completed screenings or interviews are randomly selected for verification. These cases are called by telephone interviewers who ask scripted questions designed to determine the accuracy and quality of the data collected.

Any cases discovered to have a problem or discrepancy are flagged and routed to a small specialized team of telephone interviewers who recontact respondents for further investigation of the issue s. Depending on the amount of an FI's work that cannot be verified through telephone verification, including bad telephone numbers e. Field verification involves another FI returning to the sampled DU to verify the accuracy and quality of the data in person. If the verification procedures identify situations in which an FI has falsified data, the FI is terminated.

All cases completed that quarter by the falsifying FI are verified and reworked by the FI conducting the field verification. Any cases completed by the falsifying FI in earlier quarters of the same year are also verified.

All cases from earlier quarters identified as falsified or unresolvable are removed and not reworked. Examples of unresolvable cases include those for which verifiers were never able to make contact with a resident of the DU, residents who refused to verify their data, previous residents who had moved, or residents who reported accurate roster data for the DU but did not recall speaking to an FI.

Data that FIs transmit to RTI are processed to create a raw data file in which no logical editing of the data has been done. The raw data file consists of one record for each transmitted interview. Cases are eligible to be treated as final respondents only if they provided data on lifetime use of cigarettes and at least 9 out of 13 of the other substances in the core section of the questionnaire.

Even though editing and consistency checks are done by the CAI program during the interview, additional, more complex edits and consistency checks are completed at RTI. Additionally, statistical imputation is used to replace missing or ambiguous values after editing for some key variables. Analysis weights are created so that estimates will be representative of the target population.

Details of the editing, imputation, and weighting procedures for will appear in the NSDUH Methodological Resource Book , which is in process. With the exception of industry and occupation data, coding of written answers that respondents or interviewers typed was performed at RTI for the NSDUH. Written responses in "OTHER, Specify" data were assigned numeric codes through computer-assisted survey procedures and the use of a secure Web site that allowed for coding and review of the data.

The computer-assisted procedures entailed a database check for a given "OTHER, Specify" variable that contained typed entries and the associated numeric codes. If an exact match was found between the typed response and an entry in the system, the computer-assisted procedures assigned the appropriate numeric code.

Typed responses that did not match an existing entry were coded through the Web-based coding system. Data on the industries in which respondents worked and respondents' occupations were assigned numeric industry and occupation codes by staff at the U.

As noted above, the CAI program included checks that alerted respondents or interviewers when an entered answer was inconsistent with a previous answer in a given module. In this way, the inconsistency could be resolved while the interview was in progress. However, not every inconsistency was resolved during the interview, and the CAI program did not include checks for every possible inconsistency that might have occurred in the data. For example, if respondents reported that they never used a given drug, the CAI logic skipped them out of all remaining questions about use of that drug.

Similarly, respondents were instructed in the prescription psychotherapeutics modules i. Therefore, if a respondent's only report of lifetime use of a particular type of "prescription" psychotherapeutic drug was for an OTC drug, the respondent was logically inferred never to have been a nonmedical user of the prescription drugs in that psychotherapeutic category.

In addition, respondents could report that they were lifetime users of a drug but not provide specific information on when they last used it. In this situation, a temporary "indefinite" value for the most recent period of use was assigned to the edited recency-of-use variable e. The editing procedures for key drug use variables also involved identifying inconsistencies between related variables so that these inconsistencies could be resolved through statistical imputation.

In this example, the inconsistent period of most recent use was replaced with an "indefinite" value, and the inconsistent age at first use was replaced with a missing data code. These indefinite or missing values were subsequently imputed through statistical procedures to yield consistent data for the related measures, as discussed in the next section.

For some key variables that still had missing or ambiguous values after editing, statistical imputation was used to replace these values with appropriate response codes. In this case, the imputation procedure assigns a value for when the respondent last used the drug e. Similarly, if a response is completely missing, the imputation procedures replace missing values with nonmissing ones. PMN allows for the following: The PMN method has some similarity with the predictive mean matching method of Rubin except that, for the donor records, Rubin used the observed variable value not the predictive mean to compute the distance function.

Also, the well-known method of nearest neighbor imputation is similar to PMN, except that the distance function is in terms of the original predictor variables and often requires somewhat arbitrary scaling of discrete variables. PMN is a combination of a model-assisted imputation methodology and a random nearest neighbor hot-deck procedure.

The hot-deck procedure within the PMN method ensures that missing values are imputed to be consistent with nonmissing values for other variables. Whenever feasible, the imputation of variables using PMN is multivariate, in which imputation is accomplished on several response variables at once. Face-to-face interviews Data are collected during face-to-face interviews in carefully selected nationally or subnationally representative samples of households.

Field testing High-quality data can be obtained thanks to thorough and tested field procedures, combined with rigorous data verification. Focus on equity By , more than surveys will have been implemented in more than low- and middle-income countries.

Data from MICS can be disaggregated by various geographic, social and demographic characteristics, allowing UNICEF and its global partners to better address the divides and disparities that persist among regions and within countries. Read the latest stories to learn more about the MICS. Skip to main navigation Skip to content. Where do you live?

Navigation menu