Interpreting results of cluster surveys in emergency settings: is the LQAS test the best option?
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

CDC STACKS serves as an archival repository of CDC-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other public health information authored or co-authored by CDC or funded partners. As a repository, CDC STACKS retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i

Interpreting results of cluster surveys in emergency settings: is the LQAS test the best option?

Filetype[PDF-204.61 KB]



Details:

  • Alternative Title:
    Emerg Themes Epidemiol
  • Personal Author:
  • Description:
    Cluster surveys are commonly used in humanitarian emergencies to measure health and nutrition indicators. Deitchler et al. have proposed to use Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) hypothesis testing in cluster surveys to classify the prevalence of global acute malnutrition as exceeding or not exceeding the pre-established thresholds. Field practitioners and decision-makers must clearly understand the meaning and implications of using this test in interpreting survey results to make programmatic decisions. We demonstrate that the LQAS test--as proposed by Deitchler et al.--is prone to producing false-positive results and thus is likely to suggest interventions in situations where interventions may not be needed. As an alternative, to provide more useful information for decision-making, we suggest reporting the probability of an indicator's exceeding the threshold as a direct measure of "risk". Such probability can be easily determined in field settings by using a simple spreadsheet calculator. The "risk" of exceeding the threshold can then be considered in the context of other aggravating and protective factors to make informed programmatic decisions.
  • Subjects:
  • Source:
  • Document Type:
  • Volume:
    5
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov