Sample Design of the Medical 

Expenditure Panel Survey Household 

Component, 1998–2007

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services March 2008 

 
ABSTRACT 

This report describes the sample design for the 1998−2007 Medical Expenditure 

Panel Survey Household Component (MEPS-HC) and provides updates to the earlier 

descriptions of the 1996 and 1997 MEPS-HC sample designs. Since the sample of 

households selected for each panel of MEPS-HC is a subsample of households 

participating in the previous year’s National Health Interview (NHIS) conducted by 

the National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, the report includes a summary of the key features of the NHIS sample 

design. This report also includes the target sample sizes, number of sampled units, 

number of completed interviews, and response rates for the MEPS-HC. 

Suggested Citation: 

Ezzati-Rice, TM, Rohde, F, Greenblatt, J, Sample Design of the Medical 

Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component, 1998–2007. Methodology 

Report No. 22. March 2008. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 

Rockville, MD. http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/ 

data_files/publications/mr22/mr22.pdf 

 

∗ ∗ ∗

The estimates in this report are based on the most recent data available at the time 

the report was written. However, selected elements of MEPS data may be revised 

on the basis of additional analyses, which could result in slightly different 

estimates from those shown here. Please check the MEPS Web site for the most 

current file releases. 

Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends 

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 

540 Gaither Road 

Rockville, MD 20850 

www.meps.ahrq.gov

ii
The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) 

Household Component 

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) provides nationally representative 

estimates of health care use, expenditures, sources of payment, and health insurance 

coverage for the U.S. civilian non-institutionalized population. The MEPS Household 

Component (HC) also provides estimates of respondents' health status, demographic and 

socio-economic characteristics, employment, access to care, and satisfaction with health 

care. Estimates can be produced for individuals, families, and selected population 

subgroups. The panel design of the survey, which includes five rounds of interviews 

covering two full calendar years, provides data for examining person level changes in 

selected variables such as expenditures, health insurance coverage, and health status. 

Using computer assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) technology, information about 

each household member is collected, and the survey builds on this information from 

interview to interview. All data for a sampled household are reported by a single 

household respondent. 

The MEPS-HC was initiated in 1996. Each year a new panel of sample households is 

selected. Because the data collected are comparable to those from earlier medical 

expenditure surveys conducted in 1977 and 1987, it is possible to analyze long-term 

trends. Each annual MEPS-HC sample size is about 15,000 households. Data can be 

analyzed at either the person or event level. Data must be weighted to produce national 

estimates. 

The set of households selected for each panel of the MEPS-HC is a subsample of 

households participating in the previous year's National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 

conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease and 

Control Prevention. The NHIS sampling frame provides a nationally representative 

sample of the U.S. civilian non-institutionalized population and reflects an oversample 

of blacks, Hispanics, and starting in 2006, Asians. MEPS oversamples additional policy 

relevant sub-groups such as low income households. The linkage of the MEPS to the 

previous year's NHIS provides additional data for longitudinal analytic purposes. 

Medical Provider Component 

Upon completion of the household CAPI interview and obtaining permission from the 

household survey respondents, a sample of medical providers are contacted by telephone 

to obtain information that household respondents can not accurately provide. This part of 

the MEPS is called the Medical Provider Component (MPC) and information is collected 

on dates of visit, diagnosis and procedure codes, charges and payments. The Pharmacy 

Component (PC), a subcomponent of the MPC, does not collect charges or diagnosis and 

procedure codes but does collect drug detail information, including National Drug Code 

(NDC) and medicine name, as well as date filled and sources and amounts of payment. 

The MPC is not designed to yield national estimates. It is primarily used as an 

imputation source to supplement/replace household reported expenditure information.

iii
Survey Management 

MEPS-HC and MPC data are collected under the authority of the Public Health Service 

Act. Data are collected under contract with Westat. Data sets and summary statistics are 

edited and published in accordance with the confidentiality provisions of the Public 

Health Service Act and the Privacy Act. The National Center for Health Statistics 

(NCHS) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides consultation and 

technical assistance. 

As soon as data collection and editing are completed, the MEPS survey data are released 

to the public in staged releases of summary reports, micro data files, and tables via the 

MEPS Web site: www.meps.ahrq.gov. Selected data can be analyzed through MEPSnet, 

an on-line interactive tool designed to give data users the capability to statistically 

analyze MEPS data in a menu-driven environment. 

Additional information on MEPS is available from the MEPS project manager or the 

MEPS public use data manager at the Center for Financing Access and Cost Trends, 

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; 

301-427-1406. 

AHRQ Publications Clearinghouse 

Attn: (publication number) 

P.O. Box 8547 Silver Spring, MD 20907 

800-358-9295 

703-437-2078 (callers outside the United States only) 

888-586-6340 (toll-free TDD service; hearing impaired only) 

To order online, send an e-mail to: ahrqpubs@ahrq.gov. 

Be sure to specify the AHRQ number of the document or CD-ROM you are requesting. 

Selected electronic files are available through the Internet on the MEPS Web site: 

http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/

For more information, visit the MEPS Web site or e-mail mepspd@ahrq.gov. 

iv
Table of Contents 

Background ..................................................................................................................... 1

Sample Design................................................................................................................. 1

Sample Yields and Survey Response Rates ................................................................... 10

References..................................................................................................................... 13

Tables ........................................................................................................................ 14

Table 1. Key Sample Design Features of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey...... 14

Household Component: 1996−2007 ........................................................................... 14

Table 2a. Number of responding dwelling units, families, and persons, by year and 

panel. ......................................................................................................................... 16

Table 2b. Number of responding dwelling units, families, and persons, by year and 

panel. ......................................................................................................................... 17

Table 3a. Number of completed person-level interviews by age, sex, race/ethnicity, 

region, and MSA status (based on MEPS Point in Time files), MEPS 1996−2005..... 18

Table 3b. Number of completed person-level interviews by age, sex, race/ethnicity, 

region, and MSA status (based on MEPS Full Year Files): MEPS-HC 1996−2005... 19

Table 4. Example sample size and response rates - Full Year (Panel 7, Rounds 1−3 

combined with Panel 6, Rounds 3−5): MEPS 2002................................................... 20

Table 5. MEPS Individual Panel and Combined Annual Response Rates.................. 21

v
Sample Design of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 

Household Component, 1998–2007 

Trena M. Ezzati-Rice, Frederick Rohde, Janet Greenblatt 

Background 

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) Household Component, a nationally 

representative sample of the U.S. civilian non-institutionalized population, has been 

conducted on an annual basis since 1996 by the Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality (AHRQ), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The MEPS 

provides national estimates of health care use, expenditures, sources of payment, and 

health insurance coverage as well as information on respondents' health status, 

demographic/socio-economic characteristics, employment status, access to health care, 

and satisfaction with health care. The survey reports estimates for persons and families 

as well as subgroups of the population. 

This report describes the sample design of the MEPS Household Component (MEPSHC) for 1998 through 2007 and updates descriptions of the earlier MEPS sample 

designs. MEPS Methodology Report 2 details the sample design of the 1996 MEPS-HC 

and MEPS Methodology Report 11 describes the 1997 MEPS (Cohen SB, 1997; Cohen 

SB, 2000). An additional report provides an overview of the core components of the 

MEPS data collection and the statistical features of the survey (Cohen SB, 2003). This 

updated report also includes the target sample sizes, number of sampled units, number of 

completed interviews and response rates for the recent panels of the MEPS. 

Sample Design 

Summary of Sample Design 

The MEPS-HC is a complex national probability survey of the U.S. civilian 

noninstitutionalized population. Each year a new panel of households is selected from 

among those households that participated in the previous year’s National Health 

Interview Survey (NHIS), another large ongoing Federal health survey conducted by the 

National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 

DHHS. Each new MEPS annual sample is referred to as a panel. In the MEPS, for each 

new annual sample, data are collected through a series of five rounds of computerassisted personal interviews (CAPI) over 30 months to yield annual data for two full 

calendar years. 

As illustrated in Figure 1, a new MEPS panel of households has been selected and 

fielded each year since 1996. During each calendar year (with the exception of 1996) 

data are collected simultaneously for two MEPS panels. One panel is in its first year of 

interviews (e.g., in the year 2001, Rounds 1, 2, and 3 of Panel 6), while the prior year’s 

panel is in its second year of data collection (e.g., in 2001, Rounds 3, 4, and 5 of Panel 

5). 

1
Figure 1. MEPS Household Component Overlapping Panel Design MEPS Panel 

MEPS Year 

Panel 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 →

1 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 

2 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 

3 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 

4 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 

5 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 

6 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5

↓ R1 R2 R3 

It should be noted that Round 3 for each MEPS panel overlaps two calendar years. In 

1996, the first year of MEPS, only one panel (Panel 1) was fielded, thus the annual data 

for 1996 were based on this single panel of data. However, starting in 1997, to increase 

statistical power of annual estimates produced from MEPS, data are combined across 

two distinct nationally representative samples, making use of the MEPS overlapping 

panel design. More specifically, annual estimates are made by combining data from the 

panel in its first year of data collection and the panel in its second year of data 

collection. For example, 2001 annual estimates are represented by data collected for the 

second year of Panel 5 and data collected in year one of Panel 6. 

In addition to annual estimates, the MEPS design structure permits longitudinal 

estimates over two consecutive calendar years, thus allowing examination of personlevel changes in selected variables over a two year period. For example, research 

analysts can assess the persistence of high health care expenditures by examining 

whether individuals with high expenditures in one year have high expenditures in the 

subsequent year or shift to a higher or lower expenditure level (Cohen SB and EzzatiRice TM, 2006). 

MEPS Linked to the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 

The set of households selected for each panel of the MEPS-HC is a subsample of 

households participating in the previous year's NHIS conducted by the National Center 

for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The NHIS 

sampling frame is a nationally representative sample of the U.S. civilian 

noninstitutionalized population. The use of a subsample of NHIS households provides 

budgetary savings by eliminating the need to independently list and screen households to 

locate selected policy-relevant subgroups of the population. The linkage also provides an 

additional data point for enhanced longitudinal analyses (Cohen SB, 2003; Cohen SB, 

Makuc DM, Ezzati-Rice TM, 2007). 

Since the MEPS sample of households is subsampled from the NHIS, some knowledge 

of the NHIS sample design is needed in order to understand the MEPS sample design. 

The NHIS has been in continuous operation since 1957. Every ten years the NHIS 

sample design is updated to reflect the changes to the U.S. population. Detailed 

information about the NHIS sample designs is available from the NCHS Web site.1

 For 

example, the NCHS Series 2, Number 130 report describes the sample design of the 

1 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/series/sr02/ser2.htm 

2
1995−2004 NHIS. The subsample of households selected for each MEPS panel from 

1996−2006 was based on the 1995−2004 NHIS sample design. 

Overview of 1995−2004 NHIS Sample Design 

The 1995−2004 NHIS was based on a stratified multi-stage sample design. A brief and 

simplified description of the NHIS design follows. The first stage of sample selection 

was an area sample of Primary Sampling Units (PSUs), where PSUs generally consisted 

of one or more counties. Many PSUs were selected with certainty, i.e., “selfrepresenting” PSUs. Within each PSU, density strata were formed using 1990 Census 

population distributions of Hispanic persons and black persons for single or groups of 

blocks or block equivalents. Within each density stratum, "supersegments" were formed, 

consisting of clusters of housing units. Samples of supersegments were selected for use 

over a 10-year data collection period for the NHIS. Reserve samples for two additional 

years were also selected. Households within supersegments were subsequently selected 

for each calendar year the NHIS was carried out. Households containing Hispanics and 

blacks were oversampled at rates of approximately 2 and 1.5 times, respectively, the rate 

of remaining households. 

The complete NHIS sample for each year of the 1995−2004 NHIS consisted of 358 

PSUs. Each year a sample of approximately 76,000 households was selected and 

approximately 40,000 households were interviewed. The annual NHIS sample of 

households is partitioned into four subdesigns, referred to as “panels”, each with 

approximately the same number of households (NHIS, Series 2 report). (The 

terminology Panel for the NHIS has been used by the Census Bureau, the NHIS data 

collection agent, for the 1985−1994 and 1995−2004 NHIS, and this term “Panel” should 

not be confused with the term’s frequent, but different usage in the context of 

longitudinal surveys like the MEPS.) In the NHIS Panel context, the NHIS survey 

sample is considered an all-area sampling frame. In parts of the country where local 

governments issue building permits, the area sample is supplemented with a sample of 

permits for residential housing units built after the decennial census. Within each sample 

PSU, the survey uses an area frame and in some PSUs a permit frame is also used. The 

area sample and permit frame listings define the Second Stage Units (SSUs) from which 

the NHIS household samples are taken over the life of the design, usually a 10 year 

period. (Note: The 1995 NHIS sample design was used for an 11 year period, i.e., 

1995−2005). The SSUs for the NHIS are partitioned into four subdesigns or Panels, and 

are identified by Panel labels 1, 2, 3, or 4. Typically, an SSU is assigned a panel label 

which remains fixed for the life of the survey. 

There are two main objectives of the NHIS Panel subdesign structure. The first objective 

is to provide nationally representative subdesigns with “similar” features but with 

smaller sample sizes as contingencies to deal with any potential NCHS budget 

exigencies for the NHIS. The second objective is to provide a subsample for use as a 

sampling frame for a smaller “follow-on” survey (i.e., a survey whose sample design is 

then said to be linked with that of the NHIS). Panels can be further sub-divided by 

sample assignment weeks (e.g., calendar quarters) to provide even smaller surveys. 

Since 1996, two panels of the NHIS have been reserved for use by AHRQ for the MEPS. 

Each MEPS panel can be linked back to the previous year’s NHIS public use data files. 

For information on obtaining MEPS/NHIS link files, please see 

www.meps.ahrq.gov/data_stats/more_info_download_data_files.jsp. 

3
1998−2006 MEPS Sample Design (MEPS Panels 3 through 11) 

This section documents the 1998−2006 MEPS sample designs. Earlier reports provide 

the details for the 1996 and 1997 designs (Cohen SB, 1997; Cohen SB, 2000). 

Target Population and Sampling Frame 

The target population for the MEPS consists of all persons who are members of the 

civilian noninstitutionalized (e.g., not in prisons or nursing homes) population at any 

time during the year and living in the 50 States or the District of Columbia. In addition, 

the sample is designed to meet a specified level of precision in estimates for certain 

subgroups of the population, including persons who have a family income less than 

200% of the Federal poverty level and selected racial and ethnic groups. 

The NHIS serves as the sampling frame for the MEPS. In most years, the MEPS annual 

household panel sample is selected from responding households in two of the four NHIS 

panels during calendar quarters 1−3 of the previous year. The NHIS quarter 4 is not 

processed soon enough for use in selecting the following year’s MEPS sample as each 

new MEPS panel must be fielded in January. Thus, a sample representing about threeeighths of the NHIS responding households is generally made available for use in 

MEPS. 

Analytical goals, precision requirements, and sample size targets 

The broad sample design goals for the MEPS include: 

 A sample that will provide unbiased national and regional estimates (four Census 

regions) of health care expenditure estimates and other health parameters with 

targeted precision, and 

 A sample that will meet targeted precision requirements for policy relevant 

subgroups of the population. 

Based on varying DHHS objectives coupled with the MEPS budget resources, the 

sample size and subdomains oversampled for MEPS can vary from year to year. The 

overall target precision requirement for the current MEPS-HC (2001 and forward) is an 

average design effect of 1.6 for key survey estimates for policy relevant population 

subgroups (Cohen SB, 2003). The MEPS person-level precision requirements are 

specified for national estimates derived from individuals that are considered full year 

respondents (individuals with responses for their entire period of living in the civilian 

noninstitutionalized population). Consequently, in the determination of sample sizes 

necessary to achieve the precision requirements, adjustments must be made for dwelling 

unit nonresponse and survey attrition to determine the required number of initial sample 

units per year. Starting with calendar year 2002, the target sample size for producing 

annual estimates for the MEPS-HC is approximately 15,000 families (reporting units) or 

about 37,000 persons. While these target precision levels and samples sizes have been 

specified, the targets are sometimes modified based on analytical objectives and AHRQ 

budget resources. 

4
Sample Selection Criteria and Oversampling 

The initial MEPS-HC sample consists of a subsample of households that responded to 

the prior year’s NHIS. After selection of the NHIS households (occupied dwelling 

units), “reporting units” are formed based on information collected in NHIS and for 

fielding of the MEPS sample. In brief, a household may contain one or more family 

units, each with one or more individuals. The NHIS family units become reporting units 

(RUs) for MEPS. A more detailed discussion of the definition of RUs for MEPS is found 

in the section “Sampling Unit Definitions and Eligibility Criteria”. 

The initial sample size for each panel of the MEPS is determined on the basis of the 

budget resources available at the time of sample selection and on the eligible sample 

available from NCHS, thus the sample sizes have varied from year to year. A review of 

the 1996 and 1997 MEPS is first provided followed by more specific details for the 

1998−2006 MEPS. The 1995 NHIS subsample selected for the 1996 MEPS consisted of 

195 PSUs. An initial subsample of 10,597 households was selected from NHIS Panels 1 

and 3 in two targeted quarters (2 and 3) of the NHIS. (Table 1) The 1997 MEPS panel 

(Panel 2) sample of 6,300 households was again selected in the same 195 PSUs (as in 

MEPS 1996) and was selected as a subsample of households responding to the 1996 

NHIS, Panels 1 and 3 in three targeted NHIS quarters (1, 2, and 3). Both the 1996 and 

1997 MEPS reflected an oversample of Hispanics and blacks at the same ratios as in the 

NHIS (Hispanics, 2.0:1; blacks 1.5:1). In addition, the 1997 MEPS oversampled several 

policy relevant domains at varying rates (see Table 1). 

In order to select the MEPS sample, the NHIS households are included in the frame 

based on the following definitions: 

 Responding Household: NHIS household (HH) with ACTION code = 4 (partial 

interview, no follow-up) or ACTION code 10 (complete interview) and at least 

one person with HHSTAT (household status) not equal 'D' (deleted). 

 Eligible Household: All responding HHs in the NHIS quarters and panels set 

aside for MEPS. (In most years, the HHs eligible for MEPS are from calendar 

quarters 1−3 in 2 of 4 NHIS panels.) 

Prior to sample selection, the NHIS occupied dwelling units (DUs) within pre-specified 

sampling classes are hierarchically sorted by the following measures: 

– Calendar year quarter 

– Interview week within each respective calendar quarter 

– Census division 

– State 

– Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) classification 

– NHIS primary sampling unit (PSU) 

– NHIS segment within PSU 

The household level sampling domain variables vary slightly from year to year and 

include a hierarchical classification: any Asian in household, any family in household 

with predicted poverty, any Hispanic in household, any black in household, and all 

others (i.e., no Asian, predicted poverty, Hispanic, or black). 

5
The sample of households for the 1998−2001 MEPS panels ranged from approximately 

5,200−11,000 households (Table 1, Column 7). In 1999 and 2000, due to budgetary 

constraints, the number of MEPS PSUs was reduced from 195 to 100. In 2002, some 

design enhancements were made with an increased sample size and the number of PSUs 

also increased to 195 as in the earlier MEPS panels. The sample of households for the 

2002−2006 MEPS from the 2001−2005 NHIS ranged from about 8,100 to 9,500 

households. As in the earlier years, the oversample of Hispanics and blacks in the NHIS 

carried over to MEPS. In addition, the NHIS responding households eligible for MEPS 

that contained either Asian Americans or families predicted (based on a statistical 

model) to have low income (i.e., <200% Federal poverty level) were selected with 

certainty. For the 2004−2006 MEPS panels, in addition to the certainty selection of 

Asians and low income families, households containing blacks and not among those 

households selected with certainty were further oversampled. The sampling rates by 

subdomains, the number of selected NHIS households, number of PSUs, and number of 

initial MEPS Reporting Units by MEPS panel and year are shown in Table 1. (Note: 

The sample sizes presented in Table 1 are confined to the new panel introduced each 

year. The number of responding families and persons for use in producing annual 

estimates are discussed later.) 

Sampling Unit Definitions and Eligibility Criteria 

The definition of dwelling units and group quarters in the MEPS-HC are generally 

consistent with the definitions employed for NHIS. The definitions used are: 

 Dwelling unit (DU) is a house, apartment, group of rooms, or single room 

occupied as separate civilian non-institutional living quarters or vacant but 

intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. This term is the NHIS 

definition for households and is the unit sampled for the MEPS. 

 Group quarters consist of a single civilian non-institutional dwelling or structure 

in which nine or more unrelated persons reside and where inhabitants are not 

considered a part of any other dwelling unit. 

A Reporting Unit (RU) is a person or group of persons in the sampled DU who are 

related by blood, marriage, adoption, foster care, or other family association. Each RU 

was interviewed as a single entity for MEPS. Thus, the RU serves chiefly as a familybased "survey" operations unit rather than an analytic unit. Regardless of the legal status 

of their association, two persons living together as a "family" unit are treated as a single 

RU if they chose to be so identified. Unmarried college students (less than 24 years of 

age) who usually live in a sampled household but who live away from home and go to 

school at the time of the MEPS interview are treated as a student RU separate from that 

of their parents for the purpose of data collection. Examples of different types of RUs 

are: 

1. A married daughter and her husband living with her parents in the same DU 

constitute a single RU; 

2. A husband and wife and their unmarried daughter, age 18, who is living away 

from home while at college constitute two RUs; and 

3. Three unrelated persons living in the same DU would each constitute a distinct 

RU, i.e., a total of three RUs. 

6
MEPS Data Collection Eligibility 

The only major difference in eligibility status for housing units between NHIS and 

MEPS is that college dorms represent ineligible dwelling units for MEPS. College aged 

students living away from home during the school year were interviewed at their place 

of residence for the NHIS, but, in contrast, are identified by and linked to their parents’ 

household for MEPS. Once the MEPS sample is selected from among the NHIS 

households characterized as NHIS respondents, RUs representing students living in 

student housing or consisting entirely of military personnel are deleted from the sample. 

For the NHIS, college students living in student housing are sampled independently from 

their families. For MEPS, such students are identified through the sample selection of 

their parents' RU. In MEPS, removing college students found in college housing sampled 

for the NHIS eliminates the opportunity of multiple chances of selection for MEPS for 

these students. Military personnel not living in the same RU as civilians are ineligible 

for MEPS. After such exclusions, all RUs associated with households selected from 

among those identified as NHIS responding households are then fielded in the first round 

of MEPS. The initial number of RUs for each MEPS panel is shown in Table 1, Column 

8. Standard or primary RUs are the original RUs from NHIS. However, a new RU will 

be created when members of the household leave the primary RU and are followed 

according to the rules of the survey. 

Three key factors define a person’s interview status for each round of data collection in 

the MEPS. These factors are: “in-scope” status, Keyness status, and eligibility status. 

In-scope 

A person is considered as in-scope during a MEPS round or a reference time period if he 

or she was a member of the U.S. civilian, noninstitutionalized population at some time 

during the specific data collection round or time period. 

Keyness for MEPS—“Key and non-Key Persons” 

The term "Keyness" is related to an individual’s chance of being included in MEPS. A 

person is “Key” if a person is linked for sampling purposes to the set of NHIS sampled 

households designated for inclusion in MEPS. Specifically, a “Key” person was a 

member of an NHIS household at the time of the NHIS interview or who becomes a 

member of such a household after being out-of-scope at the time of the NHIS (examples 

of the latter situation include newborns and persons returning from military service, an 

institution, or living outside the United States). 

A “non-Key” person is one whose chance of selection for the NHIS (and MEPS) was 

associated with a household eligible, but not sampled for the NHIS, and who later 

becomes a member of a MEPS RU. MEPS data are collected for the period of time a 

non-Key person is part of the sampled unit to provide information for family-level 

analyses. However, non-Key persons who leave a sample household unaccompanied by a 

Key, in-scope member are not followed for subsequent interviews. 

In summary, Keyness status is set at the time the person enters MEPS, and a person’s 

Keyness status never changes. It should be noted that a person might be Key even 

though not part of the civilian, noninstitutionalized portion of the U.S. population. For 

example, a person in the military may have been living with his or her civilian spouse 

7
and children in a household sampled for NHIS. The person in the military would be 

considered a “Key” person for MEPS; however, such a person would not be eligible to 

receive a person-level sample weight if he or she was never in-scope during a defined 

survey period. 

Eligibility 

The eligibility of a person for MEPS pertains to whether or not data are to be collected 

for that person. All of the Key in-scope persons of a sampled RU are eligible for data 

collection. The only non-Key persons eligible for data collection are those who live in an 

RU with at least one Key, in-scope person. Their eligibility continues only for the time 

that they are living with at least one such person. The only out-of-scope persons eligible 

for data collection are those living with Key in-scope persons, again only for the time 

they live with such a person. (Only persons in the military can meet this description e.g., 

a person on full-time active military duty, living with a spouse who is Key). 

2007 MEPS (Panel 12) and 2006 NHIS Sample Redesign 

As stated at the beginning of this report, the NHIS traditionally is redesigned about 

every 10 years following the most current decennial census to take account of 

demographic changes in the population. Since its beginning, the MEPS-HC has been 

conducted in a set of NHIS PSUs based on the sample design developed for the 

1995−2004 NHIS. The selection of PSUs for what is known as the 1995−2004 NHIS 

sample design was based on 1990 Census data. It should be noted, however, that the 

1995 design was used for an additional NHIS year, that is, through 2005. NHIS 

implemented a new sample design in 2006, and it is anticipated that the new sample 

design will be in place until the next redesign around 2014. The new 2006 NHIS sample 

design is based on the 2000 Census. This section primarily focuses on changes that 

occurred in the new NHIS design relative to the previous design and the associated 

changes for the 2007 MEPS and forward. 

As for the earlier NHIS sample designs, the 2006−2014 NHIS design is a complex 

multistage sample design of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population with 

stratification, clustering, and oversampling of selected population subgroups. The new 

2006 NHIS sample of households was sampled independently from that which was 

selected under the 1995−2004 design. However, the fundamental design structure of the 

new 2006 NHIS sample design is very similar to the previous sample design which was 

in place from 1995 to 2005. But, there are some important differences which are 

highlighted in the following discussion. 

The target universe for the NHIS is all dwelling units in the U.S. that contain members 

of the civilian noninstitutionalized population. As in the previous design, the target 

universe was first partitioned into primary sampling units (PSUs), each of which 

consisted of a single county, a group of contiguous counties, or metropolitan areas. 

Those PSUs defining the largest metropolitan statistical areas were selected with 

certainty and were designated as self-representing (SR) PSUs. The remaining PSUs in 

the universe were designated as non self-representing (NSR) or non-certainty PSUs and 

a sample of these PSUs was selected. The NSR PSUs were stratified by state and 

sampled into the NHIS generally at the rate of two PSUs per state using a probability 

proportional to population size according to the 2000 Census. Within a few NSR strata 

with smaller population sizes, one PSU was selected. Most of the self-representing PSUs 

8
of the previous design are still self-representing in the new design. The differences in the 

location of the PSUs between the two designs occur mostly in the NSR areas. The new 

design has 428 PSUs. The previous design had 358 PSUs. The difference in the number 

of PSUs is largely due to differences in how the PSUs are defined in the new design 

compared to the previous design. In the new design, NHIS is partitioning most of the SR 

PSUs into mini-PSUs, i.e., smaller geographic areas (one or more counties) known as 

SPSUs or stratification PSUs. For example, most surveys will refer to a large SR PSU 

like Boston as one big SR PSU. However, with the new NHIS design, there are multiple 

distinct PSUs (SPSUs) for the Boston area. 

Oversampling of the black and Hispanic populations was retained in the 2006 NHIS 

design to facilitate estimation of health related statistics for these two minority groups. 

The new sample design also includes an oversample of the Asian population. As in the 

previous design, at the second stage of sampling, the entire area within each selected 

PSU was partitioned into a substrata consisting of single or contiguous blocks or block 

equivalents. These substrata were assigned to 20 density strata defined by the 

concentration of blacks, Hispanics and Asians from the 2000 Decennial Census. New 

construction housing (or permit listings) within a PSU was included as its own 

substratum in order to produce a current sample of households including new 

construction. Thus, the number of substrata is 21, the same number as in the previous 

design. The consideration of Asians in the definition of the second-stage density strata 

was new under the 2006−2014 NHIS design; the previous design had only taken into 

consideration the concentrations of blacks and Hispanics. Also in the new design, the 

definitions that constituted low, medium, and high concentrations of each minority group 

were allowed to vary slightly from PSU to PSU. In the previous design, the definitions 

were consistent in all PSUs. Finally, as with the previous design, the area segments 

within each density stratum were partitioned into supersegments or clusters of housing 

units. These supersegments were subsequently sampled into the NHIS, and the housing 

units within them assigned to each calendar year, quarter and week of NHIS data 

collection. The sample adult selection process for the NHIS was also revised under the new 

sample design in 2006 such that when elderly black, Hispanic, or Asian persons 65 years or 

older were present they have an increased chance of being selected as the sample adult. The 

NCHS report describing the 1995−2005 design, Series 2, Number 130, provides 

additional details that still apply to the new sample design. This publication is available 

on-line at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/series/sr02/130-121/130-

121.htm. 

 

A new report providing more specific details of the 2006 NHIS sample design is being 

developed by NCHS. 

Due to budgetary constraints, the total number of sampled housing units under the 

2006−2014 NHIS design was reduced relative to the previous sample design 

(ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/Dataset_Documentation/NHIS/2006/srvy

desc.pdf). The reduction in households will come entirely from the nonminority density 

strata. That is, the target number of households with black and Hispanic respondents will 

be similar to that achieved under the old NHIS design, while the number with Asian 

respondents will be greater under the new design. The new NHIS sample design is 

anticipated to result in approximately 87,500 persons residing in 35,000 households with 

completed interviews. 

9
2007−2015 MEPS Sample Design 

The sample of households for MEPS Panels 1 through 11 (1996−2006) was generally 

selected from the first three calendar quarters of households in NHIS Panels 1 and 3 as 

sampled under the 1995−2005 NHIS design. Starting in 2007, the households in MEPS 

Panels 12 through 20 (2007−2015) will be selected from NHIS Panels 1 and 4 as 

designed for the 2006−2014 NHIS design. The change to a subsample of responding 

households in NHIS Panels 1 and 4 rather than NHIS Panels 1 and 3 was made to 

maximize the number of overlapping PSUs utilized by the MEPS across the two 

independent NHIS designs. That is, the PSUs in NHIS Panels 1 and 4 as selected for the 

2006−2014 NHIS design have the most overlap with the PSUs in NHIS Panels 1 and 3 as 

selected in the 1995−2004/5 NHIS design. This will minimize field data collection costs 

for the MEPS. 

In general, each new MEPS Panel will continue to be sampled from the first three 

calendar quarters of the prior year’s responding NHIS annual sample among the two 

panels set aside for MEPS. To reduce operational issues associated with fielding a new 

sample design in the same year as implementation of a new windows-based computerassisted personal interview (CAPI) instrument, the 2007 MEPS sample was limited to 

eligible responding housing units from the first two calendar quarters, Panels 1 and 4 of 

the 2006 NHIS. The sample yield and sampling rates for the MEPS Panel 12 fielded in 

January 2007 are shown in Table 1. In particular, a total of 7,319 NHIS housing units, 

representing 7,467 responding units, were selected for the MEPS Panel 12. 

Sample Yields and Survey Response Rates 

Sample Size 

As described in the earlier “Summary of Sample Design” section, to produce MEPS 

annual calendar year estimates, data are combined across two overlapping panels. A 

preliminary data file is also produced in MEPS which allows selected estimates to be 

produced for the first half of the year at approximately six months following data 

collection. These early estimates are also based on two overlapping panels, namely data 

collected during Round 1 of a current year’s panel and during Round 3 of the previously 

fielded panel. Tables 2a and 2b provide a summary of the number of completed 

interviews (households (dwelling units), families, and persons) by year and panel based 

on the MEPS Point-in-Time Files and Annual Full Year Files, respectively. Tables 3a 

and 3b provide the number of completed person-level interviews by age group, gender, 

race-ethnicity group, region, and MSA status based on the Point-in-Time Files and 

Annual Full Year Files, respectively. 

While sample size is an often used indicator of the reliability of estimates obtained from 

a survey, sample size is not the only feature of the sample that affects the reliability of 

estimates for a stratified multistage sample survey like the MEPS and its sample frame, 

the NHIS. The NHIS sample is clustered with multiple stages of selection and includes 

oversampling of selected minorities all of which carry over to the MEPS. In addition, 

the MEPS sample requires additional adjustments to account for differential selection 

probabilities along with the post-survey adjustments for household and person-level 

nonresponse. In this setting, the precision of the survey estimates can be expected to be 

less (compared to a simple random sample) when the clustering, multistage sample 

10
design factors, and unequal weighting are accounted for in the estimates of variance. 

Users of the MEPS micro data must be aware that standard statistical estimation 

software does not properly account for these factors in the estimates of variability (such 

as the standard error of sample estimates or corresponding confidence intervals) for 

MEPS estimates. Several methodologies have been developed for estimating standard 

errors for surveys with a complex sample design, including the Taylor-series 

linearization method, balanced repeated replication, and jackknife replication. Various 

software packages provide analysts with the capability of implementing these 

methodologies. The variables needed to calculate appropriate standard errors based on 

the Taylor-series linearization method are included on the MEPS public use files. 

Software packages that permit the use of the Taylor-series linearization method include 

SUDAAN, Stata, SAS (version 8.2 and higher), and SPSS (version 12.0 and higher). 

Users of these software packages should refer to the corresponding software user 

documentation for complete information on the capabilities of each package. 

 

Response Rates 

The general approach for calculation of MEPS response rates along with an illustrative 

example is provided in this section. In particular, response rates for annual 2002 

calendar year data are discussed. Because of the linkage of the NHIS and the MEPS, the 

response rate for MEPS is a combination of the response rate for the NHIS and the 

MEPS round specific response rates. Due to the overlapping panel design for production 

of annual estimates, the calculation of the annual response rates for MEPS likewise 

comprised the two overlapping panel specific response rates. Further, the panel-specific 

response rates get weighted by their respective sample sizes. 

To understand the calculation of MEPS response rates, some key features related to 

MEPS data collection are first discussed. When an RU is visited for a round of data 

collection, any changes in RU membership are identified. Such changes include RU 

members who have moved to another location in the U.S., thus creating a new RU to be 

interviewed for MEPS, as well as student RUs. Thus, the number of RUs eligible for 

MEPS interviewing in a given round can only be determined after data collection is fully 

completed. The ratio of the number of RUs completing the MEPS interview in a given 

round to the number of RUs characterized as eligible to complete the interview for that 

round represents the "conditional" round specific response rate expressed as a 

proportion. It is "conditional" in that it pertains to the set of RUs characterized as 

eligible for MEPS for that round, and thus is "conditioned" on prior participation rather 

than representing the overall response rate through that round. For example, in Table 4, 

for Panel 6, Round 2 the ratio of 9,222 (Row G) to 9,666 (Row F) multiplied by 100 

represents the percentage response rate for Round 2 (95.4 percent when computed), 

conditioned on the set of RUs characterized as eligible for MEPS for Round 2. Taking 

the product of the response rate of the NHIS sample designated for use in MEPS (Row 

A) and the product of the response rates (ratio of the number of completed interviews to 

the number eligible) for each consecutive set of MEPS rounds beginning with round one 

produces the overall response rate through the last MEPS round specified. 

An example response rate calculation for a full year MEPS is as follows. To produce 

annual health care and expenditure estimates for calendar year 2002, data from Panel 6 

and Panel 7 are combined. More specifically, data collected covering calendar year 2002 

for Rounds 3 through 5 of Panel 6 are combined with corresponding 2002 data from the 

first three rounds of Panel 7 to produce calendar year 2002 estimates. The overall 

11
response rate for the combined sample in Panels 6 and 7 for 2002 was obtained by 

computing the product of the relative responding sample sizes and the corresponding 

overall panel response rates and then summing the two products. Details of the 

calculations as carried out for the 2002 MEPS annual response rate are provided below. 

Panel 7 Response Rate 

For MEPS Panel 7, Round 1, a total of 8,083 households was fielded in 2005 (Row C of 

Table 4), a nationally representative subsample of the households who had responded to 

the 2001 NHIS. Table 4 further shows for each round the number of RUs eligible for 

interviewing as well as the number of RUs completing the MEPS interview. Computing 

the three individual round "conditional" response rates and then taking the product of the 

three response rates and the factor 89.7 (the percentage of the NHIS sampled households 

designated for use in MEPS, i.e., those initially characterized as responding in NHIS) 

yielded an overall response rate of 65.6 percent for Panel 7 through Round 3. 

Panel 6 Response Rate 

For MEPS Panel 6, a total of 10,651 households was fielded in 2001 (as indicated in 

Row C of Table 4), a nationally representative subsample of the households who had 

responded to the 2000 NHIS. Table 4 shows the number of RUs eligible for interviewing 

and the number completing the household interview for all five rounds of Panel 6. The 

overall response rate for Panel 6 was computed in a similar fashion to that of Panel 7, 

but covered all five rounds of MEPS interviewing rather than just the first three rounds. 

The overall response rate for Panel 6 through Round 5 was 64.0 percent. 

2002 Combined Panel Response Rate 

The combined response rate for the 2002 annual data was obtained by taking a weighted 

average of the panel specific response rates. The Panel 6 response rate was weighted by 

a factor of 0.55 and the Panel 7 response rate was weighted by a factor of 0.45, reflecting 

approximately the distribution of the overall sample between the two panels. (Note: The 

panel specific weighting factors vary from year to year.) The resulting overall annual 

response rate for the combined panels was thus computed as (.55 x 64.0) plus (.45 x 

65.6) for a final combined 2002 annual response rate of 64.7 percent (as shown in the 

last row of Table 4). 

The individual panel-specific and the overall (combined panel response rates) response 

rates for annual MEPS data analyses are summarized in Table 5. These response rates 

reflect the response to both the NHIS and the multiplicative MEPS round specific 

response rates. For 1996 thru 2000, the standardized response rates shown in Table 5 are 

slightly different from those in the 1996 and 1997 Methodology Reports and in the 

public use file documentations. This is due to a slight modification in the methodology 

for computing the response rates. The resulting changes are minor, but more importantly, 

the change provides standardized response rates for tracking trends across time. 

Development of Analysis Weights 

Weights are developed for use in the derivation of nationally representative population 

estimates to support analysis of data collected in sample surveys. The analytical weights 

typically account for any disproportionate probabilities of selection, unit nonresponse, 

12
person-level survey attrition (e.g., in a longitudinal survey), and an adjustment to make 

the weighted sample distributions agree with known population estimates. This general 

approach is used in the MEPS (Wun LM, Ezzati-Rice TM, et al, 2007), including (1) an 

adjustment for dwelling unit nonresponse at Round 1 to account for nonresponse among 

those households subsampled from NHIS for the MEPS, (2) an adjustment for 

nonresponse at the person level to account for survey attrition across the multiple rounds 

of data collection, and (3) a final step of poststratification and raking to known 

population totals for the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States. 

More detailed information on the estimation strategies used in MEPS can be found on 

the MEPS Web site: www.meps.ahrq.gov. 

Summary 

The MEPS, a comprehensive population-based health care survey, is an important 

resource to inform health care policy and practice. This report provides an update to the 

1996 and 1997 MEPS sample design descriptions with a comprehensive overview of the 

MEPS Household Component sample design for 1998 through 2007. Since the set of 

households selected for each new panel of the MEPS is a subsample of those who 

participated in the previous year’s National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), key 

statistical features of the NHIS sample design are also included. In addition, this report 

includes a summary of the total number of households sampled for the MEPS, the 

number of responding dwelling units, families, and persons by year, and the overall 

annual survey response rates. 

Acknowledgment: The authors gratefully acknowledge the expert technical review and 

helpful comments provided by Steven B. Cohen, Director, Center for Financing, Access, 

and Cost Trends (CFACT), AHRQ, and Steven R. Machlin, Division of Statistical 

Research and Methods, CFACT, AHRQ. 

References 

Cohen SB. Sample Design of the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household 

Component. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1997. 

MEPS Methodology Report No. 2. AHCPR Pub. No. 97-0027. 

Cohen SB. Sample Design of the 1997 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household 

Component. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Research and Quality; 2000. 

MEPS Methodology Report No. 11. AHRQ Pub. No. 01-0001. 

Cohen SB. Design Strategies and Innovations in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. 

Medical Care, July 2003: 41(7) Supplement: III-5−III-12. 

Cohen SB, Makuc DM, and Ezzati-Rice TM. Health insurance coverage during a 24 

month period: a comparison of estimates from two national health surveys. Journal of 

Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology (2007) 7:125−144. 

Cohen SB and Ezzati-Rice TM. (2006). Designing national health care surveys to inform 

health policy. In Statistics: A Guide to the Unknown, Fourth Edition, 89−101. Belmont 

(CA): Duxberry of Thomson Brooks/Cole. 

Wun LM, Ezzati-Rice TM, Diaz-Tena N, and Greenblatt J. On modeling response 

propensity for dwelling unit (DU) level non-response adjustment in the Medical 

Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Statistics in Medicine, 2007: 26:1875−1884. 

13
Tables 

Table 1. Key Sample Design Features of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 

Household Component: 1996−2007

Panel Year 

Number 

of PSUs* 

 Source 

of 

Sample = 

NHIS*) 

Eligible 

NHIS* 

Quarters/ 

Panels 

Additional 

oversamplesa

Sample 

rate 

Number of 

sampled 

households 

(Dwelling 

Units) 

Initial 

number of 

reporting 

units 

(RUs) 

1 1996 195 Q2,3 /P1,3 None 1.000 10,597 10,799

2 1997 195 Q1,2,3/ 

P1,3 Adults (18+) with 

functional impairmentsb

 

Children (<18) with 

limitations 

Persons 18−64 

predicted to incur high 

medical expenditures 

Persons with low 

incomec 

Adults (18+) with other 

limitationsd 

Persons 65 years+ 

Other

0.428

1.000

1.000

1.000

0.600

0.300

0.300

0.300

6,300

478

601

596

1,238

194

647

2,546

6,461

3 1998 195 Q2 /P1,3 None 1.000 5,166 5,410

4 1999 100 Q1,2,3 /P1 None 0.945 6,900 7,103

5 2000 100 Q1,2,3 /P1 None 0.741 5,380 5,533

6 2001 195 Q1,2,3 

/P1,3 

None 

Q1,2 

Q3 

0.738

0.750

0.716

10,704

7,004

3,700

11,026

7 2002 195 Q1,2,3 

/P1,3 Q1,2 Asian/<200% 

povertye 

Q1,2 Other 

Q3 Asian/<200% 

poverty e 

Q3 Other 

0.560

1.000

0.500

1.000

0.393

8,132

1,718

3,781

953

1,680

8,339

8 2003 195 Q1,2,3 

/P1,3 Q1,2 Asian/<200% 

poverty e 

Q1,2 Other 

Q3 Asian/<200% 

poverty e 

Q3 Other 

0.616

1.000

0.500

1.000

0.595

8,400

1,623

3,698

825

2,254

8,706

9 2004 195 Q1,2,3 

/P1,3 Q1,2 Asian/<200% 

poverty e 

Q1,2 Black 

Q1,2 Other 

Q3 Asian/<200% 

poverty e 

Q3 Black 

Q3 Other 

0.634

1.000

0.750

0.600

1.000

0.500

0.431

8,640

1,516

640

3,554

1,050

271

1,609

8,939

14
10 2005 195 Q1,2,3 /P1,3 

Q1,2 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q1,2 Black 

Q1,2 Other 

Q3 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q3 Black 

Q3 Other 

0.646 

1.000 

0.750 

0.600 

1.000 

0.750 

0.427 

8,546

1,616

617

3,395

956

423

1,536

8,748

11 2006 195 Q1,2,3 /P1,3 

Q1,2 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q1,2 Black 

Q1,2 Other 

Q3 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q3 Black 

Q3 Other 

0.665 

1.000 

0.750 

0.600 

1.000 

0.750 

0.500 

9,464

1,726

698

3,842

959

408

1,831

9,654

12 2007 183** Q1,2 /P1,4 

Q1 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q1 Hispanic 

Q1 Black 

Q1 Other 

Q2 Asian/<200% poverty e 

Q2 Hispanic 

Q2 Black 

Q2 Other 

0.909 

1.000 

0.750 

0.750 

0.750 

1.000 

1.000 

1.000 

1.000 

7,319

780

378

324

1,501

943

592

560

2,241

7,467

a

The oversampling of Hispanic persons and black persons carries over from the NHIS for each 

MEPS panel. The oversampling of Asian persons carries over from the NHIS starting with Panel 

12 of MEPS. 

b

Needs help in 1 or more activities of daily living (ADLs), such as bathing and dressing. 

c

 Low incomes refers to incomes below 200% of the Federal poverty line. 

d

Needs help in 10 or more instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), such as shopping or 

paying bills. 

e

<200% poverty refers to incomes below 200% of the Federal poverty line. 

* NHIS is National Health Interview Survey; PSU is primary sampling unit. 

** The 2006 NHIS sample redesign included the partitioning of self-representing PSUs into smaller 

geographic areas (one or more counties) known as SPSUs or stratification PSUs. The number of 

PSUs shown for Panel 12 is comparable to the numbers associated with the earlier MEPS panels. 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. 

15
Table 2a. Number of responding dwelling units, families, and 

persons, by year and panel. 

MEPS Household Component Point-in-Time Files, 1996−2005 

 Dwelling Units Families Persons 

1996 Panel 01 8,793 9,388 23,612

1997 Combined 13,217 14,147 35,916

Panel 01 8,035 8,613 21,411

Panel 02 5,182 5,534 14,505

1998 Combined 8,816 9,597 24,454

Panel 02 4,625 5,097 12,908

Panel 03 4,191 4,500 11,546

1999 Combined 5,533 5,834 14,974

Panel 04 5,533 5,834 14,974

2000 Combined 9,323 9,927 25,094

Panel 04 4,990 5,362 13,546

Panel 05 4,333 4,565 11,548

2001 Combined 12,598 13,393 34,173

Panel 05 3,967 4,239 10,589

Panel 06 8,631 9,154 23,584

2002 Combined 14,459 15,482 39,571

Panel 06 7,952 8,625 21,620

Panel 07 6,507 6,857 17,951

003 Combined 12,590 13,426 34,441

Panel 07 5,959 6,403 16,413

Panel 08 6,631 7,023 18,028

2004 Combined 12,782 13,664 34,797

Panel 08 6,109 6,600 16,530

Panel 09 6,673 7,064 18,267

2005 Combined 12,757 13,582 34,710

Panel 09 6,074 6,562 16,514

 Panel 10 6,683 7,020 18,196

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency 

for Healthcare Research and Quality, Medical Expenditures Panel 

Survey 

16
Table 2b. Number of responding dwelling units, families, and 

persons, by year and panel. 

MEPS Household Component Full-Year Files, 

1996−2005 

 

Dwelling 

Units Families* Persons 

1996 Panel 01 8,095 8,588 21,571

1997 Combined 12,043 12,986 32,636

Panel 01 7,366 7,925 19,622

Panel 02 4,677 5,061 13,014

1998 Combined 8,318 8,920 22,953

Panel 02 4,408 4,756 12,260

Panel 03 3,910 4,164 10,693

1999 Combined 8,671 9,278 23,565

Panel 03 3,639 3,925 9,979

Panel 04 5,032 5,353 13,586

2000 Combined 8,849 9,437 23,839

Panel 04 4,850 5,195 13,170

Panel 05 3,999 4,242 10,669

2001 Combined 11,864 12,732 32,122

Panel 05 3,836 4,114 10,298

Panel 06 8,028 8,618 21,824

2002 Combined 13,689 14,712 37,418

Panel 06 7,677 8,326 20,890

Panel 07 6,012 6,386 16,528

2003 Combined 11,929 12,742 32,681

Panel 07 5,771 6,147 16,000

Panel 08 6,158 6,595 16,681

2004 Combined 12,043 12,917 32,737

Panel 08 5,910 6,358 16,058

Panel 09 6,133 6,559 16,679

2005 Combined 11,918 12,680 32,320

Panel 09 5,832 6,278 15,904

 Panel 10 6,086 6,402 16,416

* Families defined by variable FAMID[yy] where FMRS1231 = 1. 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency 

for Healthcare Research and Quality, Medical Expenditures Panel 

Survey

17
Table 3a. Number of completed person-level interviews by age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, and MSA 

status (based on MEPS Point in Time files), MEPS 1996−2005 

 1996 1997 1998 19991 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Total 23,612 35,916 24,454 14,974 25,094 34,173 39,571 34,441 34,797 34,710 

Age 

 <1 360 566 367 200 376 514 558 518 511 519 

 1−17 6,532 10,298 7,162 4,219 6,987 9,459 11,453 10,188 10,082 10,118 

 18−24 2,133 3,194 2,204 1,308 2,230 3,125 3,610 3,179 3,268 3,243 

 25−44 7,230 10,530 7,003 4,449 7,228 9,773 11,151 9,560 9,650 9,432 

 45−64 4,707 7,224 4,925 3,149 5,400 7,440 8,524 7,286 7,501 7,676 

 65+ 2,650 4,104 2,793 1,649 2,873 3,862 4,275 3,710 3,785 3,722 

Sex 

 Male 11,257 17,033 11,567 7,241 12,056 16,339 18,832 16,258 16,405 16,406 

 Female 12,355 18,883 12,887 7,733 13,038 17,834 20,739 18,183 18,392 18,304 

Race/ethnicity 

 Hispanic 4,872 7,884 5,526 3,583 6,098 8,022 9,990 9,253 9,520 9,585 

 Black 3,183 5,301 3,689 2,173 3,626 5,041 6,022 5,392 5,349 5,716 

 Asian 690 1,004 1,006 437 726 1,175 1,643 1,516 1,461 1,370 

 Other 14,867 21,727 14,233 8,781 14,644 19,935 21,916 18,280 18,467 18,039 

Region 

 Northeast 4,754 6,990 4,503 2,599 4,084 5,570 6,370 5,315 5,450 5,205 

 Midwest 5,101 7,578 4,913 3,030 5,203 7,093 7,729 6,628 6,642 6,610 

 South 8,196 12,592 8,867 5,496 9,295 12,551 14,924 13,297 13,745 13,514 

 West 5,561 8,756 6,171 3,849 6,512 8,959 10,548 9,201 8,960 9,381 

MSA 

 MSA 18,694 28,147 19,294 11,757 19,676 27,265 31,625 27,393 27,710 28,723 

 Non MSA 4,918 7,769 5,160 3,217 5,418 6,908 7,946 7,048 7,087 5,987 

1

The 1999 PIT contains only one of the two panels. 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality, Medical Expenditures Panel Survey

18
Table 3b. Number of completed person-level interviews by age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, and MSA 

status (based on MEPS Full Year Files): MEPS-HC 1996−2005 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Total 21,571 32,636 22,953 23,565 23,839 32,122 37,418 32,681 32,737 32,320 

Age 

 <1 321 406 270 266 291 383 455 431 426 424 

 1−17 5,965 9,330 6,569 6,551 6,595 8,774 10,599 9,512 9,353 9,217 

 18−24 1,884 2,919 2,154 2,095 2,119 3,010 3,462 3,080 3,072 3,041 

 25−44 6,478 9,332 6,412 6,727 6,680 8,869 10,273 8,877 8,819 8,559 

 45−64 4,374 6,661 4,753 5,107 5,244 7,228 8,296 7,053 7,303 7,362 

 65+ 2,549 3,988 2,795 2,819 2,910 3,858 4,333 3,728 3,764 3,717 

Sex 

 Male 10,289 15,443 10,859 11,287 11,445 15,369 17,796 15,413 15,439 15,251 

 Female 11,282 17,193 12,094 12,278 12,394 16,753 19,622 17,268 17,298 17,069 

Race/ethnicity 

 Hispanic 4,638 7,542 5,585 5,852 5,936 7,637 9,427 8,866 9,022 8,990 

 

NonHispanic 16,933 25,094 17,368 17,713 17,903 24,485 27,991 23,815 23,715 23,330 

 Black 2,907 4,815 3,430 3,239 3,471 4,699 5,570 5,094 4,991 5,260 

 Asian 582 829 597 635 602 987 1,304 1,349 1,311 1,227 

 Other 13,444 19,450 13,341 13,839 13,830 18,799 21,117 17,372 17,413 16,843 

Region 

 Northeast 4,275 6,278 4,159 4,031 3,746 5,063 5,840 4,843 4,912 4,734 

 Midwest 4,668 6,834 4,537 4,657 4,951 6,679 7,377 6,365 6,224 6,154 

 South 7,494 11,446 8,340 8,764 8,901 12,003 14,212 12,704 13,130 12,656 

 West 5,134 8,078 5,917 6,113 6,241 8,377 9,989 8,769 8,471 8,776 

MSA Status 

 MSA 16,791 25,185 17,897 18,325 18,556 25,451 29,723 25,827 26,777 26,572 

 Non MSA 4,592 7,127 4,817 5,038 5,283 6,671 7,695 6,854 5,960 5,748 

 Missing 188 324 239 202 - - - - - - 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality, Medical Expenditures Panel Survey

19
Table 4. Example sample size and response rates - Full Year (Panel 7, Rounds 1−3 

combined with Panel 6, Rounds 3−5): MEPS 2002 

Panel 6 Panel 7 

A. Percentage of NHIS households designated for 

use in MEPS (those initially characterized as 

responding) 89.9% 89.7% 

B. Number of households sampled from the NHIS 10,704 8,132 

C. Number of Households sampled from the NHIS 

and eligible and fielded for MEPS 10,651 8,083 

D. Round 1 – Number of RUs* eligible for 

interviewing 11,556 8,710 

E. Round 1 – Number of RUs with completed 

interviews 9,377 7,008 

F. Round 2 – Number of RUs eligible for interviewing 9,666 7,197 

G. Round 2 – Number of RUs with completed 

interviews 9,222 6,802 

H. Round 3 – Number of RUs eligible for interviewing 9,380 6,937 

I. Round 3 – Number of RUs with completed 

interviews 9,001 6,673 

J. Round 4 – Number of RUs eligible for interviewing 9,117 NA 

K. Round 4 – Number of RUs with completed 

interviews 8,843 NA 

L. Round 5 – Number of RUs eligible for interviewing 8,892 NA 

M. Round 5 – Number of RUs with completed 

interviews 8,781 NA 

P6: A x (E/D) x (G/F) x (I/H) x (K/J) x (M/L) 

P7: A x (E/D) x (G/F) x (I/H) 

64.0% 

(Panel 6 

through 

Round 5) 

65.6% 

(Panel 7 

through 

Round 3) 

Overall combined response rate: 

0.55 x P6 response rate + 

0.45 x P7 response rate 64.7% 

* RU is Reporting Unit. 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. 

20
Table 5. MEPS Individual Panel and Combined Annual Response Rates 

 Response Rate (%) 

Calendar 

Year 

Year 2 

Panel 

Year 1 

Panel 

Adjustment 

Factors 

(Year 2, Year 1) 

Combined 

Overall 

1996 na 70.66 na 71.0 

1997 64.06 69.49 na 66.8 

1998 65.72 69.02 na 67.4 

1999 65.88 66.14 na 66.0 

2000 63.68 68.27 (0.55, 0.45) 65.7 

2001 65.42 66.81 (0.33, 0.67) 66.3 

2002 63.99 65.60 (0.55, 0.45) 64.7 

2003 62.91 65.93 (0.49, 0.51) 64.5 

2004 62.66 63.50 (0.49, 0.51) 63.1 

Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 

− na is ‘not applicable’. 

21