Planning and Development

of the Continuous National

Survey of Family Growth

2009 September 48 Number 1, iesSer
Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the public domain and may be

reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source, however, is

appreciated.

Suggested citation

Groves RM, Mosher WD, Lepkowski J, Kirgis NG. Planning and development of

the continuous National Survey of Family Growth. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 1(48). 2009.

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents

Mail Stop: SSOP

Washington, DC 20402-9328

Printed on acid-free paper.
Series 1, Number 48

Planning and Development

of the Continuous National

Survey of Family Growth

Data from the Programs and

Collection Procedures

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Maryland

September 2009

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2009–1324
National Center for Health Statistics

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Acting Co-Deputy Director

Michael H. Sadagursky, Acting Co-Deputy Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director for Science

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Acting Associate Director for

Planning, Budget, and Legislation

Michael H. Sadagursky, Associate Director for

Management and Operations

Lawrence H. Cox, Ph.D., Associate Director for Research

and Methodology

Linda B. Torian, Acting Director for Information Technology

Linda B. Torian, Acting Director for Information Services

Linda T. Bilheimer, Ph.D., Associate Director for Analysis

and Epidemiology

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director for Vital Statistics

Jane E. Sisk, Ph.D., Director for Health Care Statistics

Jane F. Gentleman, Ph.D., Director for Health Interview

Statistics

Clifford L. Johnson, M.S.P.H., Director for Health and

Nutrition Examination Surveys

Division of Vital Statistics

Charles Rothwell, M.S., Director

Delton Atkinson, M.P.H., M.P.H., Deputy Director

Stephanie J. Ventura, M.A., Chief, Reproductive Statistics

Branch
Contents
 

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................... v 
 

Abstract ................................................................................................. 1 
 

Executive Summary........................................................................................ 1 
 

Introduction to the National Survey of Family Growth ........................................................... 2 
 

A Brief History of the National Survey of Family Growth ........................................................ 2 
 

The Transition to Continuous Interviewing ..................................................................... 4 
 

Preparing for Continuous Interviewing ...................................................................... 5 
 

Questionnaire Changes for 2006 and 2007 ................................................................... 6 
 

Important Features of the Continuous National Survey of Family Growth ......................................... 6 
 

Overview of the Sample Design.............................................................................. 7 
 

Implementing the Sample in a Responsive Design Context ....................................................... 9 
 

Overview of Sample Weighting ............................................................................ 9 
 

Overview of Variance Estimation ........................................................................... 9 
 

Development of the Questionnaires and Questionnaire Programs for the Continuous National Survey of Family Growth ...... 10 
 

Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) and Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI)
 

Development .......................................................................................... 10 
 

Testing ................................................................................................ 10 
 

Spanish Translation ...................................................................................... 10 
 

Overview of the National Survey of Family Growth Questionnaire Content........................................... 11 
 

The Female Questionnaire ................................................................................ 12 
 

The Male Questionnaire .................................................................................. 17 
 

How the Data Were Collected ............................................................................... 19 
 

Recruitment Protocol..................................................................................... 19 
 

Interviewer Training ..................................................................................... 20 
 

Interviewer Materials..................................................................................... 21 
 

Supervision ............................................................................................ 22 
 

The National Survey of Family Growth Fieldwork and Responsive Design ........................................... 23 
 

Paradata Used in the National Survey of Family Growth........................................................ 23 
 

Tracking of Response Propensities in Phase 1................................................................. 24 
 

Data Collection Quality Control .............................................................................. 26 
 

Production Review Interviews ............................................................................. 26 
 

Verification............................................................................................. 26 
 

Interviewer Comments on Individual Questions ............................................................... 26 
 

Interviewer Documentation on Respondent Reactions to Interview ................................................ 27 
 

Response Rate Tracking and Respondent Pool Balance ......................................................... 27 
 

Preparing Public-Use Data Files.............................................................................. 27 
 

Data File Creation ....................................................................................... 27 
 

Overview of Item Imputation .............................................................................. 27 
 

Structure of the Data Files ................................................................................ 28 
 

Data File Documentation ................................................................................. 28 
 

iii
Using the National Survey of Family Growth Data from Continuous Interviewing ................................... 28 
 

Analyzing Continuous Interviewing Data .................................................................... 29 
 

References ............................................................................................... 29 
 

Appendixes

Appendix I. Glossary....................................................................................... 31 
 

Appendix II. Advance Letters................................................................................ 33 
 

Appendix III. Interviewer Introduction Materials ................................................................ 41 
 

Appendix IV. Brochures .................................................................................... 45 
 

Appendix V. Consent/Assent Forms........................................................................... 49 
 

Appendix VI. Other Respondent Materials ..................................................................... 52 
 

Appendix VII. Interviewer Training Agenda .................................................................... 55 
 

Appendix VIII. Project Manual Table of Contents ............................................................... 57 
 

Appendix IX. FAQ’s for National Survey of Family Growth, Continuous Interviewing ................................. 63 
 

Text Figures

1.	 History of the National Survey of Family Growth ......................................................... 3 
 

2.	 Principal Staff Involved in the Design and Planning of the Continuous National Survey of Family Growth............ 4 
 

3.	 A Brief Chronology of the Transition from Periodic to Continuous Interviewing in the National Survey of Family
 

Growth............................................................................................. 5 
 

4.	 Continuous National Survey of Family Growth: Selection of Primary Sampling Units............................. 7 
 

5.	 Continuous National Survey of Family Growth: Sample Allocation Summary.................................... 8 
 

6.	 Outline of the Female Questionnaire ..................................................................... 13 
 

7.	 Outline of the Male Questionnaire....................................................................... 15 
 

8.	 Data Structure for National Survey of Family Growth Paradata ............................................... 24 
 

9.	 The National Survey of Family Growth Dashboard for Paradata Indicators...................................... 25 
 

iv
Acknowledgments
 

The continuous National Survey of

Family Growth (NSFG, begun in 2006)

was conducted by the National Center

for Health Statistics (NCHS) with the

support and assistance of other

organizations and individuals.

Interviewing, data processing, and other

tasks were carried out by the University

of Michigan’s Institute for Social

Research (ISR), undera contract with

NCHS.

The continuous NSFG was jointly

planned and funded by the following

programs and agencies of the U.S.

Department of Health and Human

Services: +	 The Eunice Kennedy Shriver

National Institute for Child Health

and Human Development (NICHD),

National Institutes of Health

+	 The Office of Population Affairs +	 The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention’s National Center for

Health Statistics (CDC/NCHS)

+	 The CDC’s Division of HIV/AIDS

Prevention (CDC/DHAP)

+	 The CDC’s Division of Sexually

Transmitted Disease Prevention

(CDC/DSTDP)

+	 The CDC’s Division of

Reproductive Health (CDC/DRH)

+	 The Office of the Assistant Secretary

for Planning and Evaluation

(OASPE)

+	 The Children’s Bureau of the

Administration for Children and

Families

NCHS gratefully acknowledges the

contributions of these programs and

agencies, and all others who assisted in

designing and carrying out the NSFG.

This report was prepared under the

general direction of Charles J. Rothwell,

Director of the Division of Vital

Statistics (DVS), and Stephanie J.

Ventura, Chief of the Reproductive

Statistics Branch, DVS. The authors

gratefully acknowledge the assistance

of Anjani Chandra, Ph.D.; Gladys

Martinez, Ph.D.; Jo Jones, Ph.D.; Joyce

Abma, Ph.D.; and Howard Riddick,

Ph.D. for their comments on previous

drafts of this report.

This report was edited by Gail V.

Johnson, CDC/CCHIS/NCHM/Division

of Creative Services, Writer-Editor

Services Branch and typeset by Zung T.

Le, CDC/CCHIS/NCHM/Division of

Creative Services, Graphic Services

Branch. Graphics were produced by

Odell Eldridge, CDC/CCHIS/NCHM/

Division of Creative Services, Graphic

Services Branch, NOVA contractor.

v
Objectives

This report describes how the

continuous National Survey of Family

Growth (NSFG) (begun in 2006) was

designed, planned, and implemented.

The NSFG is a continuous national

survey of men and women 15–44 years

of age designed to provide national

estimates of factors affecting pregnancy

and birth rates; men’s and women’s

health; and parenting.

Methods

The survey used in-person,

face-to-face interviews conducted by

trained female interviewers. One person

per household was interviewed from a

national area probability sample. The

data collection used computer-assisted

personal interviewing (CAPI). Separate

questionnaires were used for male and

female respondents. The last section of

the questionnaires used a selfadministered technique called audio

computer-assisted self-interviewing or

ACASI. Each data collection period

lasted 12 weeks—10 weeks for ‘‘Phase

1,’’ the main data collection protocol,

and 2 weeks for ‘‘Phase 2,’’ an

intensive attempt to locate and

interview nonrespondents.

Results

Each year, about 5,000 persons

were interviewed in about 33 areas,

called primary sampling units (PSUs).

Over a 4-year period, 110 PSUs will be

used. This report gives an overview of

the procedures used in the conduct of

the continuous NSFG. A later report will

describe response rates and other

results of the data collection, but the

early fieldwork has gone well.

Keywords: survey methodology c

continuous interviewing c responsive

design c paradata

Planning and Development of

the Continuous National Survey

of Family Growth

By Robert M. Groves, Ph.D., Institute for Social Research, University

of Michigan; William D. Mosher, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics,

National Center for Health Statistics; James M. Lepkowski, Ph.D., and

Nicole G. Kirgis, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan

Executive Summary

This report describes the design and

planning work for the transition to

continuous interviewing in the National

Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), and

the procedures used in fieldwork

operations. A subsequent report will

describe response rates and other results

of the data collection.

The substantive content of the

continuous NSFG is very similar to the

most recent periodic NSFG (conducted

in 2002). However, the methodology

and management of the continuous

survey is a significant departure from

the previous periodic survey

methodology. So this initial report

describes how the survey was planned,

what its objectives were, and the overall

concepts and procedures for carrying out

and managing the survey fieldwork.

This report is being released before the

public-use data file so that researchers

will have the necessary background to

understand the data when the data file is

released. After each data file is released

from this new design, a new report will

include specific updates, including

response rates and further details of the

data collection results. In this way, users

of the data will have more of the

information they need in a timelier

manner.

The information in this report

should be useful to at least two types of

readers. First, researchers who wish to

use the NSFG public-use data files may

want to know more about how the

NSFG was actually conducted, and why,

and how its conduct may affect their

plans for analyses of the data. Second,

the information presented here may also

be useful to those interested in survey

methodology, and whose surveys might

benefit from the approaches used in the

continuous NSFG. Recognizing that the

report may be read by persons with

varying backgrounds, Appendix I

defines a number of technical terms

used in this report.

The report begins with a brief

history of the NSFG as a periodic

survey conducted six times between

1973 and 2002. The report also explains

the limitations of the periodic design

that was used during those years, with

fieldwork carried out every 6 to 7 years

in more than 100 areas all at once. The

new continuous design was meant to

adapt to a new, and less favorable,

environment for in-person household

surveys. The central goal of the NSFG

design remained the same: interviewing

a large, nationally representative sample

of men and women 15–44 years of age,

in person, in English and Spanish. The

continuous design attempts to attain that

goal with greater cost-efficiency and

greater control over sample size, data

quality, and cost through the use of a

more efficient sample design, and

extensive use of paradata to make

real-time management of interviewer

effort possible. Thus, while the content

and substantive goals of the continuous

NSFG remained similar to the previous

periodic cycles of the NSFG, the way

Page 1
Page 2 [ Series 1, No. 48

those goals were attained changed

markedly with the new design.

The sample design for the

continuous NSFG was to divide the

national sample used in the 2002

NSFG into four annual subsamples of

about 33 primary sampling units

(PSUs) each year, with new PSUs

included each year. This greater

concentration of the sample at a given

time allowed the NSFG to have a

smaller field staff with a simpler and

more cost-effective management

structure than the old periodic

design.

The next section of the report

describes how the questionnaire

programs were tested and how they

were translated into Spanish. Then the

content of the male and female

questionnaires is described and the uses

of the information are explained. In this

section, it is shown that the male and

female questionnaires were organized

somewhat differently, and that their

content was similar, but some types of

information (for example, recent

contraceptive use) were collected in

somewhat more detail for women than

for men.

This is followed by an account of

how the data were collected: after PSUs

were selected and segments

(neighborhoods) randomly selected from

PSUs, households in those

neighborhoods were listed, randomly

selected, and screened to see if there

were any men or women 15–44 years of

age living there. If so, one person 15–44

years of age was selected for the sample

and asked to complete the interview.

Adults were asked for signed consent.

For minors (15–17 years of age) years

of age, parental consent was obtained

first and then the minor’s signed assent

was requested before they completed the

interview.

The materials used in NSFG

fieldwork—advance letters, brochures,

consent forms, and the Life History

Calendar, among others—are described

in the report and shown in Appendices

II–VI, while materials used for

interviewer training are shown in

Appendices VII–VIII.

Briefly, interviewer training

consisted of an in-home portion that

included reading the NSFG Interviewer

Manual and reviewing an in-home study

module provided on a DVD, followed

by an in-class training session at the

contractor’s headquarters. The in-class

portion consisted of 5 full days,

primarily devoted to practice with the

male and female questionnaires. New

interviewers and bilingual Spanish

interviewers were trained for an

additional day.

Quality control and preparation of

the public-use data files are described

next, including how the high-priority

analysis variables (‘‘recodes’’) are

prepared and imputed. Finally, the

importance of using the correct weights

(weights for the time period during

which the data were collected) in

analysis is described.

A forthcoming companion report

describes the sample design, weighting,

imputation, and variance estimation of

the continuous NSFG in more detail.

Introduction to the

National Survey of

Family Growth

The continuous NSFG began

interviewing around July 1, 2006. At

this writing, it is yielding about 5,000

in-person interviews each year of

women and men aged 15–44 years of

age in the household population of the

United States. The interviews are done

in person in the homes of respondents

by professional female interviewers

using laptop computers. Interviewing is

ongoing for 48 weeks each year. A

sample has been released four times per

year. Each year interviewing has been

conducted in about 33 areas, with a

rotation of 25 new areas each year.

The survey produces national

estimates of characteristics relating to:

+	 Trends and differentials in birth and

pregnancy rates

+	 Determinants of birth and pregnancy

rates, including sexual activity,

contraceptive use, infertility, and

sterilization

+	 Marriage, divorce, and cohabitation

+	 Adoption and factors related to the

demand for adopted children

+	 Use of medical services for birth

control, infertility, and selected

health screening

+	 Behavior related to the risk of HIV

and other sexually transmitted

diseases

+	 Men’s roles in raising and

supporting their children

+	 Men’s and women’s attitudes about

marriage, children, and families

Public-use data files will be

released periodically. Each data release

will be accompanied by more specific

information about the results of the data

collection included in that release. A

subsequent NCHS report will include

results of the data collection. This report

gives an overview of how the

continuous NSFG was designed,

planned, and managed.

A Brief History of the

National Survey of

Family Growth

The NSFG was established at the

National Center for Health Statistics

(NCHS) in 1971. Cycle 1 was

conducted in 1973. Before then, smaller

national surveys of married women were

conducted by private organizations in

1955 and 1960 (1,2). In 1965 and 1970,

they were conducted by university

researchers with federal funding (3–5).

As shown in Figure 1, the NSFG

was conducted six times between 1973

and 2002 by NCHS. Picking up where

previous studies left off, the NSFG

continued making improvements in the

national measurement of fertility. A

‘‘cycle’’ consisted of several years of

effort, including planning, pretest,

fieldwork, data processing, file

preparation, and documentation for a

single survey, but the year given is the

year the interviewing (or most of the

interviewing) was done. In each cycle, a

large number of interviewers were hired

and the interviewing was done in 12

months or less.

Cycle 1 interviewing was conducted

in 1973, and based on interviews of

9,797 women 15–44 years of age, the

largest sample at that time for a U.S.
Cycle Year

Survey

contractor

Scope or

population

covered

Number

of

interviews

Source

of

sample

Oversamples

Average

length in

minutes

Incentive

payment

1 1973 NORC Ever-married

women 15–44

9,797 Independent

101 PSUs

Black women 60 No

2 1976 Westat Ever-married

women 15–44

8,611 Independent

79 PSUs

Black women 60 No

3 1982 Westat All women

15–44

7,969 Independent

79 PSUs

Black women

teens

60 No

4 1988 Westat All women

15–44

8,450 NHIS

156 PSUs

Black women 70 No

5 1995 RTI All women

15–44

10,847 NHIS

198 PSUs

Black women

Hispanic women

100 $20

6 2002 University of Men 15–44 12,571 Independent Blacks Men=60 $40

Michigan ISR Women 15–44 121 PSUs Hispanics Women=85

teens

Continuous 2006– University of Men 15–44 5,000 Independent Blacks Men=60 $40

Michigan ISR Women 15–44 per year 110 PSUs in Hispanics Women=80

4 years teens

NOTE: PSU is primary sampling unit. NHIS is National Health Interview Survey.

Figure 1. History of the National Survey of Family Growth

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 3

national fertility survey. Cycle 2 was

conducted in 1976, with 8,611 women.

Cycles 1 and 2 were restricted to

women who were currently or formerly

married or never-married mothers;

never-married women who had not had

children were excluded. Cycles 1 and 2

focused primarily on a pregnancy

history, contraceptive use, birth

intentions, marriage histories, and a

variety of social and economic

characteristics (6).

NSFG Cycle 3 in 1982 included

interviews with 7,969 women. The

sampling frame was expanded to include

all women 15–44 years of age

regardless of marital status, making it

possible to study the sexual activity,

contraceptive use, and use of family

planning services of never-married

women and teenagers in addition to the

populations covered by Cycles 1 and

2 (7).

NSFG Cycle 4, fielded in 1988,

included interviews with 8,450 women

15–44 years of age. New questions were

introduced on cohabitation, adoption,

and sexually transmitted diseases

(STDs). The new questions included

items covering respondents’ knowledge

of Chlamydia, genital herpes, and

AIDS-related knowledge and

behavior (8).

Cycle 5 of the NSFG was fielded in

1995 and included interviews with

10,847 women 15–44 years of age.

Several changes were introduced in the

1995 NSFG (8–10) to increase the

usefulness of the data. The survey was

converted from paper and pencil

interviewing to computer-assisted

personal interviewing (CAPI) in an

effort to improve the consistency and

quality of the data. Several event

histories were introduced: an education

history, a work history, and a

cohabitation history, to help understand

their associations with the pregnancy,

marriage, and contraception histories

that the NSFG has always collected. A

Life History Calendar was added to help

organize all the event history

information. A file of contextual data

was created and made available through

the NCHS Research Data Center,

allowing researchers to examine the

ways in which characteristics of the

place of residence–census tract, county,

or state–influence behaviors (11).

Another innovation in the 1995 NSFG

was audio computer-assisted selfinterviewing (ACASI), in which

respondents used laptop computers to

hear and read the most sensitive

questions and enter answers by

themselves.

Cycle 6 of the NSFG, which was

conducted in 2002, introduced another

major innovation. An independent

national sample of males 15–44 years of

age was added to the sample, with a

new questionnaire specially designed for

males. The 2002 survey was based on

12,571 interviews—7,643 with females

and 4,928 with males 15–44 years of

age–the largest NSFG sample ever

interviewed. The content of the ACASI

section of the NSFG was also expanded

significantly in 2002 to collect data on

behaviors related to the risk of HIV and

other STDs. Further, changes in some

question series were informed by a set

of white papers commissioned between

the 1995 and 2002 surveys, as well as a

large pilot study conducted in 2001.

Those results are presented and

described in the Series 1 report for

Cycle 6 (12); also available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/

sr_01/sr01_042.pdf.
National Survey of Family Growth staff (NSFG), National Center for Health Statistics

(In alphabetical order, former staff marked with an *)

Joyce C. Abma, Ph.D.

Anjani Chandra, Ph.D.

*Paula Goodwin, Ph.D.

Jo Jones, Ph.D.

Gladys Martinez, Ph.D.

*Brittany McGill, M.P.P.

William D. Mosher, Ph.D.

Chief, Reproductive Statistics Branch: Design Statistician:

Stephanie J. Ventura, M.A. Karen E. Davis, M.A.

Office of Population Affairs:

Eugenia Eckard, M.A.

National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

Christine Bachrach, Ph.D. and Rosalind King, Ph.D.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau, Administration for

Children and Families

Penelope Maza, Ph.D.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation

Linda Mellgren, M.P.A.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention,

Atlanta, GA

Amy Lansky, Ph.D., and Elizabeth Di Nenno, Ph.D.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, Atlanta, GA

Nicole Liddon, Ph.D., and Jami Leichliter, Ph.D.

Principal University of Michigan staff involved in NSFG design and planning

William G. Axinn, Ph.D. James M. Lepkowski, Ph.D.

Peter Granda, Ph.D. Patricia Maher

Robert M. Groves, Ph.D. Shonda Kruger Ndiaye

Nicole Kirgis

Figure 2. Principal staff involved in the design and planning of the continuous National

Survey of Family Growth, 2001–2007

Page 4 [ Series 1, No. 48

The Transition to

Continuous

Interviewing

The history described previously

illustrates that the first six NSFG data

sets were produced with large one-time

data collection efforts. In the late 1990s

large shifts in the reactions of the

household population to survey requests

were experienced by many surveys in

the United States and Europe (13).

These shifts were evident in almost all

developed countries of the world, and

the United States did not escape the

trend. It was becoming increasingly

difficult to predict how many

interviewer hours of work would be

required to contact and screen a

sufficient number of eligible

households and then obtain a given

number of interviews with those

households. It was also unclear how

large a sample was needed, and how

many interviewers were required, to

complete the task.

The continuous interviewing design

was motivated by increasing uncertainty

in the performance of complex

face-to-face surveys in the United

States. These uncertainties arise because

of unknown eligibility rates in samples

of U.S. addresses, unknown contact and

cooperation rates, and various

diseconomies of scale in the staffing

organization of large, one-time field

effort designs. An officer of the

American Association for Public

Opinion Research observed in 2003

that:

‘‘For a handful of years, it has

seemed to all of us in survey

research that response rates pose a

substantial challenge to our work. A

series of factors have made it more

difficult to contact potential

respondents, driving up costs.

During the same time period,

respondents’ willingness to

participate has declined slightly.

Taken together, these shifts have led

to lower response rates than those

of twenty years ago’’ (14).

Further, Cycles 1–6 of NSFG

required the redevelopment of survey

questionnaires, reprogramming of

computer-assisted personal interviewing

software, recruiting, hiring, and training

large numbers of interviewers, hiring

layers of field management oversight,

and large numbers of central office

staff–all required to do all of the

fieldwork in 12 months or less.

Thus, in the late 1990s the

performance of large-scale survey efforts

was becoming less predictable. The

result was that cost inefficiencies and a

loss of management control of the

survey design were increasingly likely.

Given the limited funding available for

the NSFG, a new design was needed for

the new environment–a design that

provided much greater control over the

costs and results of the survey

fieldwork. Work began on a proposal for

a reform of NSFG, to be called the

‘‘continuous NSFG.’’

The launch of the continuous NSFG

was a complex project that required the

efforts of many professionals across

several disciplines and organizations.

Some of the principal staff who were

involved in the design and planning of

the launch of the continuous NSFG are

listed in Figure 2. The principal events

are listed in chronological order in

Figure 3.

In late 2000 and early 2001, the

NSFG’s funding agency representatives

held a series of meetings to consider the

future of the survey and the most

advantageous ways to make it more

useful. Part of those deliberations was a

draft memorandum by the ISR’s NSFG

Project Director on the outlines of an

affordable and cost-effective continuous

interviewing plan. The NSFG’s

co-sponsors concluded that the content

of the survey was now generally

satisfactory, particularly given the

addition of men to the sample, and the

expansion of the content of Audio CASI
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 5

March 19, 2004 NSFG funding agencies approve continuous interviewing.

Fall 2004 Transition teams formed at ISR.

Summer–Fall 2005 OMB and IRB clearance materials are drafted.

Fall 2005 Consultations with NSFG collaborating agencies on

questionnaire changes for continuous interviewing.

January 2006 National Center for Health Statistics IRB approval is

received.

April 2006 OMB clearance is received.

January–May 2006 Questionnaire programs are programmed and tested.

March-June 2006 Training program and materials developed and reviewed.

June 2006 Forty-one interviewers and other staff are trained in

Ann Arbor, MI.

July 1, 2006–June 2007 Year 1 of interviewing.

Fall 2006 Consultations with NSFG collaborating agencies on

questionnaire changes for year 2 of interviewing.

January–May 2006 Questionnaire programs are programmed and tested.

March 2007 IRB approval of changes for year 2 is received.

April 2007 OMB approval for changes in year 2 is received.

July 2007–June 2008 Year 2 of interviewing.

July 2008–June 2009 Year 3 of interviewing.

July 2009–2010 Year 4 of interviewing—full sample design (110 PSUs)

complete in 2010.

NOTE: NSFG = National Survey of Family Growth; ISR = Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; OMB = Office

of Management and Budget; IRB = Institutional Review Board; and PSU= primary sampling unit.

Figure 3. A brief chronology of the transition from periodic to continuous interviewing in

the National Survey of Family Growth

in the 2002 NSFG. The principal way in

which the survey could be made more

useful, they concluded, was to collect

more interviews more often and release

the results more frequently.

A series of discussions and studies

was conducted in 2003 through early

2004, using the experience of the 2002

NSFG and additional research. In that

research, a continuous design was

compared with the design of the 2002

NSFG. At that series of meetings, the

NSFG staff and contractor presented

research comparing the continuous

design with a design like that used in

2002 (Cycle 6). The continuous design

had several features that suggested it

should be more cost-efficient:

1.	 The sample design would be a

stratified clustered design allocated

to optimize the workload of

interviewers (in order to control

costs of data collection).

2.	 The questionnaire would be

relatively fixed, with a small

number of changes introduced once

a year.

3. Interviewing would be continuous

over time, amortizing the costs of

hiring and training over a longer

period of time, and the benefits of

an increasingly experienced field

staff.

4. The number of primary areas in the

sample design would be relatively

small at any one time period, to

permit a greatly simplified (and

more cost-efficient) organization to

manage the data collection.

5. The primary areas (PSU’s) would

rotate over years, assembling over

time a more and more precise

sample for national estimation.

6. Production data would be processed

each day, and post-collection editing

would be done continuously every

day. This would allow data sets to

be released in a more timely

fashion.

7.	 Increased amounts of administrative

data (‘‘paradata’’) would be

monitored daily during data collection

and active interventions would be

guided by those data in order to react

to unanticipated changes in the U.S.

public’s reaction to the survey request

over time.

After much discussion, the agencies

funding the NSFG agreed in March

2004 that the continuous interviewing

design appeared to be valid and that

continuous interviewing should be

implemented.

Preparing for Continuous

Interviewing

In 2004 and 2005, the NSFG teams

at NCHS and ISR began to implement

the new continuous design. This

implementation process considered five

types of issues:

1.	 Programming and data processing,

including examining available

hardware and software for

interviewing, data processing, and

data file documentation. One

innovation here was the use of

tablet computers that could collect

electronic signatures, which

eliminated the need to mail and

store paper consent forms.

2.	 Administrative systems, including

improvements to the software

systems for collecting and analyzing

data on fieldwork.

3.	 Fieldwork and sampling, including

an assessment of commercial

address lists as a base frame for

sampled blocks; defining

interviewer workloads to optimize

production; revising training

procedures to use in-class time

more efficiently; and revising the

in-home study module and

including the material on DVD.

4.	 Preparing materials for the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

clearance of the survey and for the

IRB review. These materials were

prepared in summer and fall 2005

and reviewed. NCHS IRB approval

was received on January 27, 2006.

OMB approval was received on

April 14, 2006.

5.	 Changes in the questionnaires for

continuous interviewing, including

improvements in specifications

and substantive questionnaire
Page 6 [ Series 1, No. 48

improvements. ISR and NCHS

suggested technical improvements.

NCHS discussed substantive

improvements internally and with

collaborating agency representatives.

These changes are described in the

following text.

Questionnaire Changes for

2006 and 2007

Changes for 2006

It was decided that there would not

be any major revisions in the content of

the questionnaires between the 2002

NSFG and the start of continuous

interviewing in 2006. Nevertheless, it

was not desirable to use the 2002

questionnaires as they were. Some

moderate revisions were deemed

desirable and feasible for 2006. After

considerable in-depth analysis of the

Cycle 6 (2002) results, and discussion of

needed upgrades, the questionnaire

revisions between 2002 and 2006 were

of six main types:

1.	 Fixing errors or gaps in the

specifications or the program—

Some of these stemmed from a lack

of consistent specifications for the

routing of ‘‘Don’t Know’’ and

‘‘Refused’’ answers, which are not

common in the NSFG, but

nonetheless can cause missing and

apparently inconsistent answers for

some respondents. Careful attention

was paid to ensure that routing for

these responses was fully specified.

When necessary, improvements

were also made in the wording of

‘‘fills’’ within a question (for

example, specifying the name of a

baby or partner to ensure that the

respondent understood the question

correctly).

2.	 Simplifying or restructuring some

sections that became too complex to

program and test—These sections

were simplified enough so that their

specifications and programs could

be verified.

3.	 Improving edit checks—Edit checks

are checks for logical consistency

that are built into the interview. In

the 2002 NSFG, not all were fully

scripted for the interviewer. Writing

the words for the interviewer

ensured that the edits were

administered more consistently.

4.	 Improving comparability for males

and females—Some changes were

made to make some important

questions more comparable for

males and females than they had

been in 2002.

5.	 Updating—When necessary,

questions were updated—for

example, to include contraceptive

methods introduced in the United

States since 2002, and new HIV

testing techniques.

6.	 Coding improvements—Using

interviewer comments, consistency

checking, and other information,

new or additional code categories

were added to some questions.

Other questions that had ‘‘Other’’

codes in Cycle 6 were changed to

‘‘Other (specify)’’ codes so that the

meaning of the ‘‘Other’’ responses

could be ascertained.

Changes for 2007
 

(‘‘Year 2,’’ June 2007–2008)
 

The themes of the changes made in

the questionnaires in 2007 were the

same as in 2006—fixing errors or gaps,

simplifying, improving edit checks,

improving male-female comparability,

updating, and coding improvements—

but the number and scope of the

changes were far less because most of

those deemed necessary had been made

in 2006. Nonetheless, a few technical

fixes were made based on experience

gained in the first 6–9 months of

interviewing. In addition, a small

number of substantive improvements

were made (amounting to about 2

minutes of interview time for males and

females), based on examination of the

data, and suggestions made by the

NSFG’s collaborating agencies and by

researchers during the NSFG Research

Conference in October 2006. These

revisions were submitted to the NCHS

IRB and to OMB, and approved in early

2007.

Important Features of the

Continuous National

Survey of Family Growth

Pretest

Elaborate pretests, similar to pilot

studies, were conducted to prepare for

the 1995 and 2002 NSFG surveys. The

Cycle 5 pretest was conducted in late

1993; 500 women were interviewed.

The Cycle 6 pretest was conducted in

2001 and yielded 615 completed

interviews with men and women

15–44 years of age. These pretests

tested a number of innovations, and

the questionnaires and procedures

were revised significantly after

them (12,15,16).

The continuous NSFG was

different, however, because the volume

of questionnaire change was much less

than for the 1995 and 2002 surveys. In

effect, the 2002 survey was a kind of

pretest for the continuous NSFG,

because the experience of the 2002

NSFG was used as the most important

input into the changes for 2006. In

addition, the first 2 months of

interviewing in 2006 were designated as

the pretest, but the intent was that, if

successful, the pretest interviews would

be included in the dataset. The test was

successful, and the cases from the first 8

weeks of interviewing were included in

the main data set.

Reduced scale

The 2002 NSFG had utilized about

260 interviewers over a field period of

about 12 months. Quality and cost

control with large sets of interviewers is

difficult. Interviewer productivity is

reduced and survey costs are increased

by the inevitable learning curves that

new interviewers experience in the first

months of work. In contrast, the current

continuous NSFG uses about 40

interviewers in any given year because

the sample is divided into four annual

replicates. This smaller group of

interviewers works consistently over the

entire year, with workloads designed to

maximize their productivity. This design

allows the average interviewer to

produce considerably more interviews
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 7

per interviewer than in the 2002 survey,

which increases efficiency and reduces

the costs of training and recruiting.

Active management of the

fieldwork

One of the most important

innovations in the NSFG in 2002 and

2006 was the active management of the

fieldwork using ‘‘Responsive Design’’

concepts (16–18). This is discussed in

more detail later in this report, but here

it is sufficient to note that this active

management of the fieldwork helps to

prevent cost over-runs, control costs,

and ration interviewer labor so that

interviewers’ effort is used with

maximum effectiveness.

Overview of the
 

Sample Design
 

A total of approximately 5,000

women and men were being interviewed

annually from a sample selected using

probability sampling methods in the

early stages of continuous interviewing

for the NSFG. A national sample of 110

Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) was

selected at the beginning of data

collection around July 1, 2006

(Figure 4). PSUs are metropolitan areas,

counties, or groups of adjacent counties.

This national sample was divided

into national quarter samples

of 33 PSUs that are in turn used in each

of four successive years (Figure 5).

These national quarter sample PSUs

consist of eight large metropolitan areas

in the United States (which remain in

the sample each year) and 25 smaller

metropolitan and nonmetropolitan PSUs

that change, or rotate, each year. The

110 PSUs in the national sample are

located in most states and include the

largest metropolitan areas in the United

States.

From each PSU, secondary units,

called segments, were selected.

Segments are, roughly, neighborhoods or

groups of adjacent blocks. In each

selected segment, one of two procedures

was used to enumerate housing units in

the area. In the ‘‘update’’ segments,

addresses were obtained from a

commercial source and visited by

interviewers to check and correct the

20 SR PSUs 

NSR MSA 

PSUs (290) 

Non-MSAs 

(2,084) 

Create nonMSA strata 

(30) 

NSR MSA 

PSUs (50) 

NSR non-MSA 

PSUs (32) 

NSFG PSUs 

(110) 

Select 1 

PSU per 

stratum (28) 

Select 1 

PSU per 

stratum 

Select 2 

linked PSUs 

in one stratum 

Create NSR 

MSA strata 

(50) 

20 Next 

largest 

MSAs 

Super 8 

PSUs (8) 

NOTES: PSU = primary sampling unit; MSA = metropolitan statistical area; SR = self-representing; NSR = non-self-representing; and Super 8 = 8 largest 

PSUs. 

SR PSUs 

(28) 

PSU frame 

(2,402 PSUs) 

8 Largest 

MSAs 

Figure 4. Continuous National Survey of Family Growth: Selection of Primary Sampling Units
Page 8 [ Series 1, No. 48
 

Calendar quarter 

sample 1 

(approximately 3 

segments) 

Select 

approximately 12 

segments per PSU 

Interviewer ‘update’ 

or ‘scratch’ listing 

of addresses 

Select housing 

units 

Select eligible 

persons 

Screening 

Main interviewing 

Domain 1 

(non-minority) 

Domain 2 

(>10% Black 

population) 

Domain 3 

(>10% Hispanic 

population) 

Domain 4 (>10% 

Black and Hispanic 

population) 

NSFG PSUs (110) 

National quarter 

sample 

1 (33 PSUs) 

NOTE: PSU is primary sampling unit. 

National quarter 

sample 

2 (33 PSUs) 

Randomly 

selected 

quarter sample 

National quarter 

sample 

3 (33 PSUs) 

National quarter 

sample 

4 (33 PSUs) 

Calendar quarter 

sample 2 

(approximately 3 

segments) 

Calendar quarter 

sample 3 

(approximately 3 

segments) 

Calendar quarter 

sample 4 

(approximately 3 

segments) 

Figure 5. Continuous National Survey of Family Growth: Sample Allocation Summary
accuracy of the list. In the ‘‘scratch’’

segments, interviewers visit the segment

and list all housing units. ISR central

office staff selects a sample of the

updated or listed addresses for screening

and interviewing. More details on the

stages of sample design can be found in

the Series 2 report for continuous

interviewing (18).

The sample housing units were then

contacted, and a ‘‘screener’’ interview

was requested, in which the persons

living at that address (including persons

living away from the household in a

college dormitory, sorority, or fraternity)

were listed. If one eligible person 15–44

years of age was living at the address,

he or she was asked to do an interview.

If more than one eligible person lived

there, one was randomly selected and

asked to do an interview.

Implementing the Sample

in a Responsive Design

Context

Surveys with high response rate

goals and limited budgets, such as the

continuous NSFG, need a way to stay

informed on the level of key survey

design parameters, such as completed

interviews, eligibility rates, response

rates, expenditures, and interviewer

productivity. If these data are going to

be useful for managing the fieldwork

and controlling costs, they must be

available daily, so that changes to the

design and fieldwork strategy can be

made in response to conditions in the

field (12,16,17).

The continuous NSFG has

information systems that allow survey

design changes throughout the data

collection. The information systems

provide daily data (called paradata) on

such features as how much interviewer

labor and money are being spent on data

collection, what areas and interviewers

are having good and poor results, and

what types of nonresponse are most

prevalent in an area. ISR used a system

called SurveyTrak to provide that daily

information.

Overview of Sample

Weighting

A detailed explanation of

weighting in the 2002 NSFG has been

published (16), and another will be

published for continuous interviewing (18). This section gives a brief

general overview of weighting in the

NSFG. Use of sampling weights is

necessary to produce accurate statistics

(for example, percentages and means)

and also to produce correct estimates of

the standard errors of those statistics.

A simple random sample in which

response rates and coverage are the

same in every subgroup would create a

‘‘scale model’’ of the population.

However, many survey samples are not

‘‘scale models’’ in that sense. If a ‘‘scale

model’’ of the population is selected,

smaller groups in the population (for

example, teenagers, African Americans,

and Hispanics) would have too few

observations in the sample to provide

adequate precision for characteristics of

interest for those groups. As a result,

survey samples often select groups at

higher and lower rates deliberately to

over-represent smaller groups in the

sample. This allows analysts the

opportunity to answer key survey

questions for the total population and

for those small but often important

groups of the population.

For example, in the NSFG,

non-Hispanic black women and men

were being chosen to account for about

20 percent of all respondents in the

sample, even though they are

approximately 13 percent of the

population 15–44 years of age. Hispanic

women and men and teenagers of all

races were also sampled at higher rates

than non-Hispanic non-black adults in

this cycle of the NSFG. ‘‘Sampling

weights’’ adjust for these different

sampling rates.

A respondent’s sampling weight can

be interpreted as the number of persons

in the population that he or she

represents. For example, if a woman’s

sampling weight is 8,000, then she

represents 8,000 women in the

population. For the NSFG, the fully

adjusted sampling weights are assigned

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 9

to each respondent and consist of three

factors. The first is the inverse of the

probability that the case was selected.

For example, in the NSFG, records are

maintained to allow the computation of

the probability of selection for each

sample person. If the probability is 1 in

6,000, then the initial sampling weight

is 6,000. The second factor is an

adjustment for nonresponse calculated

separately and based on the probability

of completing a screener and the

probability that a completed screener

results in a completed interview. If, for

example, the probability of a completed

screener was .91 and the probability of a

completed interview was .825, then the

probability of a completed interview

was about (.91 × .825) or .75, and the

adjusted weight would be 6,000 divided

by .75, or about 8,000. The third factor

is termed ‘‘poststratification’’ and is an

adjustment to control totals of the

number of persons by age, sex, race,

and Hispanic origin, provided by the

U.S. Census Bureau (and, for military

personnel living in a household outside

of a military facility, the Defense

Manpower Data Center).

Overview of Variance

Estimation

Sampling variance is a measure of

the quality of a statistic (such as a

proportion or a mean) caused by having

taken a sample instead of interviewing

the full population. For example, in the

NSFG, the sampling variance measures

variation caused by interviewing

approximately 5,000 women and men in

a single year, instead of interviewing all

of the approximately 120 million

women and men 15–44 years of age in

the nation. Sampling variance measures

the variation of the estimated statistic

over repeated samples. The sampling

variance is zero when the full

population is observed, as in a census.

For the NSFG, the sampling

variance estimate is determined by the

sample design and the population

parameter being estimated, and it is

called the design-based sampling

variance. The NSFG data file contains a

final weight and information necessary
Page 10 [ Series 1, No. 48

to estimate the sampling variance for a

statistic. Many statistical software

packages by default compute

‘‘population’’ variances that may

severely underestimate the sampling

variances.

Special software is required to

accurately estimate sampling errors in a

complex sample such as the NSFG, but

such software is increasingly common

and easy to use and obtain. Examples of

how to use such software to estimate

sampling errors for the 2006–2008

NSFG are not included in this report,

but examples will be presented with

each data release from the continuous

data collection. For examples of

variance estimates based on the 2002

NSFG, see reference 16; for further

details about variance estimates for

continuous interviewing, see

reference 18.

Development of the

Questionnaires and

Questionnaire

Programs for the

Continuous National

Survey of Family

Growth

There are two versions of the NSFG

questionnaire, one for females and one

for males. The questionnaires were

programmed in a CAPI software system

called Blaiset. The questionnaires were

based on complex contingent logic,

which tailors the wording of questions

to the circumstances of the respondent,

automatically skips the interviewer to

the appropriate next question based on

earlier answers, and alerts the

interviewer to inconsistencies in

responses. The male and female

questionnaires were organized

differently, and each contained some

unique content, but they also contained

similar questions for most substantive

topics. Both questionnaires were

translated into Spanish, as described in

the following text.

Computer-Assisted

Personal Interviewing

(CAPI) and Audio

Computer-Assisted

Self-Interviewing (ACASI)

Development

The CAPI and ACASI

questionnaires used in the 2002 NSFG

were the basis for the questionnaires

used in 2006–2008. The effort to

improve the content and organization of

those questionnaires was described in

the ‘‘The Transition to Continuous

Interviewing’’ discussed previously.

The NSFG staff at NCHS led the

effort to revise the questionnaire

specifications, aided by the NSFG staff

at ISR. The NSFG staff at ISR worked

with the ISR programmers on the

implementation of the new instrument

specifications. The female and male

questionnaires were revised,

reprogrammed, and then tested on a

coordinated schedule. While the

programmers worked on one instrument,

the other instrument was tested at ISR

and NCHS. This schedule made efficient

use of available resources and avoided

unproductive downtime for either group.

Audio files used in the ACASI

section of the questionnaires, both in

English and Spanish, were also updated

each year as necessary.

Testing

Testing of the questionnaire

programs was conducted by ISR staff

and by NCHS in numerous rounds, with

a slightly different focus in each round.

Identified problems were fixed and the

instruments were sent to NCHS for

more testing. Overall, there were usually

four to five rounds of testing for each

instrument (male and female) as well as

sign-off rounds of testing for the

Spanish questionnaire, the version of the

questionnaires used for interviewer

training, and the final version for

production, as well as testing of the

questionnaire integrated into SurveyTrak

(the ISR sample management system).

For the most part, each instrument

was tested as an integrated unit,

including the screening portion of the

questionnaire and the male or female

interview. The first round of testing

focused on the logic, flow, and edit

checks in the instrument as well as

checking that the text of the

programmed questions matched the

CAPI Reference Questionnaire (CRQ)

that was developed to direct the CAPI

programming. In the later rounds of

testing, problems identified during the

earlier rounds were tested to see if they

had been resolved; screen formatting,

electronic ‘‘Help’’ screens, and ACASI

sound files were also tested.

Spanish Translation

Given the growth of the Hispanic

population into the largest minority

group (19), it is critical for the NSFG to

obtain accurate information about the

attitudes and behaviors of Hispanic men

and women. Census 2000 showed that

49 percent of Hispanic persons over the

age of 5 who spoke Spanish did not

speak English very well (20). Therefore,

it is important to have a Spanish version

of the NSFG questionnaire. Roughly

6–7 percent of the completed NSFG

interviews were conducted in Spanish.

About one-third of Hispanic men and

women interviewed in the NSFG chose

to do the survey in Spanish.

Potential respondents who do not

speak English or Spanish are not

included in the NSFG. In 2006–2008,

this group accounted for about

0.6 percent of screened households and

0.5 percent of main interview

households.

The Spanish translation of the

NSFG instruments for the 2002 and

2006–2008 NSFG was done by

Research Support Services (RSS), a firm

specializing in translation, working in

close collaboration with ISR and with

bilingual staff at NCHS. (For a

description of the translation and review

process used in the 2002 NSFG, see

reference 21).

For the 2002 NSFG (Cycle 6), a

Modified Committee Approach was

used, in which the original translation

was performed by three translators,

doing one third of the instrument each,

instead of three whole independent

translations (22). This approach had

been used extensively by RSS and
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 11

found to maintain the strength of the

traditional committee approach, while

being less expensive and less time

consuming. The division of material

among the translators was done in a

way that avoided giving entire sections

or modules to a single person. Instead,

pages are sorted into three piles, one for

each translator, ‘‘in the alternating

fashion used to deal cards in card

games’’ (23). This assured that all three

translators were familiar with the

different topics covered in the

instruments.

The modified committee approach

did not include back translation (giving

a second translator the Spanish

instrument and having him or her

translate it back into English in order to

compare the two versions of the

instrument). A major drawback of the

back-translation method is that even

when the back translation text is

identical to the original, this does not

give the researcher any sense of whether

respondents will be able to understand

the translated version.

The translation had to be sensitive

to differences in vocabulary choices

among major groups of Hispanics,

including Mexicans, Puerto Ricans,

Cubans, and others, given that the

survey was to be administered in

Spanish to a nationwide sample of

Hispanic persons. In addition, the

Spanish version had to be appropriate

for less educated and newly arrived

Spanish-speakers because this is the

Hispanic group that is most likely to

request to be interviewed in Spanish.

The committee that worked on the

NSFG translations included translators

who were native speakers of some of

the main varieties of Spanish spoken by

the Hispanic population in the United

States (one from Mexico, one from

Puerto Rico, and one from South

America). Two of the translators were

males, while the other translator and the

referee were female. The committee

translated the female questionnaire, the

male questionnaire, and the

accompanying materials (for example,

informed consent letters). The

translation reconciliation sessions took a

total of 21 hours. A referee, with

extensive experience in survey

instrument translations, chaired the

reconciliation meeting. The strength in

this model comes from the consensus

among bilinguals, which results in more

accurate text than in a subjective single

translation. In addition, problems of

personal idiosyncrasies, culture, and

uneven skills in either language could

be overcome.

Items or terms were flagged for

further research when the team was

unable to reach an agreement. A subset

of items was tested in cognitive

interviews in order to identify questions

that presented problems and reasons for

the existence of these problems. RSS

interviewed nine Spanish-speaking

women and nine Spanish-speaking men.

All were immigrants from eight

different countries in Latin America.

Their ages ranged from 16 to 41 and

their age at the time of immigration also

ranged widely, from age 10 to 36. Their

years of schooling varied from 3 to 19.

The cognitive interviews consisted of

three types of questions: questions that

tried to ascertain participants’

understanding of specific words for

which familiarity to speakers was

uncertain; questions asking about

definitions; and questions about

hypothetical situations in the form of

vignettes. The Spanish language

instruments were edited based on

information learned from the cognitive

interviews.

Once the Spanish language version

of the questionnaire had been finalized,

it had to be incorporated into the

Blaiset program. Using the English

language program as a template, the

Spanish text was copied and pasted into

the program by ISR staff. Programmers

were called upon to work on areas of

the questionnaire that required

substantial technical changes from

English to Spanish, such as major

restructuring of fills. Bilingual testers

were used to make sure the Spanish

instruments had been constructed

properly. Specifically, they examined the

instruments to make sure there were no

English words showing up in the

Spanish questions and that the fills

worked correctly. Although it was not

their main focus, their review provided

an additional check of the basic

instrument flow and structure.

In Blaiset, interviewers can switch

the language of the instrument with a

single keystroke. The ACASI portion of

the interview is also translated into

Spanish with an audio part in Spanish.

The recorded voice is from a woman of

Colombian descent as previous research

shows that the accent can be understood

by a majority of Spanish-speaking

communities (24).

In the continuous NSFG, the

translation did not need to be repeated

from scratch, but translation work was

necessary for parts of the questionnaires

that changed between 2002 and 2006.

RSS translated new questions, new

response categories, and supporting

materials to reflect questionnaire

changes for 2006, 2007, and 2008.

Changes in ACASI also required the

re-recording of the audio part of the

modified questions. The original

‘‘Spanish voice’’ was brought back to

record the new or revised text to

maintain consistency in the audio

portion of ACASI each year.

Overview of the

National Survey of

Family Growth

Questionnaire Content

The most important goal of the

NSFG is to collect nationally

representative data on factors affecting

birth and pregnancy rates, family

formation, and the risks of HIV and

other STDs. To avoid burdening the

following text with dozens of references,

we will cite the following studies that

contain numerous examples of how

NSFG data are used and presented:

+	 For the female data, see Chandra

et al 2005 (25); and Mosher et al

2004 (26).

+	 For the male data, see Martinez et al

2006 (27).

+	 For data on both sexes, see reports

on teenagers (28), sexual

behavior (29); and HIV risk

behaviors (30).

The next two sections review the

main areas covered in the female and
Page 12 [ Series 1, No. 48

male questionnaires and explain the uses

of the data in the major sections of the

questionnaires.

The male and female

questionnaires collected much of

the same information, but the

questionnaires were structured

somewhat differently. The female

questionnaire was organized by major

topics: first a pregnancy history was

collected in chronological order from

first to last, then marriages and

cohabitations in chronological order,

and then a contraceptive history.

In contrast, the male questionnaire

was organized relationship by

relationship: information on contraceptive use, sexual activity, and children

fathered was collected by asking about

them in the context of the marriage or

other relationship in which they

occurred. Experts from surveys on

closely related topics suggested to

NCHS that many men can recall this

type of information more easily and

accurately if the survey ties these

behaviors to the partners with whom

they occurred (31).

A summary of the female

questionnaire is shown in Figure 6,

while the male questionnaire is

summarized in Figure 7.

The Female Questionnaire

Female Section A: Introduction,

calendar instructions,

demographic characteristics,

household roster, childhood

background

Many studies have shown that

demographic characteristics—such as

age, race, education, employment, and

family background–have important

effects on outcomes that are central to

the NSFG, such as living together,

marriage, family size, sexual activity,

and contraceptive use. Section A began

by asking about the age, sex, race, and

Hispanic origin of each household

member, and how household members

are related to the respondent. At this

point in the female questionnaire, the

respondent was introduced to the Life

History Calendar (Appendix VI). This

calendar was used mainly to help the

respondent remember dates during the

interview.

Next, the respondent was asked

about her current or last attendance at

school or college, her highest level of

education completed, whether she has a

high school diploma or GED, and any

college degrees she may have. The next

questions concern whether she always

lived with both of her biological or

adoptive parents until she turned 18, and

if not, with whom she was living at age

14. Age 14 was used as an estimate of

the respondent’s situation in

adolescence. Questions were also asked

about the respondent’s mother’s and

father’s education, whether her mother

(or mother-figure) worked during the

respondent’s formative years, the total

number of children the respondent’s

mother had, and her mother’s age when

her first child was born.

Female Section B: Pregnancy

and birth history, adoption, and

nonbiological children

One of the primary purposes of the

NSFG is to provide data on women’s

lifetime experiences with pregnancy and

childbearing. Section B of the survey

covered pregnancies, biological children,

and adoption. First, the respondent was

asked about the onset of menstruation,

whether or not she was currently

pregnant, and how many times, if any,

she has been pregnant. For each

pregnancy, she was asked about the

pregnancy outcome (i.e., did it end in

live birth, miscarriage, and so forth) and

the pregnancy (or gestational) length.

If the pregnancy resulted in a live

birth, she was asked follow-up questions

about the baby that was born and about

the delivery. For births and pregnancies

that ended within the last 5 years, more

detailed information was collected on

cigarette smoking, prenatal care,

maternity leave, and payment for the

delivery. For all of her children

currently aged 18 or younger, the

respondent was asked whether and for

how long she breast-fed each baby.

Following the pregnancy questions,

the questions focused on adoption. First,

the respondent was asked about any

children born to her that she had placed

for adoption. Women 18–44 years of

age are asked a short series of questions

about any nonbiological children who

may have lived with them under their

care and responsibility. Greater detail

was obtained for children she legally

adopted or for whom she became legal

guardian. Finally, adult women (18–44

years of age) were asked about their

current and previous pursuit of adoption.

Women currently seeking to adopt were

asked some additional questions about

their preferences for the characteristics

of a child they would adopt (for

example, age and race). This

information is important for describing

the current demand for adoption in the

United States (32).

Female Section C: Marital and

relationship history

In Section C, information was

gathered on marriage, cohabitation, and

sexual activity. These data are used to

understand family formation and

dissolution, as well as the patterns of

sexual relationships. For every husband

or cohabiting partner the respondent

reports, she was asked whether they

have had biological children together

and whether he had prior marriages or

children from prior relationships.

Additional questions on his education,

race, and Hispanic origin are asked for

current husbands or cohabiting partners.

Respondents were asked about their

expectations to marry or cohabit.

The latter half of Section C focuses

on the first sexual intercourse and recent

sexual activity. First, all respondents

who have never been married, never

cohabited, and never been pregnant were

asked whether they had ever had sexual

intercourse. If the respondent had had

intercourse, she was asked the month

and year she first had intercourse and

her age at that time. Next, respondents

who are younger than 25 years old are

asked about their experience with sex

education.

Then, for those who have had sex,

basic information was collected about

the respondent’s first intercourse, her

first male partner, and male sexual

partners she has had within the past 12

months (up to three partners). If a recent

sexual partner is ‘‘current,’’ questions

are similar to those for current husbands
Section Main Topics

Section A • Respondent demographic characteristics (age; DOB; marital/cohabitation status; race and Hispanic origin)

• Household roster (age; sex; relationship to respondent)

• Introduction to Life History Calendar

• Education (degrees; highest grade completed; date last attended)

• Childhood family background and parents

Section B • Onset of menstruation (menarche)

• Current pregnancy status

• Number of pregnancies

• Detailed pregnancy history (more details if in last 5 years)

• Confirmation of pregnancy history

• Care of nonbiological children (women 18–44)

• Relinquishment of biological children for adoption

• Adoption plans and preferences (women 18–44)

Section C • Marital history and characteristics of each husband

• Details on current cohabiting partner, if there is one

• Cohabitation history; characteristics of former cohabiting partners

• Whether the respondent has had biological children with each of her husbands and cohabiting partners

• Ever had sexual intercourse (asked if never married, never pregnant and never cohabited):

– Age and date of first intercourse

– Characteristics of first sexual partner (if not already discussed)

– Date and age of first intercourse after menarche

• Sex education (R’s 15–24); timing relative to first sex

• Number of sexual partners (in lifetime; in past 12 months; before first marriage)

• Recent (last 12 months) partner history, up to 3 partners (or last partner ever, if none in the past 12 months); more

details on current partners

Section D • Sterilizing operations (respondent and husband/cohabiting partner)

• Desire for sterilization reversal (tubal ligations and vasectomies only)

• Nonsurgical sterility and fertility problems (respondent and husband/cohabiting partner)

Section E • Ever-use of contraceptive methods, how emergency contraception was obtained, discontinuation of use, and

reasons for dissatisfaction with selected methods

• Details on first method ever used (even if before first intercourse)

• Method use at first sexual intercourse

• Months during which she had intercourse for past 3–4 years or since first intercourse (if within the last 3–4 years)

• Contraceptive method history by month, for past 3–4 years or since first method used

• Method used at first and last sex, for up to three partners in last 12 months

• Wantedness of each pregnancy (by respondent and by father of pregnancy)

• Happiness to be pregnant scale

• Further details on circumstances surrounding pregnancies in last 3 years (including wantedness with that partner)

• Current method use, reasons for current nonuse

• Recent pill use (reasons; brand and type, consulting the Pill Chart)

• Consistency of condom use in last 4 weeks

• Frequency of sex in past 4 weeks

Section F • Use of medical services related to birth control and reproduction in the last 12 months (services include receipt of:

birth control method; checkup or medical test related to using birth control; counseling about birth control;

sterilization; counseling about getting sterilized; emergency contraception; counseling about emergency

contraception; pregnancy test; abortion; Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; post-pregnancy care; testing or

treatment for sexually transmitted disease (STD))

• Provider and payment information for each visit for these services in last 12 months (more detail if specific clinic is

cited)

• Activation of clinic lookup if service was received at a clinic

• First service ever received is asked of women 15–24 years of age, including when received, and type of provider

• If clinic is regular source of medical care

• Ever visited a clinic

Section G • Do you want a/another baby (respondent and partner)

• Intentions to have a/another baby

• Number of additional children (respondent/respondent and husband) intend to have

Figure 6. Outline of the Female Questionnaire

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 13
Page 14 [ Series 1, No. 48

Section Main Topics

Section H • Infertility services (help to get pregnant; help to prevent miscarriage)

• Infertility diagnoses received, if ever pursued medical help to get pregnant

• Vaginal douching

• Health problems related to childbearing (pelvic inflammatory disease; diabetes (gestational & nongestational);

ovarian cysts; uterine fibroids; endometriosis; problems with ovulation or menstruation)

• Physical disabilities/limitations

• HIV testing experience (some items limited to last 12 months)

• Where HIV test was received, if within the last 12 months

• HPV vaccine-related knowledge and experience

Section I • Health insurance coverage in last 12 months

• Current residence and residence as of April 1, 2000

• Place of birth (date came to the United States, if born outside of the United States)

• Religion and attendance at religious services, at age 14 and currently

• Work in past 12 months and current work status (respondent and husband/cohabiting partner)

• Child care arrangements used (if any) in past 4 weeks for children under 13

• Attitudes: relationships, sex, condom use, gender roles, parenthood

Section J (ACASI) • General health, including height and weight

• Pregnancy history (numbers ending in live birth, abortion, or other outcomes)

• School suspension/expulsion (for respondents 15–24 years old)

• Substance use (cigarettes; alcohol; marijuana; cocaine; crack; crystal meth, IV drugs)

• Sexual experience with males (vaginal intercourse, oral sex, and anal sex; condom use at last occurrence of each

type of sex; timing of oral sex relative to vaginal intercourse (if age 15–24 and have had both types of sex);

nonvoluntary intercourse with males (asked only for age 18 or older); numbers of male partners in lifetime;

numbers of male partners in last 12 months (including numbers by specific type of sex); and other HIV/STD risk

behaviors)

• Sex with females, including number of female partners

• Sexual orientation and attraction

• STD experience (some items limited to last 12 months)

• Individual earnings, family income, and public assistance during the previous year

Figure 6. Outline of the Female Questionnaire—Con.

or cohabiting partners. These questions

ask about his age and education. Partner

characteristics are important to assess

the changing patterns of contraceptive

(particularly pill and condom) use—

trends central to the prevention of teen

pregnancy, unintended pregnancy, STDs,

and HIV. Data were also obtained about

the total number of male sexual partners

she had had in her entire life, in the past

12 months, and for those who have been

married, the number she had before her

first marriage.

Female Section D: Sterilizing

operations and fertility

problems

In Section D of the survey,

questions were asked about surgical

sterilizations and fertility problems. Data

on surgical sterilizations are needed to

measure how many women use

sterilization as a contraceptive method,

and changing preferences for

sterilization versus other contraceptive

methods. If the respondent reported that

either she or her current husband or

cohabiting partner has ever had a

sterilization operation, she was asked the

date of the operation. For each operation

within the last 5 years, respondents were

asked the location where it was done,

the method of payment, and the reasons

for the operation. Women were also

asked about possible medical reasons

they may have had for the sterilization

operations they report, as well as

reasons related to their previous

methods of birth control. Any

respondent reporting tubal sterilization

or vasectomy as her and her husband’s

or partner’s only operation is asked

about reversal procedures and desire for

reversal.

Finally in this section, the

respondent was asked if she was sterile

for any nonsurgical reasons, if she

would have a physical difficulty getting

pregnant or carrying a child to term, or

if her partner had any fertility problems.

The NSFG is the only national data

source on the prevalence of fertility

problems among U.S. women and their

husbands or cohabiting partners, and

these questions are a key ingredient of

the NSFG infertility measures (25).

Female Section E:

Contraceptive history and

pregnancy wantedness

Contraceptive use and unintended

pregnancy are key topics for the NSFG

and they are the focus of Section E.

Data were gathered regarding the birth

control methods used by the respondent,

including types of contraceptives she

has ever used, discontinuation of any

contraceptive method used, and reasons

for dissatisfaction with selected

methods. The respondent was also asked

which method was the first method she

ever used.

Then, to measure how well methods

work to prevent pregnancy and to

measure the prevalence of infertility, she

was asked to identify months when she

was and was not having intercourse

during the past 3–4 years. Next she was

asked to identify contraceptive methods
Section Main Topics

Section A • Respondent demographic characteristics (age; DOB; marital/cohabitation status; race and Hispanic origin)

• Household roster (age; sex; relationship of each member to respondent)

• Education (degrees; highest grade completed; date last attended)

• Basic information about his childhood family background and parents

• Numbers of marriages and cohabitations

Section B • Ever had sexual intercourse

• Sex education received (Rs aged 15–24 only)

• Sterilizing operations

• Ever had biological child(ren); how many

• Enumeration of (up to) three most recent female sexual partners, or last partner ever

Section C • Marital and cohabitation dates for current wife/partner

• Surgical sterilization and infertility (wife/partner)

• Biological children with current wife/partner (more details if born in last 5 years)

• Other children his current wife/partner had from previous relationships (more details if he lived with the child)

• Other nonbiological children he or his current wife/partner ever cared for

• First and last sex: dates and contraceptive use

• Contraceptive use in last 12 months

Section D • Characteristics of (up to) three sexual partners in the past 12 months or last partner ever, contraceptive use at first

and most recent sex, and date of first sex in the last 12 months

• Information on children with these partners (collected as above in C)

• First intercourse ever (if not already discussed): date, contraceptive method use, and characteristics of partner

Section E • Characteristics of former wives and first cohabiting partner

Section F • Other biological children (information collected as above in C)

• Other nonbiological children ever raised (more details if adopted, as above in C—E)

• Pregnancies fathered in his lifetime that did not result in live birth (total number and numbers by outcome)

• Exact number of female partners—lifetime and in last 12 months

Section G • Activities with the children living in his household

• Activities with his biological and adopted children living elsewhere

• Financial support of his biological and adopted children living elsewhere

Section H • Desire for (wanting) a/another baby (respondent & wife/cohabiting partner)

• Intentions to have a/another baby, asked individually or jointly, as appropriate

Section I • Usual source of health care

• Health insurance coverage in last 12 months

• Health services received in last 12 months (more details if under age 25)

• Infertility services received

• HIV testing experience

Section J • Current residence and residence as of April 1, 2000

• Place of birth (date came to United States, if born outside of the United States)

• Religion and attendance at religious services, at age 14 and currently

• Military service

• Work status (respondent and wife/cohabiting partner)

• Attitudes: relationships, sex, condom use, gender roles, parenthood

Section K (ACASI) • General health questions

• Significant life events

• School suspension/expulsion (for respondents 15–24 years old)

• Pregnancies fathered

• Substance use (alcohol; marijuana; cocaine; crack; crystal meth; IV drugs)

• Sexual experience with females (vaginal intercourse, oral sex, and anal sex; condom use at last occurrence of

each type of sex; timing of oral sex relative to vaginal intercourse (for respondents 15–24 who have had both

types of sex); nonvoluntary intercourse with females (asked only for respondents 18 or older); numbers of female

partners in lifetime; numbers of female partners in last 12 months (including numbers by specific type of sex); and

other HIV/STD risk behaviors)

• Sexual experience with other males; condom use at last occurrence of anal or oral sex; nonvoluntary sex with

males (asked only for respondents 18 or older); HIV/STD risk behaviors, including number of male partners)

• Sexual orientation and attraction

• STD experience (some items limited to last 12 months)

• Individual earnings, family income, and public assistance during the previous year

Figure 7. Outline of the Male Questionnaire

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 15
Page 16 [ Series 1, No. 48

she used each month during the past

3–4 years. This detailed information on

intercourse and contraceptive use

allows researchers to analyze how

well the methods work in preventing

pregnancies (33).

The NSFG provides important

national data on unintended pregnancies

among U.S. women (34). Information

was also obtained about respondents’

current pregnancy intentions, current

methods of birth control, where birth

control methods were obtained, and if

they were not using birth control, their

reasons for nonuse. The section

concluded with a few specific questions

about birth control pills (the most

commonly used method in the United

States) and condom use.

Female Section F: Family

planning and medical services

Questions on the use of family

planning and related medical services

are essential to an understanding of

contraceptive use and reproductive

health. In Section F, women were asked

about services received in the last 12

months, including whether their care

was received from clinics or private

doctors, and how the care was paid for

(private insurance, Medicaid, etc.)

Women who received services at a

clinic in the last 12 months were

classified by the type of clinics they

used.

Female Section G: Birth desires

and intentions

Questions in Section G focused on

the respondent’s desire to have children

in the future and her intentions to

actually have children. Currently

married or cohabiting women were

asked whether she and her partner

intend to have children in the future.

Respondents who are not currently

married or cohabiting were only asked

about their individual intentions for

future children. This information is used

to track trends and group differences in

expected family sizes.

Female Section H: Infertility

services and reproductive

health

The NSFG is the only nationally

representative source of information on

the use of medical services for infertility

in the United States. In Section H, the

respondent was first asked whether she

or her partner (in any of her marriages

or relationships) had ever received

medical help to get pregnant. If yes, she

was asked about the specific types of

medical help she or her partner(s)

received and related details about her

recent pursuit of these medical services.

The respondent was also asked about

any medical help she may have ever

received to prevent miscarriages. Taken

together, these series of questions help

to measure the use of various treatments

and services for infertility.

Questions about other behaviors and

conditions that might affect childbearing

and health then follow, including

questions on vaginal douching, pelvic

inflammatory disease (PID), diabetes,

and physical disability. Since HIV

infection and AIDS are critical health

concerns in the United States and

elsewhere in the world, the questions in

this section focused on HIV testing and

receipt of HIV-related counseling. The

last series of questions in this section

(added in 2007) asked about knowledge

of and experience with the Human

Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine.

Female Section I: Insurance,

residence, work experience, and

attitudes

Section I gathers important

background information about the

respondent and her husband or

cohabiting partner (if she is married or

cohabiting). First the respondent is

asked about her health insurance

coverage over the past year. This is

followed by questions about the

respondent’s current residence, her

residence at the time of the 2000

Census, and whether she was born

outside the United States. These

questions are asked in part because

neighborhood conditions can have

important influences on the fertility,

contraceptive, and marital behavior of

the men and women living there (11).

Questions were also asked about the

respondent’s religious affiliation and

attendance, both while growing up and

at the time of interview.

Research has documented important

effects of employment on childbearing

and marriage. Section I includes a short

series of questions about the

respondent’s work experience and

current employment status. A similar

series of questions is asked about the

current or most recent employment of

the respondent’s husband or cohabiting

partner, if she has one. Women living

with any children under 13 years of age

are asked about child care arrangements

they may have used during the last 4

weeks.

This section concludes with a set of

questions about the respondent’s

attitudes and opinions about marriage

and divorce, sexual activity, condom

use, gender roles, and parenthood.

Female Section J: ACASI

(audio computer-assisted

self-interview)

Section J, available in both English

and Spanish, gives the respondent an

opportunity to answer a series of

sensitive questions privately using the

computer and headphones. In the

interviewer-administered (CAPI) part of

the interview, we only ask about

intercourse that can result in pregnancy

and birth–heterosexual vaginal

intercourse. In the ACASI part of the

interview, the questions were broadened

to include oral and anal sex and

same-sex activity, because they affect

the risk of HIV and other STDs.

The first few questions served as

practice to familiarize the respondent

with the mechanics of the ACASI

section. During these practice questions,

the respondent was given the chance to

ask the interviewer any questions about

how to use the computer in order to

move through this last part of the

interview. Once the laptop was turned

over to the respondent, general health

questions were asked, followed by
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 17

questions about cigarette, alcohol and

drug use; numbers of pregnancies;

sexual experience with males and

females; nonvoluntary sexual intercourse

with males (asked only of adult women

18–44 years of age); STD/HIV risk

behavior with males; sexual orientation

and attraction; STD experience;

individual and family income; and

receipt of public assistance in the year

prior to the interview. These questions

provide a national estimate of the

number of men and women at risk of

HIV in the United States, and the

specific behaviors that put them at

risk (29,30).

The Male Questionnaire

The male and female questionnaires

cover many of the same topics but are

structured differently. The female

questionnaire asked a series of questions

about pregnancies, followed by series on

marriages and other relationships, and

then contraceptive use. In contrast, the

male questionnaire asked about

contraceptive use, sexual activity, and

fatherhood for each female marital,

cohabiting, or sexual partner. For

example, the male questionnaire

includes:

+	 A complete marriage history (in

Sections C, D, and E).

+	 Information on biological, adopted,

or other children the respondent has

fathered or lived with, asked in the

context of questions about the

mother of the child (in Sections C,

D, and E). In Section F, we ask

about any other children who were

not covered in the earlier sections.

+	 Information on contraceptive use for

up to three partners in the last 12

months (asked in Sections C and D,

depending on who those partners

were).

+	 Greater detail on contraceptive use

and relationship characteristics for

partners deemed ‘‘current’’ (i.e., the

current wife or cohabiting partner

described in Section C, and any of

the ‘‘up to three most recent partners

in the last 12 months’’ described in

Section D).

Male Section A: Demographic

characteristics; household

roster; childhood background;

numbers of marriages and

cohabitations

Section A is the same as in the

female questionnaire, until male

respondents were asked how many times

they have been married and how many

times they may have lived together

(cohabited) with female sexual partners.

The responses to these questions

determine what questions are asked in

the rest of the interview.

Male Section B: Sex education,

sexual experience, and

sterilization and infertility

Section B is designed to measure

the population of males who are

sexually experienced (roughly the

population at risk of causing pregnancy)

and to estimate changes in sexual

behavior over time. Men who are or

have been married, or have ever

cohabited, are assumed to have had

intercourse. Men who have not been

married or cohabited are asked whether

they have ever had vaginal sexual

intercourse with female partners. Then

respondents younger than 25 were asked

about sex education they may have

received and whether this instruction

was before or after the first time they

had intercourse. Respondents who have

had intercourse are asked about any

biological children they may have

fathered. Questions are also asked about

the respondent’s total number of female

sexual partners in his lifetime and in the

past 12 months. Finally, respondents

were asked to report the month and year

in which they last had intercourse in the

last 12 months, for each partner (up to 3).

This section also obtains

information on sterilizing operations

(most commonly a vasectomy) and

male infertility. If the respondent

reports a sterilizing operation within

the last 5 years, he is asked about the

place where the operation was

performed and how it was paid for.

Data on vasectomies are needed to

measure how many men use this

contraceptive method, and changing

preferences for sterilization versus

other contraceptive methods.

Male Section C: Current wife

or cohabiting partner

In Section C, respondents were

asked to provide information about

contraception and fertility with his

current wife or cohabiting partner. This

section asked for dates of marriage and

cohabitation, demographic characteristics

of the wife or cohabiting female partner,

and her experience with sterilization and

fertility problems. The dates of his first

and most recent sexual intercourse with

this partner, and methods of contraception used with this partner in the last

12 months, were also obtained.

The respondent was then asked a

series of questions about biological

children he has had with his current

wife or cohabiting partner, including

whether he wanted each pregnancy (if

the birth was in the last 5 years),

paternity establishment (if the birth

occurred outside of marriage), and the

current living arrangements of the

children. This was followed by a series

of questions about children his current

wife or partner may have had from

previous relationships. The section

concluded with a series of questions

about any other nonbiological children

he may have cared for with her, if the

child ever lived with the respondent. For

both of these groups of children, he was

asked for basic demographic

information, current living arrangements,

and whether he adopted or assumed

legal guardianship of the child.

Male Section D: Recent sexual

partners and first sexual

partner

The NSFG collected information in

Section D on the characteristics of up to

three recent female sexual partners (i.e.,

in the 12 months preceding the

interview) or the last partner (if none in

the last 12 months). These questions

included demographic information, date

of first sex with her, contraceptive

methods used, and births fathered.

Partner characteristics are important in

assessing the changing patterns of use of

the condom and other contraceptive
Page 18 [ Series 1, No. 48

methods–trends central to the prevention

of unintended pregnancy, STDs, and HIV.

For each of the partners discussed

in Section D, he was also asked about

biological children he may have had

with her, with questions similar to those

described above in Section C, as well as

nonbiological children. This section ends

with questions about the respondent’s

first sexual intercourse, if it has not

already been covered, including his age,

some characteristics of that partner, and

contraceptive use.

Male Section E: Former wives

and the first cohabiting partner

This section collected information

about former wives and the first female

cohabiting partner. The respondent is

asked for the month and year of

marriage, cohabitation, and dissolution.

Questions about children with former

wives or cohabiting partners are similar

to those asked for current partners in

Section C.

Male Section F: Other

biological children, other

adopted children, other

pregnancies

Section F completes a man’s

fertility history by asking about any

other biological children he fathered

with women not previously discussed in

the interview—that is, he was never

married to them, they were not among

his three most recent partners in the last

12 months, and they were not his first

cohabiting partner. The questions about

these children are similar to the ones

asked in Sections C through E.

However, the respondent is also asked a

few characteristics of the mother of each

child who was not previously discussed

(for example, her age at time of the

birth). It also asks about other

nonbiological children that the

respondent cared for, if they were not

covered in earlier sections.

Male Section G: Fathering

Section provides important

information on what the respondent does

to raise his children. Separate series of

questions are asked for children that he

lived with and those he did not live

with. The specific questions asked

depend on the age of the children. For

example, some questions are asked for

children under 5 years of age (for

example, whether he ‘‘bathed, diapered,

or dressed’’ them); and some for

children 5–18-years-old (for example,

whether he helped them with

homework). The respondent was also

asked about financial support of any

biological or adopted children who did

not currently live with him.

Male Section H: Desires and

intentions for future children

Questions in this section asked the

respondent about his desire and

intention to have children in the future

and the number of children he would

like to have. If the respondent is married

or cohabiting, he was asked about the

joint desires and intentions of the

respondent and his partner. These

questions were the same as the

questions for females on this topic. This

information is used to help track trends

over time in expected family sizes.

Male Section I: Health

conditions and health services

Information from this Section I is

used to collect some of the first national

data on the reproductive health care of

men of reproductive age (35). The

respondent was first asked about his

usual source of health care and his

health insurance coverage over the past

12 months. He was also asked about use

of family planning services. Men were

then asked about specific health services

they may have received in the 12

months preceding the survey, including

a routine physical exam, screening for

testicular cancer, counseling about

contraception or sterilization, and testing

or treatment for STDs, including HIV

and AIDS. If respondents under age 25

report receiving any of these services in

the last 12 months, they were asked

about the providers of these services and

how they were paid for.

This section also collects data on

use of infertility services. The female

NSFG has long been the only nationally

representative source of information on

the use of medical services for infertility

in the United States. The male NSFG

provides an opportunity to learn more

about infertility services from the male

perspective. If the respondent has ever

received this kind of help in any of his

relationships, follow-up questions are

asked concerning the specific services

he received.

The last questions in the section are

about HIV testing and counseling, a

critical health concern in the United

States and elsewhere in the world. These

questions are essentially the same as the

series asked of females in Female

Section H.

Male Section J: Residence,

work experience, and attitudes

This section gathered important

background information about the

respondent and his current wife or

cohabiting partner, similar to the

information collected in Female Section

I. First, the respondent was asked about

his current residence, his residence at

the time of the 2000 Census, and

whether he was born outside the United

States. These questions are used to

construct the contextual data files for

the NSFG. These files are available

through the NCHS Research Data

Center. These questions are asked

because neighborhood conditions can

have important influences on the

fertility, contraceptive, and marital

behavior of the men and women living

there (11). We also ask questions about

the respondent’s religious affiliation,

both growing up and at the time of the

interview.

Research suggest that employment

has important effects on men’s

experiences with marriage and

fatherhood. Section J includes a short

series of questions about the

respondent’s military service, if any, and

his (other) work experience. Questions

are also asked about the current or most

recent job of the respondent’s wife or

cohabiting partner, if he has one.

Respondents were also asked about their

expectations to marry or cohabit.

This section concluded with a set of

attitude questions about marriage and

divorce, sexual activity, condom use,

gender roles, and parenthood.
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 19

Male Section K: ACASI

(Audio computer-assisted

self-interview)

As the ACASI section does for

females (discussed previously), Section

K gives the respondent an opportunity

to answer a series of sensitive questions

privately using the computer and

headphones, and it can be completed in

English or Spanish.

Most of the section was identical

for males and females, but there were a

few differences. Men are asked more

detail about sexual behavior and

STD/HIV risk behaviors because

same-sex activity among males carries

generally greater risk of STD/HIV than

same-sex activity among females

(29,30). Men were also asked in ACASI

whether they have ever been in jail or

prison (women were not asked this

because imprisonment among women is

not common enough to be measured

reliably in the NSFG).

How the Data Were

Collected

In order to perform screening and

in-person interviewing, NSFG

interviewers had to be trained; supplied

with letters, consent forms, and other

materials; provided with laptop

computers and other equipment; and

supervised. The following section first

describes the steps in data collection

(also called the ‘‘recruitment protocol’’),

followed by training, materials, then

equipment, and finally, supervision,

responsive design, and quality control.

Recruitment Protocol

A ‘‘recruitment protocol’’ is a set of

procedures specified by the survey

designer for interviewers to use to

contact, request cooperation from, and

interview respondents. The procedures

of the recruitment protocol were

reviewed and approved by Institutional

Review Boards at both NCHS and the

University of Michigan (Appendix I).

Many of the materials described or

mentioned here and in the following

sections of this report are shown in the

appendices. The key steps in the

recruitment protocol were:

1.	 Before contacting households in

person, the contractor sent an

advance letter and brochure to all

sampled households (Appendix II

and IV). These materials explained

who was sponsoring the survey,

who was conducting it, why it was

being done, and how the voluntary

and confidential nature of the

survey was implemented. Spanish

versions of the questionnaires, the

advance letter, and other

introductory materials were

available. The materials also cited

toll-free phone numbers and the

NSFG web site as sources of

additional information.

2.	 In many cases, interviewers were

unable to make contact with anyone

in the sample household on the first

visit and often had to return several

times until the household was

contacted. If contact was

successfully made but the

household member (or screener

respondent) had no time to

complete the screener, the

interviewer and the household

member tried to find a convenient

later time. If the household member

had more questions about the

survey, the interviewer attempted to

answer them.

3.	 When a field interviewer contacted

a sample household, she introduced

herself, displayed her identification

badge, showed the authorization

letter if necessary (Appendix II),

and explained the purpose of the

study, referring to the advance letter

that the household should have

already received (see Appendix III).

The interviewer may also reference

the Question-and-Answer brochure

(Appendix IV) to answer the most

common questions the household

might have about the study.

4.	 The interviewer conducted a brief

household screening interview to

determine who, if anyone, might be

eligible for the NSFG. If there were

no age-eligible persons (15–44

years of age) living in the

household, no further contact with

the household was made.

5.	 When a person 15–17 years of age

was selected for the sample, signed

parental consent had to be obtained

before the interviewer could talk to

the selected minor. A parental

consent form (Appendix V) was

used to explain the survey to the

minor’s mother, father, or guardian,

and request written parental

consent. If the parent gave their

consent, the minor was asked for

his or her signed assent. If either

the parent refused to sign the

parental consent form, or the minor

respondent refused to sign the

Minor’s Assent Form (Appendix V),

the case was treated as a refusal. (In

three states, the age of majority is

19 or 21 instead of 18. In those

states, the state’s age of majority

was used. In other words, in those

states, parental consent was sought

for anyone 15–18 years of age if

the age of majority is 19, or 15–20

if the age is 21.) Emancipated

minors—15–17-year-olds who are

married or cohabiting and living

away from their parents—are rare

in a sample of this size, but when

encountered, they are excluded from

the sample.

6.	 If the respondent was 18 years of

age or older, the interviewer gave

the respondent an Adult Consent

Form, which explained the survey

and requested signed consent

(Appendix V). If an adult

respondent agreed to do the survey

but refused to sign the form, the

interviewer could offer to begin the

interview and ask for a signature at

the end of the interview. If the

respondent again refused to sign

(this was rare), the interviewer was

permitted to sign noting that the

respondent agreed to the interview

but did not wish to sign the form.

7.	 The interviewer gave the respondent

$40, as a token of appreciation for

the respondent’s help.

8.	 The interview was conducted, with

the interviewer reading the

questions and entering the responses

into a laptop computer. Female

respondents used a Life History

Calendar (Appendix VI) to record

the dates and details of events, such

as contraceptive use and recent
Page 20 [ Series 1, No. 48

pregnancies. Interviewers were

instructed to conduct the interview

in a private setting to ensure

confidentiality. If another member

of the household came into the

room where the interview was

being conducted, the interviewer

was instructed to pause the

interview until the household

member left the room. (In those

cases where the respondent did not

think that a private setting within

their own household was possible,

the interview could be held outside,

or at another nearby location.)

9.	 Finally, at the end of the

interviewer-administered interview,

the interviewer gave the respondent

a pair of headphones and the laptop

computer and showed the

respondent how to make simple

entries on the computer. The

respondent then completed a 10–20

minute Audio CASI. The

interviewer could not hear what

questions the respondent was asked

over the headphones and could not

see the respondent’s answers–in the

household or later. Moreover, no

one in the household could hear or

see either the questions or the

answers.

10.	 At the end of the Audio CASI

section, the interviewer turned off

and locked the computer, thanked

the respondent, and left the

housing unit.

Interviewer Training

To prepare interviewers for the

successful completion of the tasks

discussed previously, the NSFG

interviewer training program had three

parts: home study, general interviewer

training, and NSFG project-specific

training. Bilingual interviewers also

completed an additional day of training

in conducting the NSFG interview in

Spanish. Interviewer training was held

every year in June, with additional

smaller training sessions held as needed.

The agenda for a recent training session

is shown as Appendix VII.

For the continuous NSFG, much of

the lecture material that had been

presented in-person for Cycle 6 was

moved to a DVD format to allow

interviewers to study it at home. Moving

lecture content to the DVD allowed the

in-person training time to be dedicated

to hands-on practice with the

questionnaire and with other tools for

completing the work of an interviewer.

Prior to coming to training, interviewers

were required to watch the DVD about

the NSFG and read the NSFG

Interviewer Project Manual (the table of

contents for the manual is shown as

Appendix VIII).

Interviewers were required to

complete a self-study exercise

electronically, which was sent to the

University of Michigan prior to training.

This exercise was graded and returned

to the interviewer when she arrived at

training. Interviewers who had not

interviewed before for the University of

Michigan or at all were required to

attend a 11⁄2 day general interviewing

techniques session where they were

taught the fundamentals of good

interviewing technique and how to use

the core interviewing systems used by

the University of Michigan–Blaiset for

questionnaire administration and

SurveyTrak for sample management.

Interviewers were also taught how to

complete administrative work as part of

their employment (for example,

completing electronic time and expense

reports).

In NSFG project-specific training,

interviewers were taught in a

large-group setting with smaller break

out groups for hands-on learning. (In

2006, the first year of continuous

interviewing, this ‘‘large’’ group

contained about 40 interviewers; the

smaller groups ranged from 10 to 20. In

2007, the second year of fieldwork, the

‘‘large’’ group was only about 20, and

the ‘‘small’’ group, about 10 trainees.)

In addition to the role of lead

trainer, other trainers assisted by

operating the data display and serving as

a ‘‘runner’’ (someone who assists

trainees during the training, helping

them with any technical problems).

Most of the in-person training consisted

of hands-on practice in administering

the questionnaire. This practice involved

completing five ‘‘round-robin’’ scripted

interviews (three female interviews and

two male interviews), during which the

large group was divided into two

smaller groups and interviewers took

turns asking questions of a mock

respondent. The first mock interview

was a fairly simple case, but each

interview after that was progressively

longer and more complex. Trainees took

turns asking questions, the trainer gave

the responses from a prepared script

(which included carefully planned

learning objectives), and the trainees

entered the responses into their

computers.

The first day of project-specific

training was devoted to learning how to

use the electronic listing program. These

lists were required to build the sample

frame from which a random sample was

drawn for the study.

The next 4 days were devoted to

contacting and screening households,

completing informed consent with

respondents selected for the study,

learning how to administer the

questionnaires, and addressing

respondent concerns.

NSFG staff from NCHS and

senior ISR staff attended the training

sessions to observe and to answer

questions. Interviewers enjoyed

hearing about the importance of the

research done with the NSFG and the

opportunity to ask the researchers

substantive questions about how the

data from the survey are used.

Addressing Respondent

Concerns

During the morning of the last day

of training, interviewers participated in a

special workshop on ‘‘how to address

concerns’’ that potential respondents

may have about the study. The basic

premise of the training, based on years

of scientific research on survey

response (36,37), is that potential

respondents often have legitimate

questions about someone who comes to

their door asking for something. Since

people coming to their door are often

selling something or asking for money

for a charity or help for a cause, those

might include questions such as:

+	 Who are you and what do you want

from me?

+	 Are you selling something?

+	 Do you want money from me?
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 21

Once it is understood that the

interviewer is there for a study,

respondents may have questions such as,

+	 How was I chosen? Why can’t you

interview my neighbor?

+	 What is the study about? Who is

sponsoring it?

+	 Why is it important that I participate

in it?

+	 Do I have to do it right now?

The purpose of this focused

workshop was to review the most

common kinds of questions and

concerns that respondents have about

surveys, learn to recognize them, and

learn to give an appropriate response

that answers the question. Interviewers

received a workbook, ‘‘Encouraging

Participation in the NSFG: A Handbook

for Addressing Respondent Concerns,’’

to use during the training program. The

training course outlined the steps to

encourage respondent participation,

including preparing for the interaction,

diagnosing the main concerns of the

person, selecting an appropriate

response, and quickly delivering relevant

information.

The training program had several

exercises that progressively built the

interviewer’s skills to meet the overall

objective–successfully identifying the

concern and addressing it quickly and

accurately. There were written exercises,

as well as extensive role plays that

progressed from simple to complex but

each taught the interviewers to identify

the concern, pick an appropriate

response, and deliver it promptly.

Certification interview

Passing certification was required in

order to conduct interviews. The

certification interview was conducted

one-on-one with each trainee and

duplicated many essential aspects of a

real interview situation. A trainer,

following a prepared script, played the

part of a respondent for a trainee.

At the end of the certification

interview, the trainer gave the trainee

verbal feedback and completed the

certification scoring sheet for ISR staff.

The evaluation of the certification

interview included:

+	 Explaining the study, selection

process, and consent procedures

+	 Administering the Screener

+	 Addressing respondent questions

+	 Reading questions verbatim

+	 Using study specific and general

interviewing probes correctly

+	 Providing feedback to the

respondent

+	 Using the interview aids correctly

(Q×Qs, Show Cards, Pill Chart, Life

History Calendar, Clinic database)

+	 Explaining and setting up the

ACASI for the respondent

Depending on the certification

scores, the interviewers were either

released to begin work on sample cases

or required to study and complete

another certification interview.

Regardless of her score, if the

interviewer did not correctly complete

the informed consent process, she was

required to redo that portion of

certification before she was released to

work sample cases.

After being certified in English,

bilingual interviewers attended the

bilingual training session. During this

session, the interviewers reviewed and

practiced using the Spanish version of

the respondent materials and the CAPI

questionnaires. The bilingual training

was conducted by training staff fluent in

both Spanish and English. Once these

trainees returned home, they completed

a certification interview in Spanish over

the telephone.

Interviewer Materials

Manual

The manual describing the details of

the NSFG data collection procedures is

used by field staff in training and as a

reference during field work. The

National Survey of Family Growth

Project Manual was sent to each

interviewer trainee approximately 2

weeks before training, along with a

study-specific training DVD and

home-study questions, which the

trainees were asked to complete on-line

prior to training.

The NSFG Project Manual covered:

+	 NSFG project design

+	 Background of the NSFG project

+	 NSFG sample design and sampling

procedures

+	 Computer equipment and software

used for the survey

+	 Procedures for contacting sampled

households, requesting cooperation,

screening sampled households, and

obtaining consent for the survey

+	 An overview of the questionnaire

and how to administer it

+	 Quality control measures

+	 Project administrative procedures

Along with the Project Manual, the

interviewers received manuals

explaining how to conduct listing (of

households within selected segments)

and how to use SurveyTrak, the sample

management software used for the

survey. The field supervisors also

received a manual and training on

WebTrak, the production monitoring

software used for the survey.

Materials used for listing

housing units and contacting

selected households and

respondents

During the listing process, maps of

the selected blocks and the surrounding

areas were accessed and notated

electronically in SurveyTrak. Once

complete, the listings and notated maps

were also available for interviewer

reference during screening and main

interviewing.

Before the interviewers attempted to

contact the sample households, advance

letters (Appendix II) and Question-andAnswer brochures (Appendix IV) were

mailed. This mailing was done from the

contractor’s office at the time the

sample was initially released to the

field. The letter introduced the study to

the household and informed them that

an interviewer would be contacting them

soon.

After households were selected,

interviewers attempted to make contact

and conduct a screening interview to

determine whether any household

members were eligible to participate in

the main interview. Interviewers were

provided with copies of the Household

Advance Letter and Question-andAnswer brochures to show to
Page 22 [ Series 1, No. 48

householders in case they did not

receive or did not remember receiving

them.

Materials used for requesting

participation in the survey

Several items were used to help

request the participation of members of

the sample household. The Household

Advance Letter was used to make

initial contact with residents and to

gain cooperation. Once a respondent

had been selected to complete the

survey, a Respondent Advance Letter

(Appendix II) was provided to the

selected respondent. It resembled the

Household Advance Letter, but

provided more information about the

main interview.

Another set of letters was available

to address various concerns raised by

household members or respondents

during the initial contacts by the

interviewer. The concerns addressed in

the letters were: being too busy, feeling

the interview was too personal, not

being interested in the survey, and being

generally reluctant to participate. There

were also letters designed for household

members who were difficult to find at

home, for parents or guardians who

were reluctant to give consent for their

child, and for managers of locked

buildings. These letters were sent from

the contractor’s office upon request of

the interviewers.

Interviewers were provided with

several other types of materials: a

picture identification badge, a letter of

authorization verifying the interviewer’s

position as an NSFG interviewer; a

Confidentiality Brochure (Appendix IV)

developed for interviewers to use at the

doorstep if a household member or

respondent was concerned about

confidentiality, and the NSFG Family

Facts Sheet (Appendix VI), to illustrate

how NSFG data are used and reported.

In addition to the questionnaire

translation, all other NSFG respondent

materials were translated into Spanish.

Because no information about the

households existed ahead of time, the

Advance Household and Respondent

Letters were double-sided, with an

English version on one side and Spanish

translation on the other. Other materials

were prepared in separate English and

Spanish versions. All interviewers

received both English and Spanish

respondent materials and interviewers

who did not speak Spanish also made

use of a Spanish Phrase Card and a card

in Spanish left with Spanish-speaking

households.

Computer hardware and

related supplies

The computers used in the NSFG in

2006–2008 were Fujitsu Lifebook tablet

computers. The related computer

supplies included an AC adaptor, an AC

car adaptor, an extra laptop battery, and

headphones for use during the ACASI

portion of the questionnaire. Staff

members were provided with a

convertible bump case to facilitate use

of the computer in tablet mode, a

locking laptop case, printers, and

shredders for secure disposal of any

paper materials bearing confidential

information.

Materials used to administer

the interview

Both the female and male

questionnaires had several interview aids

used to assist with the administration of

the questionnaires.

Show Cards—Some questions had

many answer choices, so it could be

hard for a respondent to remember all of

them. To help the respondent, some sets

of response choices were printed in a

Show Card Booklet. This booklet

contained response categories for both

male and female questionnaires. A

Spanish version of the booklet was

printed separately. Each page, called a

‘‘Show Card,’’ had one set of answers

on it. Being able to refer to a response

by a letter or number instead of reading

the phrase may reduce sensitivity,

because it avoids the need to say the

response aloud.

Question-by-Question Instructions—

On certain questions in the

questionnaires (both male and female),

help screens were available. These

question-by-question instructions gave

definitions, further probing instructions

and coding instructions to the

interviewer in situations when the

question may otherwise be difficult for

some respondents to understand.

Life History Calendar—Used in the

female interview only, the Life History

Calendar helped the respondent answer

questions asking for dates of events and

to record other details, usually about the

recent past. For example, the respondent

was asked to write something on the

calendar to show contraceptive methods

she used recently, dates of marriages,

cohabiting unions, births and other

pregnancies, and first sexual intercourse.

Early in the questionnaire, the

interviewer described the purpose of the

calendar. During the interview, the

respondent was reminded to refer to the

calendar to help her recall important

dates of events and then to mark those

dates on the calendar. The calendar was

available in both English and Spanish.

Pill Chart—Used with the female

questionnaire only, this poster showed

pictures of some currently available oral

contraceptive pills in order to help the

female respondent identify the type of

pill she had used (if she reported that

she was a current or recent user of oral

contraceptive pills).

Supervision

The field organization for the

continuous NSFG at any one point

consisted of about 35–40 interviewers,

overseen by two field supervisors and a

production manager. The field

supervisors guided and supported the

interviewers and helped them meet the

quality and production goals established

for the NSFG. The supervisors specific

duties included monitoring daily

production, effort, and costs for each of

the interviewers on their team; helping

interviewers develop effective

techniques for requesting cooperation

from respondents; managing the

distribution of the workload for their

team; evaluating interviewers to ensure

they are following study protocols; and

providing feedback to interviewers about

the quality of their work.

Supervisors held weekly conference

calls with their teams to discuss

progress on the sample and problems

the interviewers were facing, to review

protocols and procedures, and to

disseminate information from ISR about
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 23

the study. The supervisors were always

available by telephone or email to

provide advice or resolve issues the

interviewers were facing.

The field staff members were

supported by an electronic sample

management system called

‘‘SurveyTrak.’’ This system tracked the

status of each sample case from its

release to the field through its

completion as a final interview or other

final result code. SurveyTrak resided on

the interviewer laptops and organized

their sample assignment. For each

sample household, SurveyTrak stored

and displayed data on the day, time, and

outcome of each call attempt, reminder

notes to the interviewer about the call

attempt, and appointment day and time.

If the interviewer talked to someone, she

entered any questions asked, or

comments made, by the household

member she talked to. Sample segment

information relevant to processing the

case was also stored in SurveyTrak. The

software was interactive, so she could

update it to record her contact attempts

at the sampled households and to make

general notes about the cases. Active

cases could be sorted by interim

disposition codes, so the interviewer

could organize her workdays. At least

once a day, the interviewer performed

an electronic communication to send her

most recent work to the contractor’s

office.

The National Survey

of Family Growth

Fieldwork and

Responsive Design

The NSFG contractor, in

consultation with NCHS, required

interviewers to record simple

characteristics of neighborhoods (sample

segments), sampled households, and

things that respondents said during

attempts to contact them to request an

interview. The contractor collected and

analyzed these data during fieldwork to

help decide how to manage interviewer

resources during each quarter. These

observations were examined daily

during the quarter in search of

imbalances in the respondent pool on

correlates of the key survey variables.

During the first 10 weeks of each

quarter, various interventions were

attempted–for example, to place more

callback emphasis on cases in subgroups

that are underrepresented in the

respondent pool. These variables were

also used to stratify and assign

probabilities of selection to the second

phase sample approached in the last 2

weeks of each quarter.

This approach is called a

‘‘responsive design’’ (12,17). By way of

definition, responsive survey designs:

A.	 Pre-identify a set of design features

potentially affecting costs and

errors of survey estimates

B.	 Identify a set of indicators of the

cost and error properties of those

features and monitor those

indicators in initial phases of data

collection

C.	 Alter the features of the survey in

subsequent phases based on

cost-error trade-off decision rules

D.	 Combine data from the separate

design phases into a single

estimator.

Such design features are attractive for

the NSFG because they help manage

the uncertainty of some of the key

determinants of the number of

completed interviews: occupancy rates

for sample units, eligibility rates for

sample units, and nonresponse

likelihood for different sample

persons.

Paradata Used in the

National Survey of Family

Growth

Observational data were collected

by interviewers at various points during

the survey administration. These data

are called ‘‘paradata’’ or ‘‘process data,’’

and they were used in design decisions

throughout data collection. Collection of

paradata began at the listing stage and

continued through the last call on each

sample line. The data include:

Segment observations

A.	 Does the structure appear to be

abandoned or unoccupied?

B.	 Extent of commercial, church,

school, and other nonresidential use

in the neighborhood

C.	 Physical access impediments (for

example, locked buildings)

D.	 Evidence of non-English speakers

in the neighborhood (signs,

businesses)

E.	 Evidence of safety concerns for the

interviewer

Housing unit observations

A.	 Access impediments to the unit (for

example, locked entrance,

doorkeeper)

B.	 Number of housing units in the

structure

C.	 Observation of children under 15

years of age living in the household

D.	 Observation of whether people

living in the household are 45

years of age or older

Observations on each call to the

unit

A.	 Time of day

B.	 Day of the week

C.	 Outcome of call

D.	 Mode of contact

Observations on each call

yielding a contact with a

household member

A.	 Whether the householder asked a

question (for example, ‘‘How did

you choose my house?’’)

B.	 Whether the householder made any

comments related to certain topics

such as time or burden,

confidentiality, or personal or

sensitive questions.

Eligibility observation before

the screening interview

A.	 Whether there are children under

15, cohabiting or married man and

woman, both, or neither.
Page 24 [ Series 1, No. 48

Interviewer 

Segment 

Calls for 

Screener 

Calls for 

Main 

Address 

Household 

Tenure | Pre-study observations | Training grades |. . .| Historical Response Rate 

PSU Characteristics | Stratum | . . . | Segment observations 

Pr(sel)| Observational data | Total calls | 1st contact call | . . .| Status 

1 | I’er | Time | Date |Informant Behavior | Outcome 

1 | I’er | Time | Date |Informant Behavior | Outcome 

Composition | Informant Behavior | Sample Respondent Characteristics 

2 | I’er | Time | Date |Informant Behavior | Outcome 

2 | I’er | Time | Date |Informant Behavior | Outcome 

n | I’er | Time | Date |Informant Behavior | Outcome 

NOTES: “Pr(sel)” means probability of section. PSU is primary sampling unit. “Informant Behavior” is what the person who answered the door did or said. I’er is 

Interviewer. 

The record on the interviewer contains her years of experience, her evaluations at training, and measures of her past performance. The segment 

record includes characteristics of the PSU and stratum and observations made by the lister. The record on the address (housing unit) includes 

the probability of selection, observations made by the interviewer, the total number of visits to the household, and the unit’s current status. The 

record on the calls (visits) made attempting to get a screener includes the time and date that contact attempts were made, what the screener 

informant did or said, and the outcome of the contact. The record on the household includes the composition of the household from the 

household roster; the informant’s behavior, and the characteristics of the sampled respondent (if any). Calls for main interview include the date, 

time, and outcome of each attempt to obtain an interview. 

Figure 8. Data Structure for National Survey of Family Growth Paradata

Marital and cohabiting status

observation after the screening

interview

A.	 Whether the interviewer believes the

selected respondent is married to or

cohabiting with an opposite-sex

partner.

Observations for each

interviewer day

A.	 Number of hours spent traveling to

the segment

B.	 Number of hours spent on

administrative activities

C.	 Number of hours spent on listing

activities

D.	 Number of hours spent attempting

screening interviews

E.	 Number of hours spent attempting

main interviews

Each of these data items was

designed based on prior studies

indicating their relationship to the

respondent’s propensity to complete the

interview. These data were organized as

shown in Figure 8.

Interviewers are the highest level of

aggregation; the sample segment

paradata form the second level; the

housing unit is the third level; records

on each contact attempt (or ‘‘call’’ or

‘‘visit’’) form the lowest level of the

paradata structure. Paradata exist for the

screening stage and the main interview

stage of the interviewing. Needless to

say, the paradata files can become quite

complex. However, as Figure 8 implies,

statistical analysis on the data can

answer questions like, ‘‘What calling

pattern on screener interviews predicts

the need to make more callbacks to

obtain the main interview?’’ or, ‘‘What

interviewers achieve more efficient

interview production with different

kinds of sample persons?’’

Tracking of Response

Propensities in Phase 1

(first 10 weeks of each

quarter)

A key set of observations were

monitored each day of the survey and

formed the basis of a management tool

called the NSFG Dashboard (Figure 9).

As implied in the dashboard, the

continuous NSFG used a simple data

collection production model, whereby

the final production of interview records

is a function of effort applied to a set of

raw materials–in this case, the sample

housing units of the NSFG quarterly

sample (‘‘Active Sample’’). The cases

that were most easily contacted and

most interested in participating in the

interview were measured earliest. As the

10-week period proceeded, the

remaining active cases were ones whose

residents were rarely at home or whose
Effort

 I’rs working

 hours

 % production

 calls/day

 calls/hour 

% peak calls

 scrn’r/main calls 

X 

NOTES: Indicators of effort include the number of interviewers (“I’rs”) working that day or week, total hours worked, the percent of all hours worked that were spent 

on producing screeners or interviews, number of calls (visits to households, whether anyone was home or not) per day, number of calls per hour, the percent of all 

calls made during peak hours, and the ratio of screener calls to main study calls. 

The indicators of the characteristics of the sample include housing units that are occupied (or not), households with an eligible person living there or not), number of 

cases not worked at all yet, households not contacted yet, the mean number of visits to households, the number of housing units visited 8 or more times (“call 

attempts”), the number of locked buildings, the number of cases expressing resistance, the number of hard appointments, and the propensity of the case to be a 

respondent on the next visit. 

Productivity is measured by the number of interviews today (or this week), the cumulative number of interviews, the number of hours worked per completed 

interview, and the number of calls (i.e., in-person visits) per interview. 

Data set balance includes the response rate, the percent of households with children, the percent of households with a married or cohabiting couple, the response 

rates for various sub-groups, and the coefficient of variation of the various sub-group response rates. 

Data Set Balance

 response rate 

% with kids 

% married or cohabiting 

group response rates 

CV group response rates 

Active Sample

 occupied

 eligible

 nonworked

 noncontacts

 mean calls

 call attempts

 locked bldgs

 resistant

 hard appt.

 propensity 

The NSFG Dashboard 

Productivity

 Interviews

 Cum Interviews

 Hours/interview

 Calls/interview 

Figure 9. The National Survey of Family Growth Dashboard for Paradata Indicators

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 25

lives leave them only rare moments to

participate in the survey. Thus, the

amount of effort needed to obtain one

interview (in numbers of contact

attempts) increases over the days of the

period. A key management challenge has

been to direct those efforts over time to

achieve a respondent pool that

represents the full target population as

well as possible within budget

constraints.

Each evening after midnight, the

contractor reran computer programs to

refit two propensity models to the entire

calendar quarter’s sample. One model

predicted the likelihood that a case not

yet providing a screener interview

would do so on the next call. Another

model predicted the likelihood that a

sample person not yet providing a main

interview would do so on the next call.

Expected values for each active case,

given the model, were computed each

day during the data collection period.
Page 26 [ Series 1, No. 48

The expected values were summed over

all cases within a sample segment

(weighting the screener model expected

values by the expected eligibility of the

households).

Based on the propensity models and

selection weight values, a subsample of

active cases (both cases yet to be

screened and sample persons yet to give

a main interview) was chosen. The

specific sample designs of each quarter

vary slightly.

After working the sample for 10

weeks and visiting each remaining

nonresponding household an average

of eight times, Phase 2 was

implemented for weeks 11 and 12 of

each 12-week quarter. With the

support of the NCHS IRB and OMB,

the Phase 2 recruitment protocol had

the following components:

A.	 A subsample of the remaining

incomplete cases was selected for

further fieldwork.

B.	 Increased use of proxy informants

for the screening interview was

allowed.

C.	 A prepaid $5 incentive (versus no

incentive) was used for cases that

had not yet completed the

screening interview.

D.	 A prepaid $40 incentive for the

main interview (versus a $40

incentive provided after the

informed consent was signed).

E.	 A promised additional $40

incentive at the time of the main

interview.

Phase 2 was limited to a 2-week

period, with most attention given to

main interview cases. Thus, there were

four 12-week data collection periods

each year, with a 10-week ‘‘Phase 1’’

protocol and a 2-week ‘‘Phase 2’’

protocol. As experience was

accumulated over these 12-week

quarters, the survey management

techniques were refined.

Data Collection
 

Quality Control
 

Production Review

Interviews

Production Review Interviews were

conducted with each field interviewer

several times throughout data collection.

These Production Review Interviews

were similar to the certification

interview done at the end of training

except that they were done over the

phone and used different prepared

scripts. Production Review Interviews

were conducted by the field quality

control coordinator. After a Production

Review Interview, the quality control

coordinator gave oral feedback to the

interviewer and sent a copy of her

evaluation to the interviewer, the

interviewer’s supervisor, and the

contractor’s home office. If the

interviewer did not pass the Production

Review Interview, she was instructed to

stop fieldwork until she had reviewed

the problem areas with her supervisor,

practiced her skills, and passed a new

Production Review Interview.

Verification

As a quality control measure, a

sample of the completed interviews and

screeners were routinely called back.

Occasionally, during these calls, a

person did not recall being contacted, or

reported some other information that

contradicted the information collected.

Whenever a situation was discovered

that appeared to involve possible

falsification by the interviewer, the

supervisor and production manager were

contacted immediately. If they

confirmed that there appeared to be a

problem, the interviewer was instructed

to stop working her sample immediately.

Additional cases for that interviewer

were flagged for verification calls. If,

based on these additional calls and

further investigation into the original

case, the supervisor and production

manager determined that there was no

falsification, the interviewer was

allowed to resume working her sample.

If further evidence of falsification

was found, or if there was a high level

of nonresponse in verification, all

sample lines (all selected households)

finalized by the interviewer were

verified. If any case confirmed

interviewer falsification, the interviewer

was terminated immediately. If an

interviewer was terminated, all of her

completed interviews and age-ineligible

households had to be verified. The cases

that did not pass verification or had not

been verified by telephone were sent to

another interviewer in the field to be

verified.

Interviewer Comments on

Individual Questions

Sometimes during the course of an

interview, issues may arise that create a

problem or raise a question for the

interviewer. Using a preprogrammed key

[F2], interviewers could immediately

make a note about the issue within the

questionnaire. There were several

different reasons why interviewers

recorded F2 comments:

+	 The interviewer or respondent made

a self-assessed error and the

interviewer needed to provide an

explanation of what should have

been done.

+	 The questionnaire program did not

seem to permit the interviewer to

record the answer given by the

respondent (for example, the

response categories did not seem to

fit the meaning of the respondent’s

answer).

+	 The response was coded, but there

was an important qualification to the

response that was worth noting.

The content of these

‘‘F2 comments’’ from completed

interviews was reviewed periodically,

summarized and evaluated for evidence

of application errors or human-computer

interface weaknesses. In some cases,

this information triggered fixes in the

computer application itself; in other

cases the information in the comments

was used later to make decisions about

remedial training and/or data editing. In

addition to providing insight into the

problems of individual interviews or
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 27

interviewers, the comments can be

helpful in making improvements to the

questionnaire in the next year of the

NSFG.

Interviewer Documentation

on Respondent Reactions

to Interview

Interviewers completed a set of

observations about the interview while

respondents were completing the ACASI

portion of the interview. The task of

completing the observations on paper

helped to provide an atmosphere of

privacy by giving the interviewer

something to stay busy with while the

respondent completed ACASI. The

observation questions were used to

describe the interview situation and to

assess its quality.

In general, two types of questions

were asked:

1.	 Factual questions about the

environment in which the interview

was conducted and the use of

interview aids during the interview

(for example, where the interview

was conducted and to what extent

the headphones were used by the

respondent during ACASI).

2.	 Questions asking the interviewer for

her perceptions about the interview

interaction (for example, what was

the interviewer’s perception of the

quality of the information provided

by the respondent).

Response Rate Tracking

and Respondent Pool

Balance

As implied by the structure of the

NSFG Dashboard, the data collection

management team monitored whether

respondents and nonrespondents to the

main interview resemble one another on

a set of auxiliary variables that are

correlates of key NSFG survey

variables. These included observations

of whether there are any children in the

household, whether the sample person is

judged to be in a marriage or cohabiting

relationship, and a set of screener

variables (for example, age, gender, and

race and ethnicity). Throughout Phase 1

(the first 10 weeks) of the 12-week

calendar quarter data collection, when

large imbalances between respondents

and nonrespondents appeared on these

auxiliary variables, randomized

interventions were conducted on

subsamples of the groups then

underrepresented in the respondent pool,

in order to achieve greater balance on

these variables in the resulting data.

Preparing Public-Use

Data Files

The continuous interviewing

environment allowed project staff to

perform initial data processing and

documentation tasks at the beginning

stages of data collection. Modifications

to these procedures were made as

experience with the data was

accumulated, and as the data collection

instruments changed.

Data File Creation

Every month, the contractor’s

project staff produced initial versions of

the full male and female data files

directly from the Blaiset data models.

These files included all responses

captured through the main sections of

each questionnaire, the computed

variables, and answers provided by each

respondent during the ACASI portion of

the instrument. In addition to the

respondent files for males and females,

a female pregnancy file was also

produced with each record representing

a pregnancy reported by a female

respondent.

NCHS provided specifications to

create about 600 recoded variables.

‘‘Recoded variables’’ are high-priority

variables, often based on several

different questions in the questionnaire,

that are used frequently by NCHS staff

and other data users. Specifications for

these recoded variables were converted

into SAS programming code and

discrepancies were resolved before

merging the completed recode variables

into the main data files. Upon

completion of the recode process, cases

with missing data on that recode were

imputed for each release of a public-use

file. An imputation flag accompanies

each recode. Special post-data-collection

programs created new variables,

including a roster of a male

respondent’s biological children in

chronological order; also, some variables

were collapsed or re-categorized to

reduce the risk of disclosure.

Overview of Item

Imputation

In any survey, not every question is

answered by every person interviewed.

Sometimes a respondent cannot

remember a fact asked for in a question;

sometimes he or she refuses to answer.

Other times, the answer that the

respondent gives is clearly inconsistent

with other information in the interview;

one or more of the inconsistent answers

is then set to ‘‘missing.’’ Such ‘‘missing

data’’ create inconsistencies in estimates,

which may be confusing for many users

of the data. Assigning predicted values

to these missing items is called

‘‘imputation.’’

Imputation has several advantages.

It makes the data more complete and

consistent and therefore easier to use,

eliminating the sometimes confusing

decreases in sample size when cases

with missing values are dropped from

an analysis. It also allows all of the

collected data to be used in analysis. In

an analysis involving several different

variables simultaneously, entire cases

may be dropped because they are

missing values for one variable, even

though there are reported values for the

other variables for the case. The analyst

thus discards collected data by deleting

cases with item missing values.

Discarding cases with missing

values implicitly assigns a value to the

missing items. Effectively, discarding

cases assigns the average of the

nonmissing values to each of the

missing values. Imputation is a

procedure that attempts to improve on

this assignment by assigning a

replacement value for each item missing

value that is a prediction from other

variables, and not just an average of the

same variable from cases without

missing values.
Page 28 [ Series 1, No. 48

There are thousands of variables in

the continuous NSFG data files. Of

these, approximately 600 recoded

variables (called ‘‘recodes’’) were

selected for imputation because they

have been used frequently in analysis.

Selecting, editing, and imputing this

more limited set of variables is a way to

ensure high-quality data for the most

important variables without delaying the

release of the data file.

The frequency of missing values for

the recoded variables in the continuous

data set was low, as in the 2002 data

file–in part because CAPI requires the

interviewer to enter an acceptable

response and then goes automatically to

the next appropriate question. The CAPI

program performed range and

consistency checks to help prevent

logically impossible answers. An

estimated 1–2 percent of the values of

all recoded variables, in male, female,

and pregnancy files combined, were

missing and subsequently imputed.

The two imputation techniques used

in the continuous NSFG were:

1.	 Logical imputation

2.	 Regression imputation

Logical imputation involves having

a subject matter expert (usually at

NCHS) look at a missing value,

examine related variables, and assign a

value to the missing value that is

essentially an educated prediction of the

true value. Regression imputation uses

software that imputes a missing value

using potentially all other variables in

the data set as predictors.

A major part of the work of

imputation involves making certain that

the values imputed are within acceptable

ranges and are consistent with other data

reported by the respondent. Except when

a reported value is obviously incorrect,

actual reported data are never replaced

by an imputed value. For each recoded

variable in the database, an imputation

flag identifies whether the value of that

variable is imputed or not. Using the

imputation flag, a researcher can

identify the observations with an

imputed value and the specific type of

imputation procedure used for each

specific recoded variable. For more

information on imputation, see

references 16 and 18.

Structure of the Data Files

In the following text, ‘‘raw

variables’’ are those based on questions

asked in the questionnaire; ‘‘computed

variables’’ are variables defined within

the questionnaire program to facilitate

routing through the instrument. Many

‘‘computed variables’’ prove useful for

analysis or for the construction of

recodes, and are therefore included on

the public use files. The basic layout of

the data files is as follows:

Female respondent file

+	 Respondent ID

+	 Screener variables including

screener date

+	 Raw and computed variables

+	 Recodes and imputation flags

+	 Recodes computed from pregnancy

interval file

+	 Weights and related variables

+	 Date of interview and related

variables

Female pregnancy interval file

+	 Respondent ID

+	 Pregnancy order

+	 Raw and computed variables from

female sections B and E

+	 Recodes from female sections B

and E

+	 Respondent characteristics from the

female respondent file

+	 Imputation flags

+	 Weights and related variables

+	 Date of interview and related

variables

Male respondent File

+	 Respondent ID

+	 Screener variables including

screener date

+	 Raw and computed variables

+	 Chronologically arranged biological

child variables

+	 Recodes and imputation flags

+	 Weights and related variables

+	 Date of interview and related

variables

Data File Documentation

Public-use file documentation is

available to researchers in two forms:

1.	 As a Web-based tool to permit easy

access to all variables, quick

navigation between different

sections of the instrument and the

capability to search for key

concepts and questions (see

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm.)

2.	 As a PDF file on the NSFG web

site.

As part of the documentation

package, both forms of the

documentation are accompanied by a

User’s Guide that provides detailed

information on the conduct of the

survey and on such topics as recoding,

imputation, data quality, sample design,

estimation procedures, and variance

estimation. Full specifications for each

recoded variable are also provided. The

User’s Guide is provided as a

supplementary part of the documentation

but is directly linked and accessible

through the online documentation

system.

In addition to the codebooks and

the User’s Guide, the documentation

includes the questionnaires, which are

also provided to researchers in two

forms: the CAPI-Lite, which is intended

to be readable, and resemble a paperand pencil-questionnaire; and a CAPI

Reference Questionnaire or CRQ, which

is the full record of all specifications

transmitted to the questionnaire

programmer.

Using the National Survey

of Family Growth Data

from Continuous

Interviewing

The data from the continuous NSFG

come from a complex sample design.

Noncoverage and nonresponse affect

how analysis must be conducted on the

respondent data. To facilitate analysis,

the NSFG data are made compatible

with several data file formats, for

software systems that permit the use of

case weights and properly reflect

complex sample design in estimating

standard errors (for example, SAS,
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 29

SPSS, Stata). Each data release will

provide details on how to use that

specific data set and how to use the

pooled continuous interviewing data set.

Analyzing Continuous

Interviewing Data

The first six cycles of NSFG were

collected over a series of months and

represented the U.S. target populations

appropriate to those time periods.

Between the cycles there was no data

collection at all. In one sense, the

continuous interviewing design is

similar. It has small national samples

that represent the target populations of

the United States during any given year.

The difference between Cycles 1–6

and continuous interviewing is that:

1.	 Estimates can be made for different

time periods.

2.	 The overall sample design is the

same over time.

First, consider the different time

periods for which estimates can be

made. The respondent data from

continuous interviewing are released in

separate data sets that combine

consecutive quarters of data (for

example, the first is the period

July 2006–December 2008, or

approximately 2.5 years). Separate

weights are provided to analysts to

combine different time periods of data

across the different releases.

For example, imagine an analyst

wants to estimate quantities using a

variable that was in the NSFG in

2006–2008 (30 months) and another

variable that was first asked in

mid-2007–December 2008 (18 months).

With the first variable, there are 30

months of data and about 13,000

interviews; with the second variable,

there are 18 months of data and about

8,000 interviews. But in both cases the

size of the U.S. population 15–44 years

of age is about 120 million. Different

weights will have to be used to produce

estimates for those two interviewing

periods. It is important for analysts to

use the weights that are appropriate to

the time period of interest. Erroneous

results will be obtained when incorrect

weights are used.

The second difference between

continuous interviewing and prior cycles

of NSFG is that comparisons over time

have the advantage of being made

within the same sample design. If an

analyst wanted to compare two different

data releases of the NSFG, the standard

errors of estimates of change across

time will tend to be lower than if the

two time periods had independent

samples. The analyst must use the

correct variance estimation procedures

to reflect the sample design, but this is

built into the sampling error computing

unit coding. If the analyst ignores the

sample design and treats the data as if

they came from a simple random

sample, erroneous results will be

obtained.

Each data set released will have

more details on how to analyze data

from it, how to combine it and contrast

it with previously released NSFG data,

both within the continuous design and

outside it.

References

1.	 Freedman R, Whelpton PK, Campbell

AA. Family planning sterility and

population growth. New York:

McGraw-Hill. 1959.

2.	 Whelpton PK, Campbell AA, Patterson

JE. Fertility and family planning in the

United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press. 1966.

3.	 Ryder NB, Westoff, CF. Reproduction

in the United States, 1965. Princeton,

NJ: Princeton University Press. 1971.

4.	 Westoff CF, Ryder NB. The

Contraceptive revolution. Princeton,

NJ:Princeton University Press. 1977.

5.	 Westoff CF. The yield of the imperfect:

The national fertility study.

Demography 12(4):573–80. 1975.

6.	 Mosher WD. Fertility and family

planning in the 1970s: The National

Survey of Family Growth. Fam Plann

Perspect 14(6):314–20. 1982.

7.	 Mosher WD. Fertility and family

planning in the United States: Insights

from the National Survey of Family

Growth. Fam Plann Perspect

20(5):207–17. 1988.

8.	 Mosher WD, Bachrach CA.

Understanding U.S. fertility: Continuity

and change in the National Survey of

Family Growth, 1988–95. Fam Plann

Perspect 28(1):4–12. 1996.

9.	 Mosher WD. Design and operation of

the 1995 National Survey of Family

Growth. Fam Plann Perspect

30(1):43–46. 1988.

10.	 Kelly JE, Mosher WD, Duffer AP,

Kinsey SH. Plan and operation of the

1995 National Survey of Family

Growth. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 1(36). 1997.

11.	 Mosher WD, Deang L, Bramlett MD.

Community environment and women’s

health outcomes: Contextual data.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(23). 2003.

12.	 Groves RM, Benson G, Mosher WD, et

al. Plan and operation of cycle 6 of the

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 1(42). 2005.

13.	 De Leeuw E, De Heer W. Trends in

household survey nonresponse: A

longitudinal and international

comparison. In: Groves R, Dillman

DD, Eltinge J, Little R eds. Survey

nonresponse, 41–54. New York: John

Wiley and Sons. 2002.

14.	 Krosnick JA. Response rates,

Huffington, and more: Reflections on

the 58th annual conference. AAPOR

News, American Association for Public

Opinion Research. 2003.

15.	 Mosher WD, Pratt WF, Duffer AP.

CAPI, event histories, and incentives in

the NSFG cycle 5 pretest. In: American

Statistical Association, ed. Proceedings

of the section on survey research

methods, 59–63. 1994.

16.	 Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, Groves RM, van Hoewyk J,

Willem J. National Survey of Family

Growth, Cycle 6: Sample design,

weighting, imputation, and variance

estimation. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 2(142).

2006.

17.	 Groves RM, Heeringa SG. Responsive

design for household surveys: Tools for

actively controlling survey errors and

costs. J Royal Stat Soc A 169, Part

3:439–57. 2006.

18.	 Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, et al. Continuous National Survey

of Family Growth: New concepts for

sample design and analysis. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat. Forthcoming.

19.	 Therrien M Ramirez R. The Hispanic

population in the United States: March

2000. U.S. Census Bureau, Current

Population Reports, Series P20–535.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office. 2001.
Page 30 [ Series 1, No. 48

20. Shin H, Bruno R. Language use and

English-speaking ability: 2000. Census

2000 Brief, Series C2KBR-29. U.S.

Census Bureau, Washington, DC. 2003.

21. Martinez GM, Marin BV, SchouaGlusberg A. Translating from English

to Spanish: The 2002 National Survey

of Family Growth. Hispanic J

Behavioral Sciences 28(4): 531–45.

2006.

22. Harkness JA, Pennell BE, SchouaGlusberg A. Survey questionnaire

translation and assessment. In: Presser

S, Rothgeb JM, Couper MP, et al., eds.

Methods for testing and evaluating

survey questionnaires. New York: John

Wiley and Sons. 2004.

23. Harkness JA. Questionnaire translation.

In: Harknesss J., Vijver F, Mohler P,

eds, Cross cultural survey methods

35–56. New York: John Wiley. 2003.

24. Hinsdale M. Spanish translation issues

related to the development of computer

assisted interviewing instruments:

National Household Survey on Drug

Abuse. Paper presented at the Annual

Meeting of the American Association

for Public Opinion Research, Montreal,

Quebec, Canada. 2001.

25. Chandra A, et al. Fertility, family

planning, and reproductive health of

U.S. Women: Data from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(25). 2005.

26. Mosher WD, et al. Use of

contraception and use of family

planning services in the United States,

1982–2002. Advance data from vital

and health statistics; no. 350.

Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center

for Health Statistics. 2004.

27. Martinez GM, et al. Fertility,

contraception, and fatherhood: Data on

men and women from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(26). 2006.

28. Abma JC, et al. Teenagers in the

United States: Sexual activity,

contraceptive use, and childbearing,

2002. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 23(24).

2004.

29. Mosher WD, Chandra A, Jones J.

Sexual behavior and selected health

measures: Men and women 15–44

years of age in the United States, 2002.

Advance data from vital and health

statistics; no. 362. Hyattsville,

Maryland: National Center for Health

Statistics. 2005.

30. Anderson JE, Mosher WD, Chandra A.

Measuring HIV risk in the U.S.

Population aged 15–44: Results of the

2002 NSFG. Advance data from vital

and health statistics; no. 377.

Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center

for Health Statistics. 2006.

31. Tanfer K, Billy JOG, Grady WR.

Application of experience from the

National Survey of Men to including

Males in the National Survey of Family

Growth. Battelle, Seattle, WA. 1998.

32. Jones J. Adoption experiences of

women and men and demand for

children to adopt by women 18–44

years of age in the United States, 2002.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(27). 2008.

33. Kost K, et al. Estimates of

contraceptive failure from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

Contraception 77(1):10–21. 2008.

34. Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities in

rates of unintended pregnancy in the

United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspect

on Sex and Reprod Health 38(2):90–96.

2006.

35. Kalmuss D, Tatum C. Patterns of men’s

use of sexual and reproductive health

services. Perspect on Sex and Reprod

Health 39(2):74–81. 2007.

36. Groves RM, Couper MP. Nonresponse

in Household Interview Surveys. New

York: John Wiley and Sons. 1998.

37. Groves R, McGonagle K. A theory

guided interviewer training protocol

regarding survey participation. J

Official Statistics 17(2):249–62. 2001.
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 31

Appendix I. Glossary
 

Audio computer-assisted selfinterviewing (ACASI)—An interviewing

technique in which respondents read

questions on a computer screen while

using headphones to listen to the

questions being read. Respondents then

enter their own responses. Using ACASI

prevents anyone else from hearing the

survey questions or the respondent’s

answers to the questions, ensuring

greater privacy. Both the female and

male questionnaires of the NSFG

include ACASI sections.

Blaiset——The software program

or language that is used to create the

NSFG questionnaire.

Computer-assisted interview

(CAI)—An interviewing technique in

which the questionnaire is programmed

and administered using a computer.

Computer-assisted personal

interview (CAPI)—An interviewing

technique in which the questionnaire is

programmed into a computer and

administered by an interviewer using a

computer, in a face-to-face interview.

Contact observations—A feature in

SurveyTrak that prompts the interviewer

to answer certain questions about the

nature of each contact with the

respondent or informant. This

information can be used to tailor future

interactions, for methodological

research, and to help manage the costs

of the study.

Continuous interviewing—NSFG’s

planned work model for the NSFG calls

for ongoing collection of data over a

4-year period. For fieldwork, sample is

released for 12 weeks at a time, 4 times

a year.

Double sample—At the end of the

first 10 weeks of interviewing in a

12-week data collection period, some of

the remaining nonrespondent cases are

selected at random to receive 2 more

weeks of field effort. These selected

(sampled) cases are referred to as the

‘‘double sample’’ because they are a

sample of the original sample. The final

2 weeks of each 12-week quarter are

devoted to working the double sample.

Edit checks—Consistency checks

programmed into the NSFG

questionnaire. Specifically, edit checks

ensure that the respondent has the

opportunity to provide accurate

information by prompting for

clarification of answers that appear to be

inconsistent.

Electronic signatures—To improve

efficiency and accuracy, consent form

signatures were captured electronically

in the continuous NSFG using a tablet

PC. After the respondent read the

consent form, he or she signed an exact

replica of the form directly on the tablet

PC. The interviewer saved the form with

the respondent’s signature and it was

transmitted electronically to the

contractor’s headquarters.

Household (HH)—A general term

encompassing both the housing unit and

the household members.

Household members—Persons who

usually live in the household. ‘‘Usually

live’’ means that the person eats and

sleeps in the household most of the time

and considers it his/her permanent

residence. The NSFG has specific

protocols for identifying household

members who live in a dormitory,

sorority, or fraternity.

Household roster or household

listing (HHL)—The list of all members

living in a housing unit on a regular

basis, or who consider that address to be

their permanent residence.

Housing unit (HU)—A discrete

residence (typically a single-family

house, apartment, or condominium)

defined by two general criteria: the fact

that the living quarters are used

separately by their occupants and by

certain physical characteristics of those

quarters (for example, existence of

cooking facilities).

Informant (INF)—An adult

household member who completes the

screening interview (screener). The

informant may or may not be selected

as the respondent.

Interview observation form—A

paper questionnaire about the interview

that the interviewer completed while the

respondent was completing ACASI

questions at the end of the

questionnaire. The interviewer later

entered her responses to the interview

observation questions into Blaiset.

Life History Calendar (LHC)—A

worksheet used by female respondents

to help them remember and accurately

report events that took place over

several time frames (during the past

year, during the past 3 years, and in

their lifetimes) by placing them in

context with other events, such as births

and marriage.

Listing—Recording a complete list

of all housing units located within a

segment boundary. A list is used to

randomly select specific housing units to

participate in the survey.

Institute for Social Research,

University of Michigan—The Institute

for Social Research (ISR) at the

University of Michigan conducts the

fieldwork and data processing for the

continuous National Survey of Family

Growth (NSFG) under a contract with

NCHS. ISR has several centers that

participated in the NSFG: the Survey

Research Center provides overall

coordination and is responsible for data

collection, weighting, and variance

estimation; the Interuniversity

Consortium for Political and Social

Research processes data and develops

documentation and web based systems;

and the Population Studies Center

provides substantive expertise on

demography and family growth.

Institutional Review Board

(IRB)—A committee of peer and

community reviewers of research

procedures involving human subjects

that weighs the benefits of the research

relative to the risks of harm to human

subjects. The NSFG was reviewed and

approved by the NCHS IRB, which

NCHS calls a ‘‘Research Ethics Review

Board,’’ or RERB.

Item imputation—The process of

assigning answers to cases with missing

data (‘‘don’t know,’’ ‘‘refused,’’ or ‘‘not

ascertained.’’) In the NSFG, item

imputation is only performed on

approximately 600 ‘‘recoded variables,’’

or ‘‘recodes’’ (defined below, under

‘‘recodes’’), rather than all of the

thousands of variables in the data set.

The purposes of imputation are to make

the data more complete, more

consistent, easier to use, and, most

importantly, to reduce bias caused by

differential failure to respond. For nearly

all of the recoded variables for which

imputation is done in the continuous

NSFG, less than 2% of the cases

received an imputed value.
Page 32 [ Series 1, No. 48

Main interview—An interview

sought within sample households

containing an eligible person. If the

screening interview finds that the

household contains one or more persons

15–44 years of age, a main interview is

requested from one of those persons. If

there are two or more persons 15–44

years of age, one such person is selected

at random for the main interview.

National Center for Health

Statistics (NCHS)— NCHS is the

Nation’s principal health statistics

agency. It designs, develops, and

maintains a number of systems that

produce data related to demographic and

health concerns. These include data on

registered births and deaths collected

through the National Vital Statistics

System; the National Health Interview

Survey (NHIS), the National Health and

Nutrition Examination Survey

(NHANES), the National Health Care

Survey, and the National Survey of

Family Growth (NSFG), among others.

NCHS has conducted the NSFG since

1973. NCHS is one of the ‘‘Centers’’ for

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),

which is part of the U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services.

Non-self-representing area—A

primary sampling unit (PSU) selected

into the NSFG sample through

probability sampling methods whose

population is not large enough that its

chance of selection was assured. Such

PSUs represent not only themselves, but

also nonselected PSUs and are, thus,

said to be non-self-representing.

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) Clearance —OMB reviews

survey materials and questionnaires

proposed for use by government

agencies under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act. The review is

conducted by the OMB’s Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Paradata—Information collected

about the data collection process. In the

NSFG, paradata may describe

characteristics of the interviewer (such

as how many hours she worked in a

day), sample segment (such as whether

the segment has nonresidential

buildings), the sampled address (such as

whether the address is in a locked

building), interactions with sample

household members (such as whether

the person asked a question about the

survey), or characteristics of the

interview situation (such as whether the

interview occurred in the household or

outside it). Paradata can be used to

manage interviewer time, to manage or

limit callbacks, to understand respondent

concerns and questions about the survey,

to record observations of characteristics

of sample housing units (such as the

presence of a locked building or other

barrier to access); to model the

probability of obtaining an interview on

the next visit; and to select the double

sample.

Pill chart—A chart showing most

of the oral contraceptive pill brands

currently on the market, used by female

respondents to identify and recall names

of the medications they use.

Primary sampling unit (PSU) or

primary area—The first sampling unit

of the NSFG’s multi-stage sample

selection process. PSU’s are counties or

large cities selected by chance, at

random, with weighting based on

population size.

Quarter—A 12-week period during

which all listing, screening, and main

interviewing activities are conducted for

a particular set of sample cases.

Question-by-question objectives or

Q x Qs or F1 help—Help available for

certain interview questions providing a

definition, coding instruction, or both.

QxQ’s were available in hardcopy and

electronically within the Blaiset

instruments by pressing [F1].

Recruitment protocol—A set of

procedures used in a survey that are

specified by the survey designer. These

procedures are used to contact, request

cooperation from, and conduct

interviews with sample households.

Respondent (R)—The eligible

individual randomly selected from a

sampled housing unit who is invited to

complete an NSFG main interview.

Responsive design—Responsive

survey designs identify a set of design

features that could affect survey costs

and errors of survey estimates; collect

data (‘‘paradata’’) on those indicators in

the initial stages of the data collection,

and use the paradata to alter the features

of the survey in later phases. These

alterations are designed to control costs,

improve response rates, and reduce bias

in the sample.

Screening interview—Sometimes

called a ‘‘screener.’’ In the NSFG, the

screening interview is a short set of

questions that are asked of an adult in

the household. The goal of the screener

is to determine if there are one or more

persons in the household who are

eligible for the NSFG interview—that is,

anyone 15–44 years of age, and if more

than one, to select one person for the

interview. Therefore, the NSFG screener

collects the age, gender, and race and

Hispanic origin of household members,

because these are the factors that affect

the probability that a household member

will be selected for the sample.

Segment—The 2nd stage sampling

unit of the NSFG containing small

geographic areas within PSUs. Segments

are made up of one or more census

blocks; when necessary, blocks are

grouped together so that the number of

households will be at least as large as

the minimum number defined by the

sample design.

Segment observations—A series of

questions interviewers answered about

the characteristics of each segment they

listed. Segment observations included

any safety issues, languages spoken in

the segment, structure types present, and

the existence of access impediments

such as locked buildings. Segment

observations are completed within

SurveyTrak software.

Self-representing area—A PSU that

is automatically included in national

probability samples due to its large

population. Examples include New York

City, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

Show card booklet—A bound

reference booklet that included pages

listing response categories associated

with questions in the questionnaire. The

respondent was asked to choose a

response from those listed on a specified

card. There were separate Show card

booklets for the Female and Male

questionnaires.

SurveyTrak (STrak or ST)—The

electronic sample management system

used to keep track of the progress and

status of selected sample cases.
Appendix II. Advance Letters

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 33

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

From the Director of the National Center for Health Statistics: 

My agency, part of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, needs your help. 

We are doing an important study called the National Survey of Family Growth. The study asks 

questions about marriage and divorce, having and raising children, health and health care. The 

information is used for health services and health education programs. 

We are asking a scientific sample of households to take part in a short interview. We have asked 

the University of Michigan to do these interviews for us. In a few days, an interviewer will visit 

your home to complete the interview. The visit will only take about 5 minutes and any adult 

who lives in the home can answer. You may be asked to complete our main interview, which is 

described in the enclosed brochure. 

Your help is voluntary but is very important. By Federal law*, the answers you give are 

confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your privacy. Your answers will be 

used for research only.
 

We look forward to speaking with you soon.
 

I thank you for your help with this important study.
 

Sincerely,
 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, National Center for Health Statistics 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
 

*To read about the law that protects your privacy, the Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency 

Act of 2002, visit the website http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf. The other two laws that 

protect your privacy are Section 308(d) of the Public Health Service Act which allows us to carry out this survey (4 

USC 242 M) and the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a). 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

Page 34 [ Series 1, No. 48

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

Del Director del Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud: 

La agencia a mi cargo, que es parte del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de los 

Estados Unidos, necesita su ayuda.
 

Estamos haciendo un importante estudio llamado Encuesta Nacional de Crecimiento Familiar. 

El estudio incluye preguntas sobre matrimonio y divorcio, tener y criar hijos, salud y atención 

médica. La información que se obtiene es usada para programas que proporcionan servicios de 

salud y educación sobre salud.
 

Nos estamos dirigiendo a una muestra de hogares, seleccionada por métodos científicos, para 

pedirles que participen en una breve entrevista. Le hemos encargado a la Universidad de 

Michigan que haga las entrevistas. Dentro de pocos días, una entrevistadora irá a su hogar a 

completar la entrevista. La visita tomará solamente unos 5 minutos y cualquiera de los adultos 

que viven en su hogar puede responder. Es posible que les pidamos que completen nuestra 

entrevista principal que se describe en el folleto que le enviamos con esta carta. 

Su participación es voluntaria pero es muy importante. De acuerdo con las leyes federales*, sus 

respuestas serán confidenciales y tomaremos todas las medidas posibles para proteger su 

privacidad. Sus respuestas sólo se usarán para fines del estudio. 

Esperamos hablar pronto con usted. 

Le agradezco su ayuda con este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
 

*Para leer acerca de la ley que protege su privacidad, el Acta de Protección de la Información Confidencial y 

Eficiencia Estadística de 2002, visite la página: http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf. Las 

otras dos leyes que protegen su privacidad son la Sección 308(d) del Acta del Servicio de Salud Pública que nos 

permite hacer esta encuesta (4 USC 242 M) y el Acta de Privacidad de 1974 (5 USC 552a). 
 

 

 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 35

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

From the Director of the National Center for Health Statistics: 

We are pleased you were chosen to take part in the National Survey of Family Growth. This important 

study is being done by the National Center for Health Statistics of the United States Department of 

Health and Human Services. 

We plan to speak to a national sample of households. The interview asks questions about marriage and 

divorce, having and raising children, health and health care. It lasts about 60-80 minutes. The 

information is used for health services and health education programs. 

The highly respected University of Michigan will do the interviews. 

Your help in this study is voluntary but very important. Saying yes or no to being in the study will not 

change any benefits you get now or in the future. The interview is interesting and enjoyable for most 

people. Each person interviewed represents thousands of others. Your interviewer will arrange to do the 

interview at the time that works best for you. For your help, you will receive $40 as a token of 

appreciation.
 

By Federal law*, the answers you give are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your 

privacy. Your answers will be used for research only. We report the information in summary form. 

Individuals or families can not be identified. You may choose not to answer any question at any time. 

You may have questions about your rights as a participant in this research study. If so, please call the 

office of the Research Ethics Review Board at the National Center for Health Statistics, toll free, at 1-

800-223-8118. Please leave a brief message with your name and phone number. Say that you are calling 

about Study Number 2006-01. Your call will be returned as soon as possible. 

The enclosed brochure will help to answer your questions about the study. You can also learn more at 

our website: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. To schedule your interview, please call the University of 

Michigan (toll-free) at 1-800-759-7947. 

I thank you for your help with this important study.
 

Sincerely, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, National Center for Health Statistics 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs 

*To read about the law that protects your privacy, the Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency 

Act of 2002, visit the website http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf. The other two laws that 

protect your privacy are Section 308(d) of the Public Health Service Act which allows us to carry out this survey (4 

USC 242 M) and the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a). 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

 

Page 36 [ Series 1, No. 48

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

Del Director del Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud: 

Nos complace que usted haya sido seleccionado(a) para participar en la Encuesta Nacional de 

Crecimiento Familiar. El Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud, del Departamento de Salud y
 

Servicios Humanos, está llevando a cabo este importante estudio. 

Tenemos planeado hablar con una muestra nacional de hogares. La entrevista incluye preguntas sobre 

matrimonio y divorcio, tener y criar hijos, la salud y la atención médica. Toma alrededor de 60 a 80 

minutos. La información que se obtiene es usada para programas que proporcionan servicios de salud y
 

educación sobre salud.
 

Las entrevistas serán hechas por la Universdad de Michigan, una institución muy respetada. 

Su ayuda en este estudio es voluntaria pero es muy importante. Su decisión de participar o no participar 

en la encuesta no afectará ningún beneficio que usted reciba, ahora o en el futuro. Para la mayoría de las 

personas, la encuesta es interesante y entretenida. Cada persona entrevistada representa a miles de otras. 

Su entrevistadora hará la entrevista en el horario que a usted más le convenga. Por su ayuda, usted 

recibirá $40 como muestra de agradecimiento. 

De acuerdo con las leyes federales*, sus respuestas serán confidenciales y tomaremos todas las medidas 

posibles para proteger su privacidad. Sus respuestas sólo se usarán para fines del estudio. La 

información se reporta en forma resumida. No se puede identificar a ningún individuo ni familia. Usted 

puede dejar sin contestar cualquier pregunta en cualquier momento. Tal vez usted tenga alguna pregunta 

sobre sus derechos como participante en este estudio. En tal caso, puede llamar a la Oficina de la Junta 

de Revisión de Ética en la Investigación, en el Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de la Salud, al teléfono 

gratuito, 1-800-223-8118. Por favor deje un mensaje breve con su nombre y su número de teléfono. 

Diga que está llamando con referencia al Estudio # 2006-01. Le regresarán su llamada lo antes posible. 

El folleto que recibe con esta carta ayudará a contestar las preguntas que usted tenga sobre este estudio. 

También puede informarse más en nuestra página en Internet: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. Para hacer 

una cita para su entrevista, por favor llame al teléfono gratuito de la Universidad de Michigan, 1-800-

643-7605. 

Le agradezco su ayuda con este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs 

*Para leer acerca de la ley que protege su privacidad, el Acta de Protección de la Información Confidencial y 

Eficiencia Estadística de 2002, visite la página: http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf. Las 

otras dos leyes que protegen su privacidad son la Sección 308(d) del Acta del Servicio de Salud Pública que nos 

permite hacer esta encuesta (4 USC 242 M) y el Acta de Privacidad de 1974 (5 USC 552a). 
 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 37

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

From the Director of the National Center for Health Statistics: 

My agency, part of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, needs your help. 

We are carrying out an important study called the National Survey of Family Growth. The survey
 

gathers information on marriage and divorce, having and raising children, health, and the use of health 

care. The information is used for health and health education programs for men and women. 

We are asking a scientific sample of households in the United States to take part in a short interview to be 

done by the highly respected University of Michigan. In a few days, an interviewer on the staff of the 

University of Michigan will visit your home to see if you or someone in your household is eligible for the 

study. The visit will only take about 5 minutes and any adult who lives in the home can answer. You 

may be selected for our main interview, which is described in the enclosed brochure. 

We have enclosed $5 as a token of our appreciation for your help. It is yours to keep. If you would like to 

set up a time for our interviewer to visit you, please call the University of Michigan (toll-free) at: 1-800-

759-7947, to set up an appointment. 

Your help with this short interview is very important and completely voluntary. By Federal law*, the 

answers you give are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your privacy. Your 

answers will be used for research only. We look forward to speaking with you soon about this
 

important, nationally recognized and highly respected study of people in America. 

On behalf of the National Center for Health Statistics, I thank you for your help with this important study. 

Sincerely, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, National Center for Health Statistics 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
 

*Here are the laws and the information you would need to read the law for yourself (Section 308(d) of the Public Health Service 

Act which allows us to carry out this survey (42 USC 242M), the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a)), and the Confidential 

Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of 2002 (http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf) 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

 

 

Page 38 [ Series 1, No. 48

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

Del Director del Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud: 

La agencia a mi cargo, que es parte del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos, necesita su ayuda. 

Estamos haciendo un importante estudio llamado la Encuesta Nacional de Crecimiento Familiar. La 

encuesta obtiene información sobre matrimonio y divorcio, tener y criar hijos, salud y uso de servicios de 

atención médica. La información es usada para programas de salud y de educación sobre salud para 

hombres y mujeres. 

Nos estamos dirigiendo a una muestra de hogares en los Estados Unidos, seleccionada por métodos 

científicos, para pedirles que participen en una breve entrevista que lleva a cabo una institución muy
 

respetada: la Universidad de Michigan. Dentro de pocos días, una entrevistadora que es miembro del 

personal de la Universidad de Michigan irá a su hogar a ver si usted o alguien en su hogar es elegible para 

el estudio. La visita tomará solamente unos 5 minutos y cualquiera de los adultos que viven en su hogar 

puede responder. Es posible que resulten seleccionados para participar en nuestra entrevista principal que 

se describe en el folleto que le enviamos con esta carta. 

Le estamos enviando $5 como muestra de nuestro agradecimiento por su ayuda. Participe o no, ese 

dinero es para usted. Si desea hacer una cita para que una entrevistadora le visite, por favor llame al 

teléfono gratuito de la Universidad de Michigan al 1-800-643-7605 para hacer una cita. 

Su participación en esta breve entrevista es muy importante y totalmente voluntaria. De acuerdo con las 

leyes federales*, sus respuestas serán confidenciales y tomaremos todas las medidas posibles para 

proteger su privacidad. Sus respuestas sólo se usarán para fines del estudio. Esperamos hablar pronto 

con usted sobre este importante estudio de la gente en los Estados Unidos, el cual goza de reconocimiento 

y alto grado de respeto a nivel nacional. 

En nombre del Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de la Salud, le agradezco su ayuda con este importante 

estudio.
 

Atentamente, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs 

*A continuación se mencionan las leyes y la información que usted necesitaría para leer acerca de la ley por sí mismo(a) 

(Sección 308(d) del Acta del Servicio de Salud Pública que nos permite hacer esta encuesta (4 USC 242 M), el Acta de 

Privacidad de 1974 (5 USC 552a), y el Acta de Protección de la Información Confidencial y Eficiencia Estadística de 2002 

(http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf) 
 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 39

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

From the Director of the National Center for Health Statistics: 

We are pleased you were chosen to take part in the National Survey of Family Growth. This important study 

is being done by the National Center for Health Statistics of the United States Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

The interview asks questions about marriage and divorce, having and raising children, health and health care. 

It lasts about 60-80 minutes. The information is used for health services and health education programs. The 

highly respected University of Michigan will do the interviews. 

We are asking your help to find a convenient time for you to talk with our interviewer. Interviewers work 

seven days a week, including evenings. Please help us by calling our toll-free number, 1-800-759-7947, to 

set up an appointment. For considering our request for your help, we are enclosing $40 with this letter. 

When the interviewer visits you to conduct the interview, you will receive an additional $40 as a token of 

our appreciation. 

Your help in this study is voluntary but very important. Saying yes or no to being in the study will not 

change any benefits you get now or in the future. The interview is interesting and enjoyable for most 

people. Each person interviewed represents thousands of others. 

By Federal law*, the answers you give are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your 

privacy. Your answers will be used for research only. We report the information in summary form. 

Individuals or families can not be identified. You may choose not to answer any question at any time. 

You may have questions about your rights as a participant in this research study. If so, please call the 

office of the Research Ethics Review Board at the National Center for Health Statistics, toll free, at 1-800-

223-8118. Please leave a brief message with your name and phone number. Say that you are calling about
 

Study Number 2006-01. Your call will be returned as soon as possible. 

You may also learn more about the survey at our website: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. If you need to 

schedule your interview, please call the University of Michigan (toll-free) at 1-800-759-7947. 

I thank for your help with this important study. 

Sincerely, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, National Center for Health Statistics 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs 

*Here are the laws and the information you would need to read the law for yourself (Section 308(d) of the Public Health Service Act 

which allows us to carry out this survey (42 USC 242M), the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a)), and the Confidential Information 

Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of 2002 (http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf) 
Page 40 [ Series 1, No. 48

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

Del Director del Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud: 

Nos complace que usted haya sido seleccionado(a) para participar en la Encuesta Nacional de Crecimiento 

Familiar. El Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud, del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de los 

Estados Unidos, está llevando a cabo este importante estudio. 

La entrevista incluye preguntas sobre matrimonio y divorcio, tener y criar hijos, la salud y la atención médica. 

Toma alrededor de 60 a 80 minutos. La información que se obtiene es usada para programas de servicios de salud 

y educación sobre salud. Las entrevistas serán hechas por una institución muy respetada: la Universidad de 

Michigan. 

Le estamos pidiendo que nos ayude a determinar cuál sería un buen momento para que usted hable con nuestra 

entrevistadora. Las entrevistadoras trabajan siete días a la semana, e inclusive por la noche. Por favor 

ayúdenos llamando a nuestro teléfono gratuito 1-800-643-7605 para hacer una cita. Junto con esta carta le 

estamos enviando $40 por su consideración de nuestro pedido de ayuda. Cuando la entrevistadora le visite para 

hacer la entrevista, usted recibirá $40 adicionales como muestra de nuestro agradecimiento. 

Su ayuda en este estudio es voluntaria pero es muy importante. Su decisión de participar o no participar en la 

encuesta no afectará ningún beneficio que usted reciba, ahora o en el futuro. Para la mayoría de las personas, la 

encuesta es interesante y entretenida. Cada persona entrevistada representa a miles de otras. 

De acuerdo con las leyes federales*, sus respuestas serán confidenciales y tomaremos todas las medidas posibles 

para proteger su privacidad. Sus respuestas sólo se usarán para fines del estudio. La información se reporta en 

forma resumida. No se puede identificar a ningún individuo ni familia. Usted puede dejar sin contestar cualquier 

pregunta en cualquier momento. Tal vez usted tenga alguna pregunta sobre sus derechos como participante en este 

estudio. En tal caso, puede llamar al comité de Revisión de Ética en la Investigación, en el Centro Nacional para 

Estadísticas de la Salud, al teléfono gratuito, 1-800-223-8118. Por favor deje un mensaje breve con su nombre y 

su número de teléfono. Diga que está llamando con referencia al Estudio 2006-01. Le regresará su llamada lo 

antes posible.
 

También puede informarse más en nuestra página en Internet: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. Si necesita hacer una 

cita para su entrevista, por favor llame al teléfono gratuito de la Universidad de Michigan, 1-800-643-7605. 

Le agradezco su ayuda con este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs 

*A continuación se mencionan las leyes y la información que usted necesitaría para leer acerca de la ley por sí mismo(a) (Sección 308(d) del Acta 

del Servicio de Salud Pública que nos permite hacer esta encuesta (4 USC 242 M), el Acta de Privacidad de 1974 (5 USC 552a), y el Acta de 

Protección de la Información Confidencial y Eficiencia Estadística de 2002 (http://scitech.dot.gov/research/human/docs/hfcc/title-v.pdf) 
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 41

Appendix III. Interviewer Introduction Materials

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

To Whom It May Concern: 

[INTERVIEWER NAME] has been authorized to work as a field interviewer on the National Survey of 

Family Growth (NSFG). This major study is sponsored by the National Center for Health Statistics of the 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This survey provides information on health, marriage 

and divorce, having and raising children and medical care. 

About 17,000 people in the U.S. will be selected at random to take part in this study. 

The interviewers working on this study have been hired and trained by the University of Michigan’s 

Survey Research Center, located in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The National Center for Health Statistics 

hired the University of Michigan (Contract # 200-2000-07001) to collect the data for the survey. 

If you would like more proof that [INTERVIEWER NAME] is an interviewer working for the University
 

of Michigan on this study, please call the Survey Research Center at 1-800-759-7947 (toll-free). This 

number is answered Monday-Thursday 9am-9pm, Friday 9am-5pm, and Saturday 12pm-4pm, Eastern 

time.
 

If you would like to know more about the NSFG, you may visit the study’s website: 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. You may also call Dr. Joyce Abma or Dr. William Mosher, at the National 

Center for Health Statistics (1-866-227-8347 - toll-free), during business hours, Monday through Friday. 

Thank you in advance for your help with this important research study. 

Sincerely, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, National Center for Health Statistics 
Page 42 [ Series 1, No. 48

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

De mi mayor consideración: 

[INTERVIEWER NAME] ha sido autorizada para trabajar como entrevistadora en la Encuesta Nacional 

de Crecimiento Familiar (NSFG, por sus siglas en inglés). Este importante estudio está patrocinado por el 

Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de los 

Estados Unidos. Esta encuesta proporciona información acerca de salud, matrimonios y divorcios, tener y
 

criar hijos, y atención médica. 

Aproximadamente 17,000 personas en los EE.UU. serán seleccionadas al azar para participar en este 

estudio.
 

Las entrevistadoras que trabajan en este estudio han sido empleadas y entrenadas para este proyecto por el 

Centro de Encuestas de la Universidad de Michigan, ubicado en Ann Arbor, Michigan. La Universidad 

de Michigan tiene un contrato (Contrato # 200-2000-07001) con el Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de 

Salud para recopilar los datos de la encuesta. 

Si desea más pruebas de que [INTERVIEWER NAME] es una entrevistadora que trabaja para la 

Universidad de Michigan en este estudio, por favor póngase en contacto con el Centro de Encuestas 

llamando al teléfono gratuito 1-800-643-7605. 

Si desea más información sobre la encuesta NSFG, puede visitar en Internet la página del estudio: 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. También puede llamar a la Dra. Gladys Martinez (ella habla Español) o al 

Dr. William Mosher, al Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud (teléfono gratuito: 1-866-227-8347), 

durante horas de trabajo, de lunes a viernes. 

Desde ya, le agradecemos su cooperación con este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

/Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D./
 

Director, Centro Nacional para Estadísticas de Salud 
 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 43

NSFG Screener Introduction 

 ̈ Hello. I am (NAME) from the University of Michigan. Here is my identification 

card. We are conducting the National Survey of Family Growth for the National 

Center for Health Statistics, which is part of the US Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

This letter explains all about this survey. You may remember receiving this 

letter and a brochure in the mail recently. Please take some time to read this 

important information. 

{IF NECESSARY, YOU MAY READ THE LETTER TO THE HOUSEHOLD MEMBER.} 

 ̈ Do you have any questions about anything (you have read/I have read to you) 

about the National Survey of Family Growth? 

I have a few questions that tell us whether anyone living here can take part in 

our study. These questions take about 5 minutes. I have to ask these 

questions only of an adult member of the household. Are you 18 or over? 

 ̈ {If yes, continue with screener} 

 ̈ {If no} May I please speak to someone in the household who is age 18 or 

older? 

 ̈ {If no adults live in the household} Thank you for your time. I need to contact my 

supervisor for instructions on how to proceed. 

 ̈ This interview is completely voluntary and confidential. If there is any question 

that you do not wish to answer, please let me know and we can move on to the 

next question. 

May I ask you these questions now? 

IF YES, CONTINUE WITH THE SCREENER ON THE COMPUTER.

 IF NO, ATTEMPT TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR ANOTHER TIME.
 
Page 44 [ Series 1, No. 48

Card Used to Greet Spanish-Speaking NSFG Informants 

1. English: “Hello. Excuse me, sir/madam, but do you speak Spanish?” 

Spanish: “Hóla. Perdón, señor/señora, ¿Usted habla español?” 

Phonetic: “O-lah. Pear-doh-n, see-nee-or/see-nee-ora, oo-stead ah-blah 

es-pah-nee-ole?” 

2. English: “Yes.” “No.” 

 Spanish: “Sí.” “No.” 

Phonetic: “See.” “No.” 

3. English: “Does any adult in the household speak English?” 

Spanish: “¿Algún adulto en la casa habla inglés?” 

Phonetic: “All-goon adulto in lah kah-sah ah-blah in-glays?” 

4. English: “May I speak with that person?” 

Spanish: “¿Puedo hablar con esa persona?” 

Phonetic: “Pway-doh ah-blar cone essa per-so-nah?” 

5.	 (Give the person a pad of paper and say:) 

English: “Please write down here at what time I can find this person at home. If I 

can call by phone, please write down the telephone number here: .” 

Spanish: “Por favor, anote a qué hora puedo encontrar a esa persona en 

casa. Si puedo llamar por teléfono, por favor anote el número de teléfono 

aquí:.” 

Phonetic: “Pour fah-four, ah-note-ay ah kay or-ah pway-doh in-cone-trar ah essa 

per-so-nah in kah-sah. See pway-doh yah-marr pour tele-phono pour fah-four 

ah-note-ay L new-mer-o day tele-phono ah-key: .” 




 

 

 

_________________________________ ___________ _____________________ 

 

_________________________________ 

_________________________________ 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 49

Appendix V. Consent/Assent Forms

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

ADULT’S PERMISSION FOR INTERVIEW 

This interview is part of the National Survey of Family Growth. This research study is being done for the U.S. National Center 

for Health Statistics. The University of Michigan will do the interviews. The survey has questions on marriage and divorce, 

having and raising children, health and health care. The information will be used for health services and health education 

programs in the U.S.. The interviewer will only ask questions that apply to you. The interview lasts about 60-80 minutes. 

Answers to the questions will be entered into a laptop computer. 

You will be part of a scientific sample of people. You will represent thousands of other people across the country. Your 

participation is very important because it will help the study be accurate for people like yourself. For your help in this study, you 

will receive $40 as a token of appreciation. 

By Federal law, the answers you give are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your privacy. Your answers 

will be used for research only. To keep the answers confidential it is important to do the interview in a private setting. This 

brochure, which you may have seen earlier, answers questions people sometimes ask about the study. 

Your help in this study is completely voluntary. Saying yes or no to being in the survey will not change any benefits you get 

now or in the future. For most people, the survey is interesting and enjoyable. Some of the questions in the interview may be 

sensitive for some people. You may choose not to answer any question for any reason, and you may stop the interview at any 

time. 

You may have questions about your rights as a participant in this research study. If so, please call the office of the Research 

Ethics Review Board at the National Center for Health Statistics, toll free, at 1-800-223-8118. Please leave a brief message with 

your name and phone number. Say that you are calling about Study Number 2006-01. Your call will be returned as soon as 

possible. If you have other questions about the survey, you may call Dr. William Mosher or Dr. Joyce Abma (toll-free) at 

NCHS: 1-866-227-8347, or visit the NSFG webpage: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. 

Thank you again for being part of our survey. 

I have read the study letter and brochure. I agree to take part in the survey. 

I received the $40 token of appreciation.  I refused the $40 token of appreciation. 

Respondent’s Signature R espondent’s Name (PLEASE PRINT) 

Interviewer’s Signature 

I have read the study letter and brochure. I agree to take part in the survey but do not wish to sign this consent form. 

Interviewer: The respondent has read the study letter and brochure or they have been read to the respondent. The respondent 

has given oral permission to be interviewed, but does not wish to sign the consent form. 

Interviewer’s Signature 
U

_________________________________ ___________ _____________________ 

____________________________________ 

Page 50 [ Series 1, No. 48

.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

PARENT’S/GUARDIAN’S PERMISSION FOR INTERVIEW 

This interview is part of the National Survey of Family Growth. This research study is being done for the U.S. National Center 

for Health Statistics. The University of Michigan will do the interviews. The survey has questions on marriage and divorce, 

having and raising children, health and use of health care, and attitudes and opinions about these topics. The interviewer will 

only ask questions that apply to your son or daughter’s experience. The information will be used for health services and health 

education programs in the U.S. The interview lasts about 60 minutes. Answers to the questions will be entered into a laptop 

computer. 

Your son or daughter will be part of a scientific sample. This sample will represent the 20 million teenagers in the United States. 

His or her participation is very important and will help the study results to be accurate for all teenagers. Your teenager will 

receive $40 as a token of appreciation for his or her help in this study. 

By Federal law, your teenager’s answers are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your teenager’s and your 

family’s privacy. Your teenager’s answers will be used for research only and will not be shared with you or other family 

members. To keep the answers confidential it is important to do the interview in a private setting. This brochure, which you 

may have seen earlier, answers questions people sometimes ask about the study. 

Giving your permission does not mean that your son or daughter has to do the interview. It just means that we have your 

permission to ask him or her for the interview. Your son or daughter is free to decide to do the interview or not. Saying yes or 

no to being in the survey will not change any benefits you or your teenager gets now or in the future. For most people, the 

survey is interesting and enjoyable. Some of the questions in the interview may be sensitive for some people. Your son or 

daughter may choose not to answer any question for any reason, and he or she may stop the interview at any time. 

You may have questions about your teenager’s rights as a participant in this research study. If so, please call the office of the 

Research Ethics Review Board at the National Center for Health Statistics, toll free, at 1-800-223-8118. Please leave a brief 

message with your name and phone number. Say that you are calling about Study Number 2006-01. Your call will be returned 

as soon as possible. If you have other questions about the survey, you may call Dr. William Mosher or Dr. Joyce Abma (tollfree) at NCHS: 1-866-227-8347, or visit the NSFG webpage: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. 

I have read the study letter and brochure. You may ask my son or daughter if he or she wants to take part in the survey. 

Parent’s/Guardian’s Signature Parent’s/Guardian’s Name (PLEASE PRINT) 

Son or Daughter’s Name (PLEASE PRINT) 
U

 

 

 

 

_________________________________ ___________ _____________________ 

 

_________________________________ 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 51

.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 

3311 Toledo Road 

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782 

MINOR’S PERMISSION FOR INTERVIEW (AGE 15-17) 

We are doing a research study called The National Survey of Family Growth. Your parent or guardian says that you may take 

part. This study is being done for the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics. The University of Michigan does the 

interviews. The survey has questions on marriage and divorce, having and raising children, health and health care. We also ask 

your thoughts about these topics. The interviewer will only ask questions that make sense for you. The information will be used 

for health services and health education programs for teens and adults. The interview lasts about 60 minutes. Answers will be 

put into a laptop computer. 

You will be part of a sample that represents the teenagers in the U.S. Your help is very important because you represent 

thousands of others. To thank you for your help in this study, we will give you $40. 

By Federal law, the answers you give are confidential and we will take all possible steps to protect your privacy. We will not 

share them with your parents, other family members or anyone else. They will be used for research only. To keep the answers 

private we will do the interview in private. This brochure answers questions people sometimes ask about the study. 

It’s your choice to do the interview or not. Saying yes or no to being in the survey will not change any benefits you get now or 

ever. For most people, the survey is interesting and enjoyable. Some of the questions in the interview may be sensitive for some 

people. You can say no to any question for any reason. You can stop at any time. 

You may have questions about your rights as a participant in this research study. If so, please call the office of the Research 

Ethics Review Board at the National Center for Health Statistics, toll free, at 1-800-223-8118. Please leave a brief message with 

your name and phone number. Say that you are calling about Study Number 2006-01. Your call will be returned as soon as 

possible. If you have other questions about the survey, you may call Dr. William Mosher or Dr. Joyce Abma (toll-free) at 

NCHS: 1-866-227-8347, or visit the NSFG webpage: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm. 

If you agree to take part in this study, please sign this form. Thank you again for being part of our survey. 

I have read the study letter and brochure. I agree to take part in the survey. 

I received the $40 token of appreciation.  I refused the $40 token of appreciation. 

Respondent’s Signature R espondent’s Name (PLEASE PRINT) 

Interviewer’s Signature 
Some suggested abbbirth control methods P = Pill

C = CondomW = WithdrawaFS = Female s

 V = Vasectomy

D = Depo Prov
N S

F G

 

Lives with
 

some 12%
 

Lives with 

none 14% 

Lives with all his 

children 73% 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Ever cohabited Currently cohabiting 

50 

9 

49 

9 

Women 

Men 

80 69
 70
 

60 48
 

50
 35
 40
 

30 17 20
 

10
 

0
 

Ever 3 6 12 

months months months 

or longer or longer or longer 

Family Facts

from the National Survey of Family Growthȱȱ

The Nation al Survey o f Fam ily Growth (NSFG) collects data on such topics as pregnancy, adoption, 

contraceptive use and effectiveness, and infertility. In 2004, it was praised by the Washington Post as 

“a com prehensive, well-respected governm ent survey” and “one of the m ost authoritative sources of 

information.” The Washington Times said the survey “p rovides bed rock data on Am erican fam ily life, 

marriage, divorce, adoption, cohabitation, fa mily planning, fatherhood, infertility, pregnancy and birth.” 

Below are some examples of actual data collected by the study the last time it was conducted in 2002. 

Living Arrangement with Children 

73% of fa thers live with all of their 

children; 14% do not liv e with any of their 

children, and 12% live with som e and not 

others. 

Cohabiting 

About half of m en and wom en ha ve ever 

cohabited at som e tim e and 9% are 

currently cohabiting. 

Breastfeeding 

Approximately two-thirds of babies born 

1997 through 2000 were breastfed. By one 

year of age, only 17 percen t were s till 

being breastfed. 

Percent Percent of babies breastfed 

Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 53
N S

F G

Family Facts

from the National Survey of Family Growth

40 

33 35 

Percent of women who had an 

Percent of men aged 40-44 

Number of Children Fathered 

Among m en 40 - 44 years old, 22% have 

not fathered any children and 33% have 

fathered 3 or more children. 

Contraception 

The most popular methods of contraception 

in the U.S. in 2002 were the pill, fe male 

sterilization, and the condom. 

Unintended Pregnancies 

In their firs t year usin g the pill, 7% of 

women ha d an unintended pregnancy, 

compared with 14% of those using 

condoms and 14% of those using 

diaphragms. 

22 

20 

25 

None 1 2 3 or more 

Number of biological children fathered 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Contraceptive Methods 

Shot 5% 

Condom 18% Other 10% 

Pill 31% 

sterilization 27% 

Male 

sterilization 9% 

Female 

30 

unintended pregnancy 

25 

20 

14 14 15 

10 7 

5 3

0 

Injectable Pill Male condom Diaphragm 

Birth Control Method 

U.S. Department of Health A Research Study for the National Center for Health 

& Human Services Statistics conducted by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

The University of Michigan National Center for Health Statistics 

Page 54 [ Series 1, No. 48
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 55

Appendix VII. Interviewer Training Agenda

NSFG Study-Specific Training
 

Participant’s Agenda
 

June 2007
 

There will be an hour lunch break and two 15-minute breaks each day.
 

You will need to have your training binder and tablet computer with you every day.
 

A one-hour computer help session will be available each day immediately following training.
 

Sunday, June 24

12:00pm to 5:45pm

On-staff Field Researchers will join New Hire Field Researchers for lunch beginning at noon. Study-specific training will start

after lunch.

Topic Group

Welcome, Introductions & NSFG Overview Full Group

Sampling & Listing Concepts Full Group

Electronic Listing Program (ELP) Full Group

Listing Exercise Small Groups

Monday, June 25

8:00am to 5:00pm Topic

Topic Group

Announcements and Goals for the Day Full Group

NSFG: The Overall Picture Full Group

Introducing NSFG to Informants and Respondents Full Group

NSFG Screening Full Group

Informed Consent & Token Protocols and Practice Full Group

Female Mock Interview #1—Walk-Through Full Group

Female ACASI & Completing the Interview Full Group

Wrap-Up Full Group
Page 56 [ Series 1, No. 48

Tuesday, June 26

8:00am to 5:30pm

Topic Group

Announcements and Goals for the Day Full Group

Completing and Entering Interview Observations Full Group

Male Mock Interview #1—Walk-Through Full Group

Female Mock Interview #2—Round Robin Small Groups

NSFG Deputy Project Director, Bill Axinn Full Group

Wrap-Up Full Group

Wednesday, June 27

8:00am to 4:30pm

Topic Group

Announcements and Goals for the Day Full Group

Female Mock Interview #3—Round Robin Small Groups

Male Mock Interview #2—Round Robin Small Groups

Wrap-up Small Groups

Thursday, June 28

8:00am to 2:45pm

Topic Group

Announcements and Goals for the Day Full Group

Addressing Respondent Concerns Full Group

Special Circumstances in the Field

• Safety Concerns

• Dealing with Upset Respondents

• Spanish Interview Protocol

Full Group

Putting It All Together/Administrative Matters Full Group

**Pre-assigned certification sessions will be held on Thursday afternoon and Friday**
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 57
 

Appendix VIII. Project Manual Table of Contents

NSFG Project Manual

Chapter 1 – NSFG Project Design and Background

1.1	 Introduction to the NSFG .............................................................................. 1 
 

Study Purposes and Background ..................................................................... 1 
 

Who Uses the Data?............................................................................... 1 
 

Past NSFG Cycles ................................................................................ 2 
 

NSFG Cycle 7 ................................................................................... 3 
 

Project Management and Organization ................................................................ 4 
 

Data Collection Operations Staff ..................................................................... 4 
 

Role of the Field Researcher ........................................................................ 5 
 

Data Collection Team.............................................................................. 6 
 

Field Period...................................................................................... 7 
 

Production Goals ................................................................................. 7 
 

Importance of Confidentiality ....................................................................... 8 
 

Procedures for Maintaining Confidentiality............................................................. 9 
 

1.2	 NSFG Sample Design and Sampling Procedures ........................................................... 15 
 

Sampling Procedures and Listing Process.............................................................. 15 
 

The NSFG Cycle 7 Sample Design................................................................... 17 
 

Chapter 2 – Computer Equipment and Software

2.1 Computer Usage ..................................................................................... 21 
 

Getting to Know Your Tablet PC..................................................................... 21 
 

Using Your Tablet PC.............................................................................. 40 
 

Step One - Setting up the Tablet PC................................................................ 40 
 

Step Two - Power Sources........................................................................ 40 
 

Step Three - Opening the Tablet PC................................................................ 41 
 

Step Four–Starting your Tablet PC................................................................. 41 
 

Step Five - Navigating/Using the Pen and Touch Pad Pointing Device .................................... 41 
 

Step Six - Controlling the Volume .................................................................. 41 
 

Step Seven - Shutting Down the Tablet PC........................................................... 41 
 

Communicating with Your Tablet PC ................................................................. 42 
 

High-Speed Connection .......................................................................... 42 
 

Wireless Connection............................................................................. 43 
 

Communication when Traveling ................................................................... 43 
 

Taking Care of Your Tablet PC ...................................................................... 44 
 

Caring for your Tablet PC........................................................................ 44 
 

Cleaning the Tablet PC .......................................................................... 45 
 

Safeguarding the Tablet PC....................................................................... 45 
 

Computer Terms .................................................................................. 45 
 

Troubleshooting .................................................................................. 47 
 

ACASI Troubleshooting .......................................................................... 47 
 

Computer Troubleshooting........................................................................ 49 
 

Help Desk ....................................................................................... 50 
 

2.2	 NSFG SurveyTrak.................................................................................... 53 
 

Introduction to the Three NSFG SurveyTrak Projects .................................................... 53 
 

Listing Project.................................................................................... 53 
 

Screener Project .................................................................................. 54 
 

Interview Probability .............................................................................. 57 
 

Level of Resistance ............................................................................... 57 
 
Page 58 [ Series 1, No. 48
 

Eligibility Judgment ............................................................................... 57 
 

Main Interview Project............................................................................. 57 
 

Permission Forms and Electronic Signatures ........................................................... 60 
 

Completing Observations ........................................................................... 60 
 

Segment Observations ........................................................................... 60 
 

Housing Unit Observations ....................................................................... 61 
 

Contact Observations............................................................................ 61 
 

Other Contact Observations ...................................................................... 62 
 

Interview Observations .......................................................................... 62 
 

Follow-Up Letter Requests ......................................................................... 63 
 

2.3 NSFG Listing in SurveyTrak ........................................................................... 65 
 

Listing Tab ...................................................................................... 65 
 

Transfer Listing................................................................................... 66 
 

Transfer History .................................................................................. 66 
 

Finalized ........................................................................................ 67 
 

Maps ........................................................................................... 67 
 

Segment Observations ............................................................................. 68 
 

Special Notes .................................................................................... 70 
 

Listing .......................................................................................... 71 
 

Function Buttons.................................................................................. 75 
 

Consistency Check/Counters ........................................................................ 79 
 

Segment Observations ........................................................................... 79 
 

Measure of Size (MOS) Discrepancy ............................................................... 79 
 

Duplicate Addresses............................................................................. 79 
 

Reports ......................................................................................... 79 
 

Line Listing Report ............................................................................. 79 
 

Chapter 3 – Contacting Households & Obtaining Consent

3.1 Planning and Scheduling your Work ..................................................................... 81 
 

Advance Preparation............................................................................... 81 
 

Segment Information .............................................................................. 81 
 

First Visit to a Segment ............................................................................ 81 
 

Listing and Completing Segment Observations ......................................................... 82 
 

Contacting Sample Households ...................................................................... 83 
 

When to Contact?............................................................................... 83 
 

Working Smart ................................................................................. 84 
 

3.2 Approaching the Household ............................................................................ 87 
 

Tools for Obtaining Participation..................................................................... 87 
 

Advance Household Letter........................................................................ 87 
 

Advance Respondent Letter ....................................................................... 87 
 

The Questions & Answers Brochure ................................................................ 87 
 

Verbal Introduction.............................................................................. 88 
 

University of Michigan ID Badge .................................................................. 88 
 

Letter of Authorization........................................................................... 88 
 

Confidentiality Brochure ......................................................................... 88 
 

The NSFG Family Facts Sheet .................................................................... 88 
 

Toll-Free Numbers/Website Card................................................................... 89 
 

The Introduction and Screening Process ............................................................... 89 
 

Confidentiality Assurances.......................................................................... 90 
 

Private Setting for the Interview ..................................................................... 90 
 

Safeguards to Respondent Privacy.................................................................... 91 
 

Barriers to Obtaining Participation ................................................................... 93 
 

Local Environment .............................................................................. 93 
 

Limited Access Buildings......................................................................... 94 
 

Introduction to Informants and Respondents............................................................ 96 
 

Follow-Up Letters................................................................................. 97 
 
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 59
 

Developing Your Own Interviewing Style.............................................................. 97 
 

Tips on Building Rapport........................................................................... 98 
 

Approaching a non-English-Speaking Household....................................................... 101 
 

Protocol for Spanish-Speaking Households............................................................ 102 
 

Approaching a Non-English/Non-Spanish-Speaking Household ........................................... 103 
 

3.3	 Identifying and Addressing Respondent Concerns ......................................................... 125 
 

Overview....................................................................................... 126 
 

1. Know the Survey Thoroughly.................................................................... 	 126 
 

Know the Instrument and Study Procedures......................................................... 126 
 

Anticipate Answers to Commonly Asked Questions ................................................... 126 
 

Provide Accurate Information .................................................................... 126 
 

2. Listen Actively................................................................................ 126 
 

Non-Verbal or Environmental Cues................................................................ 127 
 

External Cues................................................................................. 128 
 

Internal Cues ................................................................................. 129 
 

Personal Cues ................................................................................ 130 
 

3. & 4. Identifying the Concern Expressed and Selecting an Appropriate Respondent ........................ 130 
 

Identifying the Primary Concern ................................................................. 130 
 

Themes of Reluctance .......................................................................... 131 
 

Time and Burden Concerns ...................................................................... 132 
 

Confidentiality Concerns ........................................................................ 133 
 

Privacy/Personal/Sensitive Questions .............................................................. 134 
 

Not Interested’’ Concerns........................................................................ 135 
 

Note on Parental Concerns ...................................................................... 136 
 

5. Deliver the Response Effectively ................................................................. 136 
 

Other Responses to Specific Concerns ............................................................... 137 
 

Summary ....................................................................................... 142 
 

3.4 Screening Households................................................................................ 143 
 

Screening Overview .............................................................................. 143 
 

Identifying the Informant .......................................................................... 143 
 

The Introduction ................................................................................. 143 
 

Conducting the Screener .......................................................................... 144 
 

The Household Roster ............................................................................ 145 
 

Names and Initials ............................................................................... 146 
 

Gender......................................................................................... 146 
 

Age ........................................................................................... 147 
 

Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................... 147 
 

Dorm Resident .................................................................................. 147 
 

Entering Additional People ........................................................................ 148 
 

Finishing the Roster .............................................................................. 148 
 

Getting Information from the Informant .............................................................. 149 
 

Finishing the Screener ............................................................................ 150 
 

No Eligible Household Members.................................................................. 150 
 

An Eligible Household Member .................................................................. 150 
 

Sampling Updates................................................................................ 152 
 

3.5 Obtaining Consent and Token Procedures................................................................ 155 
 

Informed Consent ................................................................................ 155 
 

Electronic Signatures ............................................................................. 155 
 

Adult’s Permission for Interview Form Procedures ..................................................... 155 
 

Respondent Agrees to Sign the Permission for Interview Form ......................................... 156 
 

Respondent Agrees to Participate but not to Sign the Permission Form .................................. 156 
 

Minor’s Permission for Interview Form Procedures..................................................... 158 
 

Parent/Guardian Declines to Allow Minor to Participate .............................................. 158 
 

Parent/Guardian Agrees to Allow Minor to Participate................................................ 159 
 

Minor Respondent Agrees to Sign Permission for Interview Form....................................... 159 
 

Minor Respondent Agrees to Participate but not to Sign the Form ...................................... 160 
 

State-Specific Laws on Age of Majority ............................................................ 160 
 
Page 60 [ Series 1, No. 48
 

Emancipated Minors ........................................................................... 160 
 

Important Things to Remember about Obtaining Consent ................................................ 161 
 

Tokens of Appreciation............................................................................ 161 
 

Obtaining a Cash Advance ...................................................................... 162 
 

Chapter 4 –Interviewing Conventions and NSFG Questionnaire

4.1 General Interviewing Techniques ...................................................................... 167 
 

Introduction..................................................................................... 167 
 

Question Reading ................................................................................ 167 
 

Ask the Questions Exactly as They are Worded in the Questionnaire..................................... 167 
 

Read Each Question Slowly...................................................................... 167 
 

Ask Every Question Specified in the Questionnaire ................................................... 168 
 

Clarification .................................................................................... 168 
 

Probing ........................................................................................ 169 
 

Neutral Probing Techniques ........................................................................ 170 
 

Repeating the Question ......................................................................... 170 
 

An Expectant Pause ............................................................................ 170 
 

Repeating the Respondent’s Reply................................................................. 170 
 

Neutral Probes ................................................................................ 170 
 

Probing for Dates and Ages........................................................................ 173 
 

Neutral, Non-Directive Probing ..................................................................... 173 
 

Probing Attitudinal vs. Factual Questions............................................................. 174 
 

Neutral Prefaces for Probes ........................................................................ 175 
 

Feedback ....................................................................................... 176 
 

4.2	 The NSFG Female Questionnaire ...................................................................... 181 
 

Introduction..................................................................................... 181 
 

Section Overviews ............................................................................... 181 
 

Female Section A: Introduction, Calendar Introductions, Demographic Characteristics, Household Roster,
 

Childhood Background......................................................................... 181 
 

Female Section B: Pregnancy and Birth History, Adoption and Nonbiological Children ..................... 182 
 

Female Section C: Marital and Relationship History ................................................. 182 
 

Female Section D: Sterilizing Operations and Fertility Problems ....................................... 183 
 

Female Section E: Contraceptive History and Pregnancy Wantedness.................................... 183 
 

Female Section F: Family Planning and Medical Services............................................. 184 
 

Female Section G: Birth Desires and Intentions ..................................................... 184 
 

Female Section H: Infertility Services and Reproductive Health ........................................ 184 
 

Female Section I: Insurance, Residence, Work Experience and Attitudes ................................. 185 
 

ACASI Language ................................................................................ 185 
 

Female Section J: ACASI (Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview) ..................................... 185 
 

Completing the ACASI ........................................................................... 186 
 

Aids to the Female Instrument...................................................................... 187 
 

Show Cards................................................................................... 187 
 

Question-by-Question Help ...................................................................... 188 
 

The NSFG Life History Calendar ................................................................. 189 
 

Pill Chart .................................................................................... 194 
 

Completing the Interview.......................................................................... 195 
 

4.3	 The NSFG Male Questionnaire ........................................................................ 201 
 

Introduction..................................................................................... 201 
 

Section Overviews ............................................................................... 201 
 

Male Section A: Demographic Characteristics, Household Roster, Childhood Background, Number of
 

Marriages and Cohabitations ................................................................... 201 
 

Male Section B: Sex education, Sexual experience, and Sterilization and Infertility ......................... 202 
 

Male Section C: Current Wife or Cohabiting Partner................................................. 203 
 

Male Section D: Recent Sexual Partners and First Sexual Partner ...................................... 203 
 

Male Section E: Former Wives and the First Cohabiting Partner ....................................... 203 
 

Male Section F: Other Biological Children, Other Adopted Children, Other Pregnancies.................... 204 
 
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 61
 

Male Section G: Fathering ...................................................................... 204 
 

Male Section H: Desires and Intentions for Future Children ........................................... 204 
 

Male Section I: Health Conditions and Health Services ............................................... 204 
 

Male Section J: Residence, Work Experience and Attitudes ............................................ 205 
 

ACASI Language ................................................................................ 205 
 

Male Section K: ACASI (Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing) .................................... 206 
 

Completing the ACASI ........................................................................... 206 
 

Aids to the Male Instrument ....................................................................... 206 
 

Completing the Interview.......................................................................... 206 
 

4.4 NSFG Questionnaire Conventions ...................................................................... 209 
 

Navigating in the NSFG Interview .................................................................. 209 
 

Special Keys .................................................................................... 210 
 

Recording Comments ............................................................................. 210 
 

Entering Responses............................................................................... 210 
 

Close-Ended Questions ......................................................................... 211 
 

Enter All that Apply ............................................................................ 212 
 

Numeric Responses ............................................................................ 213 
 

Open-Ended Questions.......................................................................... 214 
 

Date Questions................................................................................ 215 
 

Correcting or Modifying Responses ............................................................... 217 
 

Edit Checks in the Questionnaire ................................................................... 217 
 

Hard Edit Checks.............................................................................. 218 
 

Soft Edit checks ............................................................................... 218 
 

Using Databases ................................................................................. 220 
 

State Database ................................................................................ 220 
 

Clinic Database ............................................................................... 221 
 

The ACASI Section .............................................................................. 221 
 

Commonly Used Icons............................................................................ 222 
 

4.5	 Interview Observations ............................................................................... 227 
 

Observations Overview ........................................................................... 227 
 

Starting the Interview Observation .................................................................. 227 
 

Completing the Interview Observation Form .......................................................... 228 
 

Respondent Questions ............................................................................ 228 
 

Entering the Interview Observations into the Computer.................................................. 228 
 

Chapter 5 – Quality Control and Administrative Procedures

5.1 Neutrality and Professionalism......................................................................... 229 
 

Neutrality in Interviewing ......................................................................... 229 
 

Personal Cues ................................................................................ 230 
 

Less Obvious Characteristics .................................................................... 231 
 

Expecting the Unexpected ....................................................................... 232 
 

Points to Remember............................................................................ 232 
 

Asking Sensitive Questions ........................................................................ 233 
 

Dealing with Upset Respondents ................................................................... 234 
 

Safety in the Field ............................................................................... 236 
 

Authorization Letter .............................................................................. 237 
 

Unusual Circumstances ........................................................................... 238 
 

Intoxicated Respondents......................................................................... 238 
 

Drugs and other Illegal Activity .................................................................. 238 
 

5.2 Quality Control ..................................................................................... 243 
 

Quality Control Procedures ........................................................................ 243 
 

Practice, Monitoring and Evaluation at Training .................................................... 243 
 

Certification Interviews ......................................................................... 244 
 

Verification ................................................................................... 244 
 

Production Review Interview..................................................................... 245 
 
Page 62 [ Series 1, No. 48
 

5.3 Administrative Procedures ............................................................................ 247 
 

Goals and Expectations ........................................................................... 247 
 

Tenrox ......................................................................................... 248 
 

Overnight Travel Policy ........................................................................... 248 
 

Ordering Supplies................................................................................ 248 
 

Cell Phones..................................................................................... 249 
 

Land-Line Phone Calls............................................................................ 249 
 

NSFG Field Researcher Website .................................................................... 249 
 
Series 1, No. 48 [ Page 63

Appendix IX. FAQ’s for National Survey of Family Growth,

Continuous Interviewing

The following appendix shows some Frequently asked questions (FAQ’s) and their answers. Additional information will be

released on the NSFG web site (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm) as it becomes available.

1.	 Given that the continuous interviewing design uses quarterly samples, can I analyze the data for just

one quarter?

No. Sample sizes for a single quarter are too small to provide estimates with adequate levels of precision. In

general, NSFG staff recommend using data for at least 18 months for adequate precision. In the first data file,

weights will be included only for the full 30 months of interviewing, and for the last 18 months of

interviewing (when certain new questions were introduced). Analysts should only use time periods for which

sampling weights are provided.

2.	 The public use data file has both recoded variables (‘‘recodes’’) and raw variables. Which ones

should I use?

NCHS recommends using the recoded variables because they have been studied for consistency and any

missing data has been resolved through imputation. Using the recodes allows the analyst to make use of the

intensive scrutiny given to them. Thus, NCHS uses the recoded variables in many of the tables in NCHS

official publications. If a recoded variable is not available for a specific analysis, then the raw variables or

computed variables should be used.

3.	 Will the continuous interviewing design use different questionnaires over the years?

Changes occurred at the beginning of the 2nd and 3rd years of interviewing (no changes were made for year

4). But over 95% of the questions remain the same from one year to the next. Variables measured in only

some of the years will be noted in the public use documentation of the data sets.

4.	 How do I combine the different quarters of data collection in my analysis?

The NSFG staff and contractor will include sampling weights on the data files for time periods for which

analysis is appropriate. See question 1 and the data release documentation for more details.

5.	 Given that the size of the data set can become large over the many quarters of continuous

interviewing, can I analyze the data separately for different states in the country?

Although the number of data records in the pooled data set of the continuous survey can become large when

several years of data are combined, the sample is limited to 110 primary areas. These primary areas do not fall

in all states. As long as this design is used, estimates cannot be computed for individual states. If the sample

design were modified and sample sizes increased, estimates for at least some states would become possible.

6.	 Can I combine the data for males and females in continuous interviewing?

There is a combined file for males and females, which contains variables that are common to both sexes.

Using the sampling weights, estimates for both males and females can be made.

7.	 For a recoded variable, how do I find out what questions in the questionnaire contributed to it?

The ‘‘Recode specifications’’ are given in the public use data file documentation. These specifications show

how each recoded variable was constructed. The NSFG staff recommends using recodes when they are

appropriate for a particular analysis, because they have been checked for accuracy, edited, and imputed.

8.	 Should I obtain the same results on birth-related statistics from analyzing continuous NSFG as vital

statistics?

Birth statistics based on the National Vital Statistics System are derived from a complete count of the

approximately 4 million birth certificates filed each year. The continuous NSFG, in contrast, estimates these

births with a sample of a few hundred births each year to women in the continuous NSFG sample. Therefore,

continuous NSFG estimates will not match those from the birth certificates exactly, primarily because of
Page 64 [ Series 1, No. 48

sampling error. They may also differ from Vital Statistics because of differences between the coverage,

nonresponse, and measurement features of the two sources of data.

9. What format is used for the public use data set?

The data sets are released in ASCII format and are compatible with several major statistical software systems

that permit analysis of complex survey data, including SAS, SPSS, and Stata.

10. How is the continuous pooled data set any different from analyzing any other sample survey?

For the most part, analyzing the pooled data is no different than analyzing a previous NSFG cycle, at least in

terms of the application of standard survey estimation software to the data file. Each continuous NSFG data

file can be thought of and treated as a single cycle of the NSFG, but the time period to which the results

apply must be described accurately.

The continuous NSFG allows a user to obtain ‘period prevalence’ estimates for the population over a

multi-year period. Previous NSFG cycles allowed the user to report estimates for a single year. The continuous

NSFG will allow the user to report estimates for a period of a few years. For example, the proportion of

women 15–44 who are currently using the oral contraceptive pill may be reported, once the 2009–2010 data

are released, for the period from 2006 to 2008, or the period 2009 to 2010, or for the period 2006 through

2010. The first two of these periods may be reported by a user interested in contrasting rates across the US

population in each of those time intervals. The third period allows the user to report the rate across a longer

time interval, but with greater precision, since the sample size of the pooled data will be larger.

Thus, the continuous NSFG requires reporting results for longer time periods, or for contrasting time periods.

It may also be cumulated over time to produce estimates with greater precision. For example, the proportion of

Hispanic females using one type of contraception for the period 2006 to 2008 will have about one-half the

sample size of the same proportion for the period 2006 to 2010. Cumulating over a longer time period will

provide more precise estimates, which will be especially useful for smaller subgroups of interest, at the price

of a longer time period reference for the estimate.

In all these estimates, the analyst must use appropriate weights and variance estimates for the specific time

period used. The appropriate weights and sampling error codes will be provided with each release of the

continuous NSFG that allow proper estimation for different time periods of interest. The presence of

alternative time period weights will require users to choose the time period of estimation and the appropriate

weight to apply, but the benefits include greater analytical flexibility and larger sample size.
Vital and Health Statistics

series descriptions

SERIES 1.	 Programs and Collection Procedures—These reports

describe the data collection programs of the National Center

for Health Statistics. They include descriptions of the methods

used to collect and process the data, definitions, and other

material necessary for understanding the data.

SERIES 2.	 Data Evaluation and Methods Research—These reports

are studies of new statistical methods and include analytical

techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected

data, and contributions to statistical theory. These studies

also include experimental tests of new survey methods and

comparisons of U.S. methodology with those of other

countries.

SERIES 3.	 Analytical and Epidemiological Studies—These reports

present analytical or interpretive studies based on vital and

health statistics. These reports carry the analyses further than

the expository types of reports in the other series.

SERIES 4.	 Documents and Committee Reports—These are final

reports of major committees concerned with vital and health

statistics and documents such as recommended model vital

registration laws and revised birth and death certificates.

SERIES 5.	 International Vital and Health Statistics Reports—These

reports are analytical or descriptive reports that compare U.S.

vital and health statistics with those of other countries or

present other international data of relevance to the health

statistics system of the United States.

SERIES 6.	 Cognition and Survey Measurement—These reports are

from the National Laboratory for Collaborative Research in

Cognition and Survey Measurement. They use methods of

cognitive science to design, evaluate, and test survey

instruments.

SERIES 10.	 Data From the National Health Interview Survey—These

reports contain statistics on illness; unintentional injuries;

disability; use of hospital, medical, and other health services;

and a wide range of special current health topics covering

many aspects of health behaviors, health status, and health

care utilization. They are based on data collected in a

continuing national household interview survey.

SERIES 11.	 Data From the National Health Examination Survey, the

National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, and

the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey—

Data from direct examination, testing, and measurement on

representative samples of the civilian noninstitutionalized

population provide the basis for (1) medically defined total

prevalence of specific diseases or conditions in the United

States and the distributions of the population with respect to

physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics, and

(2) analyses of trends and relationships among various

measurements and between survey periods.

SERIES 12.	 Data From the Institutionalized Population Surveys—

Discontinued in 1975. Reports from these surveys are

included in Series 13.

SERIES 13.	 Data From the National Health Care Surveys—These

reports contain statistics on health resources and the public’s

use of health care resources including ambulatory, hospital,

and long-term care services based on data collected directly

from health care providers and provider records.

SERIES 14.	 Data on Health Resources: Manpower and Facilities—

Discontinued in 1990. Reports on the numbers, geographic

distribution, and characteristics of health resources are now

included in Series 13.

SERIES 15.	 Data From Special Surveys—These reports contain

statistics on health and health-related topics collected in

special surveys that are not part of the continuing data

systems of the National Center for Health Statistics.

SERIES 16.	 Compilations of Advance Data From Vital and Health

Statistics—Advance Data Reports provide early release of

information from the National Center for Health Statistics’

health and demographic surveys. They are compiled in the

order in which they are published. Some of these releases

may be followed by detailed reports in Series 10–13.

SERIES 20.	 Data on Mortality—These reports contain statistics on

mortality that are not included in regular, annual, or monthly

reports. Special analyses by cause of death, age, other

demographic variables, and geographic and trend analyses

are included.

SERIES 21.	 Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorce—These reports

contain statistics on natality, marriage, and divorce that are

not included in regular, annual, or monthly reports. Special

analyses by health and demographic variables and

geographic and trend analyses are included.

SERIES 22.	 Data From the National Mortality and Natality Surveys—

Discontinued in 1975. Reports from these sample surveys,

based on vital records, are now published in Series 20 or 21.

SERIES 23.	 Data From the National Survey of Family Growth—These

reports contain statistics on factors that affect birth rates,

including contraception, infertility, cohabitation, marriage,

divorce, and remarriage; adoption; use of medical care for

family planning and infertility; and related maternal and infant

health topics. These statistics are based on national surveys

of women and men of childbearing age.

SERIES 24.	 Compilations of Data on Natality, Mortality, Marriage, and

Divorce—These include advance reports of births, deaths,

marriages, and divorces based on final data from the National

Vital Statistics System that were published as National Vital

Statistics Reports (NVSR), formerly Monthly Vital Statistics

Report. These reports provide highlights and summaries of

detailed data subsequently published in Vital Statistics of the

United States. Other special reports published here provide

selected findings based on final data from the National Vital

Statistics System and may be followed by detailed reports in

Series 20 or 21.

For answers to questions about this report or for a list of reports published

in these series, contact:

Information Dissemination Staff

National Center for Health Statistics

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

3311 Toledo Road, Room 5412

Hyattsville, MD 20782

1–800–232–4636

E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov

Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

MEDIA MAIL
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

CDC/NCHS
 

PERMIT NO. G-284
 

CS203069B

T35030 (09/2009)

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2009–1324, Series 1, No. 48