Download - Kentucky Health Issues Poll,
Reflecting the Community: Demographic Variations in Landline and Cell-Only
Households for a Statewide Telephone Survey
Sarah Walsh, MPH, CHES, Foundation for a Healthy KentuckyJennifer Chubinski, MS, The Health Foundation of Greater CincinnatiMichelle Vargas, Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati
Eric Rademacher, PhD, Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati
Presenter Disclosures
The following personal financial relationships with commercial interests relevant to this presentation existed during the past 12 months:
NO RELATIONSHIPS TO DISCLOSE.
Kentucky Health Issues Poll (KHIP)
• Questions vary by year, but include:– Health status– Socioeconomic variables– Public opinion on health related topics
• KHIP gives policymakers and advocates valuable data for keeping health on the public agenda.
KHIP
KHIP Methodology
• Conducted annually, since 2008• Random Digit Dial Telephone survey (RDD)– Cell phone sampling started 2009
• Data collection done by the Institute for Policy Research (IPR) at the University of Cincinnati
• Analysis done by Foundation staff
KHIP sample over time
2008 1,632 landline interviewsJanuary 16-February 11, 2008
2009 1,464 landline; 205 cell-only interviewsOctober 8-November 6, 2009
2010 1,469 landline; 208 cell-only interviewsDecember 3-22 and 27-28, 2010
2011 ≈ 1,200 landline; ≈ 300 cell any interviews
September 27-present
Cell-only Households, 2009-2010
Blumberg SJ, Luke JV, Ganesh N, et al. Wireless substitution: State-level estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, January 2007-June 2010. National health statistics reports; no 39. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2011. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.html
Why Cell?
• KY high cell-only state• Vulnerable populations and more likely cell
phone-only users important to our mission– Low-income– Minority– Young adults
• More reliable sample of population
UNWEIGHTED Results
2009 Unweighted Results
percent Males 34.0% 48.8% 35.8% 48%
Landline Only Cell Only
Combined Sample
Weighted Target
percent Black 5.3% 8.9% 5.8% 7%
percent 18-45 26.5% 71.7% 32.1% 56%
2010 Unweighted Results
percent Males 35.0% 45.7% 36.3% 48%
Landline Only Cell Only
Combined Sample
Weighted Target
percent Black 5.6% 8.2% 5.9% 7%
percent 18-45 22.7% 61.5% 27.5% 56%
Results (unweighted)
• Cell phone sample increased size (as compared to a landline only sample) of:– Minority (races not white, and Hispanic) ≈ 1%– **Young adults ≈3-4%– Men ≈2%– Low-income adults (under 100 and 200% FPG) ≈1%– Uninsured ≈2%
** strongest effect
WEIGHTED Results
2009 Results
Currently Uninsured 28.0% 27.5%
Weighted Landline Only
Weighted Combined Sample
Uninsured in Past Year 31.5% 31.7%
Below 100% FPL 27.1% 26.4%
Below 200% FPL 47.4% 47.3%
2010 Results
Currently Uninsured 21.3% 22.5%
Weighted Landline Only
Weighted Combined Sample
Uninsured in Past Year 29.8% 31.6%
Below 100% FPL 23.6% 24.7%
Below 200% FPL 48.1% 49.1%
Results (weighted)
• Most differences lost in weighting procedure– Weights based on 2008 American Community
Survey (ACS)– Sample weighted on age, race, sex, education,
regional distribution, number of adults and phone lines in the household.
• HOWEVER, the cell phone sample reduced the magnitude of the weights
Lessons Learned- KHIP 2011
• Cell sampling changed from cell only to cell mostly
• Larger percentage of cell phones• Larger cost with cell sampling, but cost is
going down– Previously 5x a landline response– Currently 3x a landline response
Draw your own conclusions
• Raw data available in free statistical portal– Online Analysis and Statistical Information System
(OASIS) www.oasisdataarchive.org
Draw your own conclusions
• Data available for mapping in free mapping portal- HealthLandscape www.healthlandscape.org
Questions?
Sarah WalshSenior Program Officer, Local Data for Local Action Initiative
(502) [email protected]
Jennifer ChubinskiDirector of Community Research
(513) [email protected]