SNAPSHOT OF INDICATORS
Summary of the sample design for PMA2015/Uganda-R3:
PMA2020 uses a two-stage cluster design with residential area (urban vs. rural) and sub-regions as strata. The first stage of sampling was selection of clusters within each sampling stratum using probability proportional to size procedures. Within the 10 sub-regions, clusters were selected proportional to the urban/rural distribution. The sample was designed to generate national estimates of all women modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR) with less than 2% margin of error and urban/rural estimates at less than 3% margin of error.
The table below provides a summary of key family planning indicators at the national level and their breakdown by background characteristics. Disaggregation by administrative unit was done at the region level (Central, Western, Eastern, and Northern) due to small sample sizes when disaggregated by sub-region.
To view the breakdown by background characteristics of the respondents, please click on the respective indicator link. Distribution of respondents by background characteristics is available here. Distribution of SDPs by background characteristics is available here.
Additional detail on sample design, data collection and processing, response rates, and standard errors are available below the indicator tables.
The PMA2015/Uganda-R3 Survey in Detail
Round 1 Sample Design
Survey resources allowed targeting a sample size of 110 enumeration areas (EAs) and a final sample size of 4,840 households. A total of 110 EAs were sampled throughout all 10 sub-regions in Uganda selected by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) master sampling frame, which was representative at the national and sub-regional levels for both urban and rural areas. The primary sampling units for the survey were the EAs, created during the 2002 National Population and Housing Census. The EAs were selected systematically with probability proportional to size with urban/rural stratification in the 10 sub-regions. The rationale was for PMA2020 estimates to be comparable to the most recent national survey estimates. UBOS provided the selection probabilities for the PMA2020 sampled clusters for constructing weights.
In each selected EA, field supervisors randomly selected up to three private SDPs to be interviewed by a resident enumerator using the SDP questionnaire. The field supervisors themselves administered the SDP questionnaires at an additional three public SDPs that serve each EA; the lowest, second-lowest, and third-lowest level public health SDPs designated to serve each EA.
Round 3 Sample Update
The mapping and listing process and data collection took place between August and September 2015. Once listed, field supervisors randomly selected 44 households from the updated household listing. A household roster was completed and all eligible women age 15-49 in selected households were approached and asked to provide informed consent (and assent if age 15-17 years) to participate in the study.
The majority of SDPs are repeated in each round, forming a panel survey. If an EA had more than three private SDPs identified during the listing process, then a new sample of the private SDPs is selected during each round.
All PMA2020 questionnaires are administered using Open Data Kit (ODK) software and Alcatel Android smartphones. The PMA2015/Uganda-R3 questionnaires were in English and could be switched into eight local languages (Luganda, Ngakarimojong, Runyankole, Runyoro-Rutoro, Luo, Lugbara, Ateso, and Lusoga) on the phone. The questionnaires were translated using available translations from similar population surveys and experts in translation. The interviews were conducted in the local language, or English in a few cases when the respondent was not comfortable with the local language. Female resident enumerators in each enumeration area (EA) administered the household and female questionnaires in the selected households.
The household questionnaire gathers basic information about the household, such as ownership of livestock and durable goods, as well as characteristics of the dwelling unit, including wall, floor and roof materials, water sources, and sanitation facilities. This information is used to construct a wealth quintile index.
The first section of the household questionnaire, the household roster, lists basic demographic information about all usual members of the household and visitors who stayed with the household the night before the interview. This roster is used to identify eligible respondents for the female questionnaire. In addition to the roster, the household questionnaire also gathers data that are used to measure key water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) indicators, including regular sources and uses of WASH facilities used and prevalence of open defecation by household members.
The female questionnaire is used to collect information from all women age 15 to 49 that were listed on the household roster at selected households. The female questionnaire gathers specific information on: education; fertility and fertility preferences; family planning access, choice and use; quality of family planning services; exposure to family planning messaging in the media; and the burden of collecting water on women.
The SDP questionnaire collected information about the provision and quality of reproductive health services and products, integration of health services, and water and sanitation within the health SDP.
Training, Data Collection and Processing
As this was a refresher training for continuing staff the training focused on a handful of newly added questions to the household, female and service delivery point (SDP) questionnaires and review of survey content and protocol. In addition, the staff reviewed the listing and mapping protocol as the field team was expected to re-list the household and SDP sample.
Data Collection and Processing
The ODK application enabled REs and supervisors to collect and transfer survey data to a central ODK Aggregate cloud server. This instantaneous aggregation of data also allowed for concurrent data processing and course corrections while PMA2020 was still active in the field. Throughout data collection, central staff at MakSPH in Kampala, Uganda and the data manager at the Gates Institute at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, Maryland routinely monitored the incoming data and notified field staff of any potential errors, missing data or problems found with form submissions on the central server. The use of mobile phones combined data collection and data entry into one step; therefore, data entry was completed when the last interview form was uploaded at the end of data collection in October.
Once all data were on the server, data analysts cleaned and de-identified the data, applied survey weights, and prepared the final data set for analysis using Stata® version 14 software. Data analysis for the national dissemination of preliminary findings was conducted between October and December 2015. The national dissemination workshop of preliminary results was held on December 21, 2015 at the Serena Hotel, Kampala, Uganda.
In the occupied households that provided an interview, a total of 3,856 eligible women age 15 to 49 years were identified. Overall, 95.7% of the eligible women were available and consented to the interview. The female response rate was higher in the rural (96.9%) relative to the urban (92.5%) EAs. Only de facto females are included in the PMA analyses; the final completed de facto female sample size was 3,690 (unweighted).
In the occupied households that provided an interview, a total of 3,856 eligible women age 15 to 49 years were identified.
The final service delivery point (SDP) sample included 378 facility interviews, of which 362 were completed for a response rate of 95.8%.
Weights were adjusted for non-response at the household and individual levels and applied to all household and individual estimates in this report. SDP estimates are not weighted.
|Household response rate* (%)||88.9||96.6||94.5|
|Interviews with women age 15-49|
|Number of eligible women**||1,077||2,779||3,856|
|Number of eligible women interviewed||996||2,694||3,690|
|Eligible women response rate† (%)||92.5||96.9||95.7|
Sample Error Estimates
|Variable||Value[R]||Standard Error||Confidence Interval|
|All women age 15 to 49|
|Currently using a modern method||0.259||0.014||0.232||0.285|
|Currently using a traditional method||0.028||0.005||0.019||0.038|
|Currently using any contraceptive method||0.287||0.014||0.259||0.314|
|Currently using injectables||0.134||0.025||0.418||0.518|
|Currently using condoms||0.047||0.008||0.032||0.063|
|Currently using implants||0.041||0.005||0.030||0.052|
|Chose method by self or jointly in past 12 months||0.916||0.016||0.883||0.948|
|Paid fees for family planning services in past 12 months||0.398||0.029||0.340||0.456|
|Informed by provider about other methods||0.612||0.033||0.546||0.678|
|Informed by provider about side effects||0.606||0.035||0.537||0.676|
|Satisfied with provider: Would return and refer friend/relative to provider||0.866||0.020||0.826||0.906|
|Visited by health worker who talked about family planning in past 12 months||0.164||0.021||0.123||0.205|
|Married women age 15 to 49|
|Currently using a modern method||0.305||0.017||0.271||0.338|
|Currently using a traditional method||0.039||0.007||0.025||0.053|
|Currently using any contraceptive method||0.343||0.018||0.308||0.379|
|Currently using injectables||0.171||0.014||0.143||0.199|
|Currently using condoms||0.042||0.009||0.024||0.060|
|Currently using implants||0.049||0.007||0.034||0.064|
|Chose method by self or jointly in past 12 months||0.921||0.017||0.887||0.955|
|Paid fees for family planning services in past 12 months||0.395||0.030||0.336||0.455|
|Informed by provider about other methods||0.632||0.033||0.565||0.698|
|Informed by provider about side effects||0.632||0.036||0.561||0.703|
|Satisfied with provider: Would return and refer friend/relative to provider||0.885||0.018||0.848||0.921|
|Visited by health worker who talked about family planning in past 12 months||0.189||0.024||0.142||0.236|