Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40958968›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2025

Accounting for clustering for self-reported outcomes in the design and analysis of population-based surveys: A case study of estimation of prevalence of epilepsy in Nairobi, Kenya.

Daniel M Mwanga, Isaac C Kipchirchir, George O Muhua, Charles R Newton, Damazo T Kadengye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Daniel M MwangaDepartment of Mathematics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Isaac C KipchirchirDepartment of Mathematics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
George O MuhuaDepartment of Mathematics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Charles R NewtonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Damazo T KadengyeData Synergy and Evaluations, African Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population-based surveys are common for estimation of important public health metrics such as prevalence. Often, survey data tend to have a hierarchical structure where households are clustered within villages or sites and interviewers are assigned specific locations to conduct the survey. Self-reported outcomes such as diagnosis of diseases like epilepsy present more complex structure, where interviewer or physician-related effects may bias the results. Standard estimation techniques that ignore clustering may lead to underestimated standard errors and overconfident inferences. In this paper, we examine these effects for estimation of prevalence of epilepsy in a two-stage population-based survey in Nairobi and we discuss how clustering can be taken into account in design and analysis of population-based prevalence studies. We used data from the Epilepsy Pathway Innovation in Africa project conducted in Nairobi and simulated attrition levels at 10% and 20% assuming missing at random (MAR) mechanism. Attrition was accounted for using sequential k-nearest neighbor method. We adjusted the expected prevalence based on clustering at multiple levels, such as site, interviewer and household using a random effects model. Intraclass correlation (ICC) > 0.1 indicated presence of substantial clustering. We report point estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI). Crude prevalence of epilepsy was 9.40 cases per 1,000 people (95% CI: 8.60-10.20). There was substantial clustering at household level (ICC = 0.397), interviewer level (ICC = 0.101) and site level (ICC = 0.070). Prevalence adjusted for clustering at household, interviewer and site was 9.15/1,000 (95% CI 7.11-11.20). Overall, not accounting for clustering was associated with underestimation of standard errors. Not accounting for attrition on the other hand led to underestimation of prevalence. Imputation of the missing data due to attrition mitigated the attrition bias under appropriate assumptions. Accounting for clustering, particularly household, interviewer and site levels, is critical for valid estimation of standard errors in population-based surveys. Rigorous training and pre-survey testing can minimize measurement error in self-reported outcomes. Attrition can lead to underestimation of prevalence if not properly addressed. Attrition bias can be minimized by conducting targeted mobilization of participants to improve response rates and using statistical methods such as multiple imputation or machine learning-based imputation methods to address it.

Indexed as

clusteringepilepsyhierarchical structureinterviewer effectsmulti-level modelingpopulation-based surveysprevalence

Identifiers

PMID40958968
PMCPMC12433999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.