GENERAL REPORT OF THE COGNITIVE TESTING MXICO INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTADISTICA, GEOGRAFA E INFORMTI

1
GENERAL REPORT OF THE COGNITIVE TESTING
MÉXICOINSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTADISTICA,
GEOGRAFÍA E INFORMÁTICA (INEGI)
Sixth meeting of the Washington Group in
Disability Statistics October 10-13,
2006 Kampala, Uganda
2
BACKGROUND

• INEGI decided to do the Cognitive testing
  proposed by WCG, with its own resources.
• It was carried out from the 6th to the 10th of
  June.
• In each household, there was at least one person
  with a disability.
• 82 households interviewed.
• 326 people interviewed.
• Two central states (Aguascalientes and Mexico
  City).

3
INTERVIEWERS

• Educational level of the interviewers
• 7 have concluded professional's level
• 3 have high school studies
• All of them are Spanish-speakers

4
TRAINING

• A Manual was elaborated for the interviewer, it
  can be used as a guide for training and as
  auxiliary manual through the interviews, and the
  content was

• to specify the tests objectives as the questions
  
• Instructions of filling out, recommendations to
  carry out the interview depending on type of the
  person's limitation recommendations to solve
  difficult cases and operative aspects.

It was qualified in two days, in the first, the
instrument and the precisions of the sections
were seen, and in the second day doubts and
problems were solved. A pilot exercise was
carried out, it consisted in applying the
instrument in a complete households, the
procedures were revised again and the necessary
adjustments were made.
5
RESPONDENTS

• Observation unit households with at least one
  person with disability.
• The private and public institutions, which work
  with and for the people with disability gave us
  the information abut the households.
• Total of people interviewed 326 people in 82
  households.
• Average number of interviews by household 4
  people.
• Average time for interviews by household 245
  hrs.

6
Distribution of the households by type of
disability
7

• The respondents' profile social demographic
• All the selected households had knowledge of the
  test
• An appointment was settled for the interview,
• The dates and hour were selected by Interviewed
  people taking into account that in the
  households there were present most of people.

8
REPORT TYPE
The interviews were classified in the two
following ways SELF REPORT when the interview
was made directly with the respondent in other
words, the informant answered all questions
PROXY REPORT When the persons information was
provided by a third person under his
authorization

• In the cases where when one of them couldnt be
  present (by personal reasons) in the interview,
• Another case, was when the person (respondent)
  suffered from a severe disability, that did not
  allow him to answer the interview by himself,
  (the information was provided by his parents or
  the person who is in charge of his care)
• A third case was when the informant was a small
  child (babies and children under 6 years of age).

9

• Sex and Age
• 46.9 was applied to men and 53.1 to women.
• 16.9 of the interviews were made to children
  among 0 to 14 years old.
• 14.7 to people of 60 and more years.
• 23.6 to young population between 15 and 29
  years and
• 44.5 to the population of 30 to 59 years old.

10
QUESTIONNAIRE

• The questionnaire mainly has maintained its
  original structure from its English version but
  it was necessary to make some adjustments to the
  sections to assure their application and
  monitoring.
• First change
• A section was elaborated for the household where
  we included the list of people in the household,
  some data demographic requested for the household
  in the cognitive testing and another information
  like control measurement.

• Name of the interviewer
• Household income (monthly)
• The obligation clauses and confidentiality
• Observations section.

• Geographical location
• Place of the interview
• Control of the household and questionnaire
• Lists of people in household
• Duration of the interview

11

• Second change
• In some of the questions, about data of the
  informant, slight modifications were made to
  adapt the questions our native language. In
  addition proven questions in the Count of
  Population and Housing 2005 were used. The
  modified questions were the following ones
• Educational level
• Original WCG structures
• 2. How many years in all did you spend studying
  in school, college or university? Years
  _____
• Adaptation for Mexico

12

• Household income
• Original WCG structures
• 5. What is your household income? (See card)
  (J, C, M, F, S, K, P, D, H, U, N)
• Adaptation for Mexico

The total amount of household income (monthly)
was asked in national currency and finally the
conversion was made to Euros and it was
classified according to the table that proposed
by WCG.
13

• Construction of application universes (domains)
• For every domain of the test, different subgroups
  were constructed, depending on if they use or no
  helps or equipments in these cases a careful
  review was done and we evaluated the possibility
  of dividing them in sections. This was done in
  all the sections that required it.

14

• Third change
• Following some recommendations of the WCG, at the
  end of the questionnaire a section on disability
  was added, with questions on type and cause of
  disability that were used in the XII General
  Census on Population and Housing 2000, a question
  on age at disability onset was added too.

15
(No Transcript)
16
TRANSLATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

• The translation work was performed by personnel
  from INEGI that have an appropriate knowledge of
  the English language and some knowledge on the
  subject the translating process was the
  following

• Two independent translations were prepared of the
  questionnaire that the WCG sent us.
• From those two translations, a third version was
  prepared that suffered modifications when it was
  compared with the concepts used by ICF, some
  tests were made to evaluate their understanding.
• When the time arrived to design the questionnaire
  and from the observations received by the expert
  personnel in the instrument design, some doubts
  arose.
• We returned to the original questionnaire and
  ICF, and a fourth version of the translation was
  obtained, which was used for the rising.

Problems and difficulty in the process of the
translations The meaning of some words of the
questionnaire in English didn't correspond to
used in Spanish language, as technical terms,
regionalisms and doubts of the operative
17
TRANSLATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

• HEARING

• The cuestion
• Do you wear a hearing aid all of the time, ,
  only for certain activities, or none of the time?
• In this cuestion are included the answer options,
  it was made extensive an repetitive to avoid
  this situacion, the first part of the question
  was equal Do you wear a hearing? And the rest
  of cuestion were left in the answer option
• The sentence
• In to croweded room?
• Room refered to type of physical espace, so
  that the informat kept in mind that it could be
  in any space, not alone a room this word change
  by PLACE. The same happened in the sentence
  quiet room

18
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

• HEARING

• The cuestion
• How often do you MISS words in conversation
  or on the radio or television because you have
  difficulty hearing?
• The respondents interpretation was afirmative,
• How often do you LISTEN WELL words in
  conversation or on the radio or television
  because you have difficulty hearing?
• For the cuestionnaries in Spanish io change the
  writing in affirmative form for to reduce the
  mistake.

19
RESULTS
20
(No Transcript)
21
Distribution of people by domain
22
Vision
23
Hearing
24
Cognitive
25
Lower Mobility
26
Self-care
27
Communication
28
CONCLUSIONS

• 1. The core question on Cognitive (concentration
  and memory) it turns out to be very general
  additionally, for the case of Mexico it is not a
  term that is known for all. The words we opt.
  were "To REMEMBER AND CONCENTRATES", but they
  were of little common use and therefore, the
  informants don't put them in the context of a
  daily situation.
• 2. In Communication the question is too long and
  confuse for some informants (both versions,
  Spanish and English) although it was included in
  the context of the same one.

29

• On the operative aspects
• 3. Some type of filter is required in order to
  apply the questions according to the age of the
  respondents or to carry out the necessary
  modifications to define those core questions that
  can present biases for the age of the respondents.

30

• Thank you for your attention
• rita.velazquez_at_inegi.gob.mx