K-2
Table K.1 Domain 2006 NSDUH Respondent <strong>Pair</strong>-<strong>Level</strong> Slippage Rates n Initial Total (I) 1 Final Total (F) 2 Control Total from SDU (C) (I - C)/C% (F - C)/C% Total 19,893 205,793,653 205,793,653 205,793,653 -0.00 -0.00 <strong>Pair</strong> Age Group 12-17, 12-17 3,886 7,593,952 7,642,963 7,642,963 -0.64 0.00 12-17, 18-25 2,691 7,666,780 7,732,366 7,732,366 -0.85 -0.00 12-17, 26-34 742 5,426,563 5,334,899 5,334,899 1.72 0.00 12-17, 35-49 3,057 32,144,621 31,877,090 31,877,090 0.84 0.00 12-17, 50+ 584 10,048,663 10,193,132 10,193,132 -1.42 0.00 18-25, 18-25 4,112 12,028,399 12,171,874 12,171,874 -1.18 -0.00 18-25, 26-34 832 7,152,631 6,925,334 6,925,334 3.28 -0.00 18-25, 35-49 925 16,514,379 16,887,667 16,887,667 -2.21 -0.00 18-25, 50+ 565 14,068,072 13,598,232 13,598,232 3.46 -0.00 26-34, 26-34 634 8,986,851 9,952,592 9,952,592 -9.70 -0.00 26-34, 35-49 345 9,323,330 8,506,385 8,506,385 9.60 0.00 26-34, 50+ 127 8,293,213 7,973,961 7,973,961 4.00 0.00 35-49, 35-49 492 20,317,917 20,340,565 20,340,565 -0.11 0.00 35-49, 50+ 254 17,123,597 15,795,918 15,795,918 8.41 0.00 50+, 50+ 647 29,104,687 30,860,675 30,860,675 -5.69 -0.00 <strong>Pair</strong> Race/Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino 2,766 32,818,261 32,045,093 32,045,093 2.41 0.00 Black or African American 2,189 22,653,757 23,267,640 23,267,640 -2.64 0.00 White 12,222 120,159,898 122,505,280 122,505,280 -1.91 0.00 Other 956 12,778,059 13,369,146 13,369,146 -4.42 -0.00 White & Black or African American 189 2,064,514 1,827,702 1,827,702 12.96 0.00 White & Hispanic or Latino 604 6,297,255 6,291,370 6,291,370 0.09 0.00 White & Other 616 5,944,742 4,322,148 4,322,148 37.54 0.00 Black or African American & Hispanic or Latino 85 1,125,656 939,877 939,877 19.77 0.00 Black or African American & Other 143 1,052,175 583,028 583,028 80.47 0.00 Hispanic or Latino & Other 123 899,336 642,369 642,369 40.00 0.00 <strong>Pair</strong> Gender Male, Male 4,350 37,558,293 37,373,669 37,373,669 0.49 -0.00 Female, Female 4,479 35,935,950 35,889,842 35,889,842 0.13 -0.00 Male, Female 11,064 132,299,411 132,530,142 132,530,142 -0.17 0.00 <strong>Pair</strong> Relationship Domain 3,4,5 Parent-Child (12-14)* 2,155 11,708,435 12,578,842 12,579,871 -6.93 -0.01 Parent-Child (12-17)* 4,005 23,684,149 25,245,240 25,245,953 -6.19 -0.00 Parent-Child (15-17)* 1,850 11,975,713 12,666,398 12,666,082 -5.45 0.00 Parent-Child (12-20)* 4,663 30,956,140 33,343,540 33,343,930 -7.16 -0.00 Parent*-Child (12-14) 2,155 19,405,792 19,422,684 19,423,808 -0.09 -0.01 Parent*-Child (12-17) 4,005 31,577,654 32,461,094 32,461,117 -2.72 -0.00 Parent*-Child (15-17) 1,850 18,879,541 19,715,740 19,352,295 -2.44 1.88 Parent*-Child (12-20) 4,663 38,133,341 39,210,262 39,210,228 -2.75 0.00 Sibling (12-14)-Sibling (15-17)* 2,274 3,911,492 4,093,334 4,093,833 -4.45 -0.01 Sibling (12-17)-Sibling (18-25)* 2,369 5,594,430 5,649,340 5,649,213 -0.97 0.00 Spouse-Spouse/Partner-Partner 3,995 67,667,733 68,167,305 68,167,645 -0.73 -0.00 Spouse-Spouse/Partner-Partner with Children (Younger Than 18) 1,873 28,769,311 29,805,311 29,805,329 -3.48 -0.00 K-3
- Page 1 and 2:
2006 NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AN
- Page 3 and 4:
Preface This report documents the m
- Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents Chapter Page Pref
- Page 7 and 8:
Table of Contents (continued) Appen
- Page 9 and 10:
List of Tables Table Page Table 1.1
- Page 11 and 12:
List of Tables (continued) Table Pa
- Page 13 and 14:
List of Exhibits Exhibit Page Exhib
- Page 15 and 16:
CBSA DU ev GEM Half step Household-
- Page 17 and 18:
1. Introduction Traditionally, most
- Page 19 and 20:
produced a priori. It was anticipat
- Page 21:
to perform some treatment (such as
- Page 24 and 25:
P hij ( ) ⎡P P ⎤⎡ 1 1 ⎤ hi
- Page 26 and 27:
The QDU selection probability was d
- Page 29 and 30:
3. Brief Description of the General
- Page 31 and 32:
4. Predictor Variables for the Ques
- Page 33 and 34:
Exhibit 4.1 Definitions of Levels f
- Page 35:
Exhibit 4.2 Definitions of Levels f
- Page 38 and 39:
e. Youth Only; f. Young Adult Only;
- Page 41 and 42:
6. Editing and Imputation of Pair R
- Page 43 and 44:
from other pair members was sometim
- Page 45 and 46:
Table 6.1 Levels of the Variable PA
- Page 47 and 48:
Table 6.3 Measures of the Quality o
- Page 49 and 50:
identified pair member "A" as "othe
- Page 51 and 52:
performed at the household level ra
- Page 53 and 54:
pair member's roster and another pa
- Page 55 and 56:
Table 6.6 Age Group Pair Number Age
- Page 57 and 58:
13. MSA (metropolitan statistical a
- Page 59 and 60:
different ways depending upon the a
- Page 61 and 62:
5. parent-child (child 12 to 17), p
- Page 63 and 64:
ecause, even though the parent-chil
- Page 65 and 66:
collapsed with the two-parent house
- Page 67 and 68:
Sibling-sibling pairs. The likeness
- Page 69 and 70:
with children) lived within the hou
- Page 71 and 72:
6.4.1.2 Sibling-Sibling Domains Whe
- Page 73 and 74:
4. The respondent had a child and a
- Page 75 and 76:
parent-focus and child-focus counts
- Page 77 and 78:
the random imputation described ear
- Page 79 and 80:
6.4.3.3.3 Spouse-Spouse Counts For
- Page 81 and 82:
7. Weight Calibration at Questionna
- Page 83 and 84:
Exhibit 7.2 Summary of 2006 NSDUH P
- Page 85 and 86:
Table 7.1 Model Group QDU Sample Si
- Page 87 and 88:
7.2.5 QDU Weight Component #15: Res
- Page 89 and 90:
8. Evaluation of Calibration Weight
- Page 91 and 92:
8.5 Sensitivity Analysis of Drug Us
- Page 93 and 94:
Table 8.2a Percentages of Youths (1
- Page 95 and 96:
Table 8.3a Percentages of Youths (1
- Page 97 and 98:
Table 8.4 Percentages of Youths (12
- Page 99 and 100:
Table 8.6a Percentages of Youths (1
- Page 101 and 102:
Table 8.7a Percentages of Youths (1
- Page 103 and 104:
References Ault, K., Aldworth, J.,
- Page 105:
Singh, A., Grau, E., & Folsom, R.,
- Page 108 and 109:
A-2
- Page 110 and 111:
A.2 GEM Adjustments for Extreme-Val
- Page 112 and 113:
A-6
- Page 114 and 115:
B-2
- Page 116 and 117:
B.1.1 Person Level B.1.1.1 Receivin
- Page 118 and 119:
B-6
- Page 120 and 121:
C-2
- Page 122 and 123:
To help understand what effects wer
- Page 124 and 125:
Exhibit C.1 Definitions of Levels f
- Page 126 and 127:
C.3 How to Interpret Collapsing and
- Page 128 and 129:
The number of respondents in that c
- Page 130 and 131:
Exhibit C.2 Covariates for 2006 NSD
- Page 132 and 133:
C-14
- Page 134 and 135:
Table C.1b 2006 Distribution of Wei
- Page 136 and 137:
Exhibit C.1.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 138 and 139:
Exhibit C.1.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 140 and 141:
C-22
- Page 142 and 143:
Table C.2b 2006 Distribution of Wei
- Page 144 and 145:
Exhibit C.2.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 146 and 147:
Exhibit C.2.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 148 and 149:
C-30
- Page 150 and 151:
Table C.3b 2006 Distribution of Wei
- Page 152 and 153:
Exhibit C.3.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 154 and 155:
Exhibit C.3.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 156 and 157:
C-38
- Page 158 and 159:
Table C.4b 2006 Distribution of Wei
- Page 160 and 161:
Exhibit C.4.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 162 and 163:
Exhibit C.4.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 164 and 165:
D-2
- Page 166 and 167:
D-4
- Page 168 and 169:
E-2
- Page 170 and 171:
E-4 Table E.1 2006 NSDUH Selected Q
- Page 172 and 173:
E-6 Table E.2 2006 NSDUH Respondent
- Page 174 and 175: F-2
- Page 176 and 177: Table F.1 2006 NSDUH QDU-Level Slip
- Page 178 and 179: G-2
- Page 180 and 181: G-4 Table G.1 2006 NSDUH Selected Q
- Page 182 and 183: G-6 Table G.2 2006 NSDUH Respondent
- Page 184 and 185: H-2
- Page 186 and 187: Exhibit H.1 Definitions of Levels f
- Page 188 and 189: Exhibit H.2 Covariates for 2006 NSD
- Page 190 and 191: H-8
- Page 192 and 193: Table H.1b 2006 Distribution of Wei
- Page 194 and 195: Exhibit H.1.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 196 and 197: Exhibit H.1.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 198 and 199: H-16
- Page 200 and 201: H-18
- Page 202 and 203: Table H.2b 2006 Pair Weight GEM Mod
- Page 204 and 205: Exhibit H.2.1 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 206 and 207: Exhibit H.2.3 Covariates for 2006 N
- Page 208 and 209: H-26
- Page 210 and 211: I-2
- Page 212 and 213: Table I.1 2006 NSDUH Person Pair-Le
- Page 214 and 215: J-2
- Page 216 and 217: J-4 Table J.1 Domain 2006 NSDUH Sel
- Page 218 and 219: J-6 Table J.2 2006 NSDUH Respondent
- Page 220 and 221: J-8 Table J.3 Domain 2006 NSDUH Res
- Page 222 and 223: J-10
- Page 226 and 227: Table K.1 2006 NSDUH Respondent Pai
- Page 228 and 229: L-2
- Page 230 and 231: L-4 Table L.1 2006 NSDUH Selected P
- Page 232 and 233: L-6 Table L.2 2006 NSDUH Respondent
- Page 234 and 235: L-8 Table L.3 2006 NSDUH Respondent
- Page 236 and 237: L-10 Table L.3 2006 NSDUH Responden
- Page 238 and 239: M-2
- Page 240 and 241: procedures were implemented indepen
- Page 242 and 243: first sorting variables). In genera
- Page 244 and 245: predicted mean(s), the neighborhood
- Page 246 and 247: N-2
- Page 248 and 249: The PMM method is only applicable t
- Page 250 and 251: type of constraint, called a "logic
- Page 252 and 253: N-8
- Page 254 and 255: O-2
- Page 256 and 257: Table O.1 Rules for Determining Mat
- Page 258 and 259: Table O.1 Rules for Determining Mat
- Page 260 and 261: O-8 Table O.2 Priority Condition Ru
- Page 262 and 263: O-10 Table O.2 Priority Condition 2
- Page 264 and 265: Table O.2 Priority Condition Rules
- Page 266 and 267: O-14 Table O.2 Priority Condition 5
- Page 268 and 269: O-16 Table O.2 Priority Condition 6
- Page 270 and 271: P-2
- Page 272 and 273: P-4 Table P.1 Priority Condition, F
- Page 274 and 275:
Table P.1 Priority Conditions Used
- Page 276 and 277:
P-8 Table P.1 Priority Condition, F
- Page 278 and 279:
P-10 Table P.2 Priority Condition,
- Page 280 and 281:
P-12 Table P.2 Priority Condition,
- Page 282 and 283:
P-14 Table P.2 Priority Condition,
- Page 284 and 285:
P-16 Table P.2 Priority Condition,
- Page 286 and 287:
P-18
- Page 288 and 289:
Q-2
- Page 290 and 291:
data, which was adjusted to more re
- Page 292 and 293:
Table Q.1 Model Group 3 (15-17, 15-
- Page 294 and 295:
Table Q.1 Model Group 9 (18-20, 26+
- Page 296 and 297:
Table Q.2 Pair Domain Sibling (12-1
- Page 298 and 299:
Table Q.3 Model Group Parent- Child
- Page 300 and 301:
Table Q.3 Pair Domain Spouse- Spous
- Page 302 and 303:
Table Q.4 Pair Domain Sibling (12-1
- Page 304 and 305:
Q-18
- Page 306 and 307:
R-2
- Page 308 and 309:
was not imputed, the indirect count
- Page 310 and 311:
1. The counts disagreed if a househ
- Page 312 and 313:
S-2
- Page 314 and 315:
with parent(s) in the household) fo
- Page 316 and 317:
• Both had counts of children wit
- Page 318 and 319:
− The other conditions had not al
- Page 320 and 321:
• The number of children in the s
- Page 322 and 323:
5. Two family units might be in the
- Page 324 and 325:
− − No bad relationship codes i
- Page 326 and 327:
elationship codes, and the sum of t
- Page 328 and 329:
• The pair relationship was not a
- Page 330 and 331:
• The screener count of roster me
- Page 332 and 333:
15. The count of the number of spou
- Page 334 and 335:
member had a spouse-spouse-with-chi
- Page 336 and 337:
• If the spouse-spouse counts exc
- Page 338:
• The number of roster members yo