mismatches and matches in address information from the census and the bso: a longitudinal...
TRANSCRIPT
Mismatches and matches in address information from the Census and the BSO: A longitudinal perspective 2001-2011
Ian Shuttleworth and Brian Foley, Queen’s University Belfast
British Society for Population Studies annual conference
9th September 2015, University of Leeds
Presentation format
• Context
• Data source, research approach and methods
• Backdrop of societal change in Northern Ireland (NI) during the 2000s
• Research questions
• Results
• Summary and conclusions
Context
• Shift in approach to future production of UK population statistics
• Greater use of administrative data sources enhance quality of statistical outputs from 2021 Census
• Post-2021; move away from traditional census-taking approach
• Health service registration data - fundamental role important to improve understanding of data quality
research focus → accuracy of address information
Data source
• Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study (NILS) representative 28% sample (circa 500,000 individuals)
health card registration data from Business Services Organisation (BSO)
one of 104 designated birth dates
• Linked to census and vital events data
• Address information for NILS members updated through six-monthly data downloads provided by BSO
Research approach
• Assess quality of address information in NI health card registration data over time
• Cross-sectional comparison of address Super Output Area (SOA) from linked health card registration and census records
2001 Census
BSO health card registrations, April 2001
SOA of address
2011 Census
BSO health card registrations, April 2011
SOA of address
NILS NILS
Methods
• Descriptive statistics on rates of address match/mismatch in 2001 and 2011, based on all ages
• Multilevel logistic regression modellingbinary outcome variable (1 = SOA mismatch, 0 = SOA match)
hierarchical data (individuals nested within SOAs)
based on 16-74 age group with SOA recorded in both the health card registration and census data
circa 315,000 and 347,000 records for 2001 and 2011, respectively
Change in NI during the 2000s
Advances in information technology
Ageing population
Expansion of rental sector
Increase in migrant population
Demographic and socio-economic change
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+
Es
tim
ate
(x
10
3)
Age group (years)
2011 2001
Population
Population by age band
1,500
1,550
1,600
1,650
1,700
1,750
1,800
1,850
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Es
tim
ate
(x
10
3)
Year ending mid-
Source: Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA)
Demographic and socio-economic change
-5,000
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Est
imat
e
Year ending mid-
Net migration
In-migration
Out-migration
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
Est
imat
e
2001 2011
Europe (excluding UK & Ire)
Other
Country of birth
Long-term migration
Source: NISRA
Demographic and socio-economic change
Housing tenure
0 10 20 30 40 50
Level 4 and above
Level 1 to 3
No qualifications
Percent
2011
2001
Education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Privaterented
Socialrented
Owneroccupied
Percent
2011
2001
Source: NISRA
Research questions
• How do the rates and geography of address mismatch in health card registration data in 2011 compare with the situation in 2001?
• What is the descriptive profile of address match/mismatch in 2011 and how does this compare with the situation in 2001?
• Has the association between address mismatch and relevant individual-, household- and area-level variables changed between 2001 and 2011?
• What is the transition in address match/mismatch status of NILS members between 2001 and 2011?
Address accuracy status
11.9%
85.9%
2.2%
14.5%
84.2%
1.3%2001 2011
n = 456,290 n = 485,185
Address match
Address mismatch
SOA missing in health card registration data
Source: NILS
Address mismatch rate, 2001
Belfast
Source: NILS
Address mismatch rate, 2011
Belfast
Source: NILS
Research questions• How do the geography and rates of address mismatch in health
card registration data in 2011 compare with the situation in 2001?
• What is the descriptive profile of address match/mismatch in 2011 and how does this compare with the situation in 2001?
• Has the association between address mismatch and relevant individual-, household- and area-level variables changed between 2001 and 2011?
• What is the transition in address match/mismatch status of NILS members between 2001 and 2011?
Address mismatch by age
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90+
Co
un
t
Age (years)
SOA match 2011
SOA match 2001
SOA mismatch 2011
SOA mismatch 2001
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90+
Per
cen
tAge (years)
SOA match 2011
SOA match 2001
SOA mismatch 2011
SOA mismatch 2001
Source: NILS
2001 2011
Sex
Marital status
Address match
Address mismatch
SOA missing in health card registration data
88%
84%
10%
13%
Female
Male
86%
82%
13%
16%
Female
Male
90%
88%
84%
82%
78%
7%
10%
14%
16%
20%
Widowed
Married
Single
Divorced
Separated
91%
86%
85%
82%
81%
8%
12%
14%
17%
18%
Widowed
Married
Divorced
Single
Separated
0% 50% 100%
0% 50% 100% Source: NILS
2001 2011
Limiting long-term illness
Education
Address match
Address mismatch
SOA missing in health card registration data
88%
84%
80%
9%
14%
18%
Noqualifications
Level 1 to 3
Level 4 andabove
89%
85%
9%
12%
Yes
No
0% 50% 100%
0% 50% 100%
86%
84%
12%
15%
Yes
No
88%
82%
81%
11%
17%
17%
Noqualifications
Level 1 to 3
Level 4 andabove
Source: NILS
2001 2011
Country of birth
Address one year ago
Address match
Address mismatch
SOA missing in health card registration data
86%
78%
12%
17%
UK/Ireland
Non-UK/Ireland
85%
76%
14%
20%
UK/Ireland
Non-UK/Ireland
89%
61%
54%
9%
23%
43%
No addresschange
Moved fromoutside UK
Moved fromwithin UK
86%
73%
54%
13%
20%
45%
No addresschange
Moved fromoutside NI
Moved fromwithin NI
0% 50% 100%
0% 50% 100%
Source: NILS
2001 2011
Tenure
Accommodation type
Address match
Address mismatch
SOA missing in health card registration data
88%
87%
69%
10%
12%
27%
Owneroccupied
Social rented
Privaterented
86%
85%
73%
13%
14%
25%
Owneroccupied
Social rented
Privaterented
87%
87%
74%
72%
64%
10%
12%
19%
25%
31%
Detached
Semi-D/Terraced
Caravan/Mobile
Flat/Apartment
Communal
86%
84%
77%
73%
63%
13%
15%
20%
25%
35%
Detached
Semi-D/Terraced
Caravan/Mobile
Flat/Apartment
Communal
0% 50% 100%
0% 50% 100% Source: NILS
Research questions
• How do the geography and rates of address mismatch in health card registration data in 2011 compare with the situation in 2001?
• What is the descriptive profile of address match/mismatch in 2011 and how does this compare with the situation in 2001?
• Has the association between address mismatch and relevant individual-, household- and area-level variables changed between 2001 and 2011?
• What is the transition in address match/mismatch status of NILS members between 2001 and 2011?
Sex (ref cat: Male) FemaleAge (ref cat: 16-24 yrs) 25-34 yrs
35-44 yrs
45-54 yrs
55-64 yrs
65-74 yrsMarital status (ref cat: Single) Married
Separated
Divorced
WidowedLimiting long-term illness (ref cat: Yes) NoQualifications (ref cat: No) YesReligion (ref cat: Catholic)Protestant & other Christian
Other religionsCountry of birth (ref cat: UK/Ireland) Non-UK/IrelandNSSEC (ref cat: Professional)Intermediate
Routine
StudentAddress one year ago (ref cat: No move) Moved from within UK
Moved from outside UKTenure (ref cat: Owner occupied) Social rented
Private rented
Communal2001 Population density, Log10 scale Quartile 2(ref cat: Quartile 1) Quartile 3
Quartile 42005 Deprivation Score, Log10 scale Quartile 2(ref cat: Quartile1) Quartile 3
Quartile 4
Between-SOA variance: null model 0.21, specified model 0.14315,204 Level 1 units, 890 Level 2 units
Lower odds Higher odds
-1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Odds ratio
Binary logistic multilevel model: 2001
Source: NILS
Sex (ref cat: Male) FemaleAge (ref cat: 16-24 yrs) 25-34 yrs
35-44 yrs
45-54 yrs
55-64 yrs
65-74 yrsMarital status (ref cat: Single) Married
Separated
Divorced
WidowedLimiting long-term illness (ref cat: Yes) NoQualifications (ref cat: No) YesReligion (ref cat: Catholic)Protestant & other Christian
Other religionsCountry of birth (ref cat: UK/Ireland) Non-UK/IrelandNSSEC (ref cat: Professional)Intermediate
Routine
StudentAddress one year ago (ref cat: No move) Moved from within NI
Moved from outside NISOA (mis)match status 2001 (ref cat: Matching) Mismatched
SOA missing in BSO dataTenure (ref cat: Owner occupied) Social rented
Private rented
Communal2011 Population density, log scale Quartile 2(ref cat: Quartile 1) Quartile 3
Quartile 42010 Deprivation Score, log scale Quartile 2(ref cat: Quartile 1) Quartile 3
Quartile 4
Between-SOA variance: null model 0.12, specified model 0.05347,617 Level 1 units, 890 Level 2 units
Lower odds Higher oddsBinary logistic multilevel model: 2011
-1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Odds ratio Source: NILS
Research questions
• How do the geography and rates of address mismatch in health card registration data in 2011 compare with the situation in 2001?
• What is the descriptive profile of address match/mismatch in 2011 and how does this compare with the situation in 2001?
• Has the association between address mismatch and relevant individual-, household- and area-level variables changed between 2001 and 2011?
• What is the transition in address match/mismatch status of NILS members between 2001 and 2011?
Transition in address match/mismatch status
279,899 40,287 890 321,076
87.2% 12.5% 0.3% 100.0%
75.2% 10.8% 0.2% 86.3%
30,612 12,284 207 43,103
71.0% 28.5% 0.5% 100.0%
8.2% 3.3% 0.1% 11.6%
4,817 763 2,239 7,819
61.6% 9.8% 28.6% 100.0%1.3% 0.2% 0.6% 2.1%
SOA mismatchSOA missing in health card regisration data
2011
Total
SOA match
SOA match
SOA mismatch
SOA missing in health card regisration data
2001
n = 371,998
Source: NILS
Summary of main findings
• Increase of circa 2% in the address mismatch rate in 2011
• Highest rates of address mismatch in urban areas in both years
• Descriptive profile of address match/mismatch very similar in 2011
compared to 2001
• High odds of address mismatch in 2011:male25 to 34 age groupmoved in the year before the censusaddress mismatch in 2001private rentersmore densely populated areas
Conclusions
• Despite demographic and socio-economic change in NI, address mismatch situation in 2011 similar to that in 2001
• Conservative estimate of address mismatch
• Implications for sub-national population estimates and other statistics they underlie, e.g. health and economic indicators
• Increasingly mobile population → difficult to reference individuals to a single address
Future analysis
• Further analysis of NILS members exhibiting address mismatch in both 2001 and 2011
• Use subsequent downloads of BSO data after April 2011 to investigate the lag in updating of address information in health card registration data to match that recorded in the 2011 Census
• Undertake the analysis using Unique Property Reference Number, which will provide an insight into mismatch at the individual address level
The help provided by the staff of the Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study and the NILS Research Support Unit is acknowledged. The NILS is funded by the Health and Social Care Research and Development Division of the Public Health Agency (HSC R&D Division) and NISRA. The NILS-RSU is funded by the ESRC and the Northern Ireland Government. The authors alone are responsible for the interpretation of the data and any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of NISRA/NILS.
NILS-RSU Contact Details:
Email: [email protected]
Acknowledgement
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72
Co
un
t
Age (years)
2011 age
2001 age0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+
Per
cen
t
Number of address changes recorded in BSO data between 2001 and 2011
Matched address in both 2001 and 2011
Mismatched address in both 2001 and 2011
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
Male Female
Co
un
tSex
Characteristics of NILS members with address mismatch in both 2001 and 2011