Small area estimation strategies for large population surveys: a comparison of design and model-based methods

ABSTRACT

Small area estimation (SAE) concerns with how to reliably estimate population quantities of interest when some areas or domains have very limited samples. This is an important issue in large population surveys, because the geographical areas or groups with only small samples or even no samples are often of interest to researchers and policy-makers. For example, large population health surveys, such as Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System and Ohio Mecaid Assessment Survey (OMAS), are regularly conducted for monitoring insurance coverage and healthcare utilization. Classic approaches usually provide accurate estimators at the state level or large geographical region level, but they fail to provide reliable estimators for many rural counties where the samples are sparse. Moreover, a systematic evaluation of the performances of the SAE methods in real-world setting is lacking in the literature. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical model with constraints on the parameter space and show that it provides superior estimators for county-level adult uninsured rates in Ohio based on the 2012 OMAS data. Furthermore, we perform extensive simulation studies to compare our methods with a collection of common SAE strategies, including direct estimators, synthetic estimators, composite estimators, and Datta GS, Ghosh M, Steorts R, Maples J.'s [Bayesian benchmarking with applications to small area estimation. Test 2011;20(3):574–588] Bayesian hierarchical model-based estimators. To set a fair basis for comparison, we generate our simulation data with characteristics mimicking the real OMAS data, so that neither model-based nor design-based strategies use the true model specification. The estimators based on our proposed model are shown to outperform other estimators for small areas in both simulation study and real data analysis.

KEYWORDS:

• Direct estimate
• synthetic estimate
• composite estimate
• benchmarking
• Bayesian hierarchical modeling
• Ohio medicaid assessment survey

View correction statement:

Corrigendum

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was partially supported by grant 1R01 HS024263-01 from the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.