Common use of Response rates Clause in Contracts

Response rates. In order to produce annual health care estimates for calendar year 2016 based on the full MEPS sample data from the MEPS Panel 20 and Panel 21, the two panels are combined. More specifically, full calendar year 2016 data collected in Rounds 3 through 5 for the MEPS Panel 20 sample are pooled with data from the first three rounds of data collection for the MEPS Panel 21 sample (the general approach is described below). As mentioned above, all response rates discussed here are unweighted. To understand the calculation of MEPS response rates, some features related to MEPS data collection should be noted. When an RU is visited for a round of data collection, changes in RU membership are identified. Such changes include the formation of student RUs as well as other new RUs created when RU members from a previous round have moved to another location in the U.S. Thus, the number of RUs eligible for MEPS interviewing in a given round is determined after data collection is fully completed. The ratio of the number of RUs completing the MEPS interview in a given round to the number of RUs characterized as eligible to complete the interview for that round represents the “conditional” response rate for that round expressed as a proportion. It is “conditional” in that it pertains to the set of RUs characterized as eligible for MEPS for that round and thus is “conditioned” on prior participation rather than representing the overall response rate through that round. For example, in Table 3.1, for Panel 21 Round 2 the ratio of 7,319 (Row G) to 7,870 (Row F) multiplied by 100 represents the response rate for the round (93.0 percent when computed), conditioned on the set of RUs characterized as eligible for MEPS for that round. Taking the product of the percentage of the NHIS sample eligible for MEPS (Row A) with the product of the ratios for a consecutive set of MEPS rounds beginning with Round 1 produces the overall response rate through the last MEPS round specified. The overall unweighted response rate for the combined sample of Panel 20 and Panel 21 for 2016 was obtained by computing the products of the relative sample sizes and the corresponding overall panel response rates and then summing the two products. Panel 21 represents about 49.0 percent of the combined sample size while Panel 20 represents the remaining 51.0 percent. Thus, the combined response rate of 46.0 percent was computed as 0.510 times 45.7, the overall Panel 20 response rate through Round 5 plus 0.490 times 46.3, the overall Panel 21 response rate through Round 3.

Response rates. In order to ‌ To produce annual health care estimates for calendar year 2016 2021 based on the full MEPS sample data from the MEPS Panel 20 23, Panel 24, Panel 25, and Panel 2126, the two four panels are combined. More specifically, full calendar year 2016 2021 data collected in Rounds 7 through 9 for the MEPS Panel 23, Rounds 5, 6 and 7 for the MEPS Panel 24 and Rounds 3 through 5 for the MEPS Panel 20 25 sample are pooled with data from the first three rounds of data collection for the MEPS Panel 21 26 sample (the general approach is described below). As mentioned above, all response rates discussed here are unweighted. To understand the calculation of MEPS response rates, some features related to MEPS data collection should be noted. When an RU is visited for a round of data collection, changes in RU membership are identified. Such changes include the formation of student RUs as well as other new RUs created when RU members from a previous round have moved to another location in the U.S. Thus, the number of RUs eligible for MEPS interviewing in a given round is determined after data collection is fully completed. The ratio of the number of RUs completing the MEPS interview in a given round to the number of RUs characterized as eligible to complete the interview for that round represents the “conditional” response rate for that round expressed as a proportion. It is “conditional” in that it pertains to the set of RUs characterized as eligible for MEPS for that round and thus is “conditioned” on prior participation rather than representing the overall response rate through that round. For example, in Table 3.1, for Panel 21 26 Round 2 the ratio of 7,319 4,799 (Row G) to 7,870 6,045 (Row F) multiplied by 100 represents the response rate for the round (93.0 79.4 percent when computed), conditioned on the set of RUs characterized as eligible for MEPS for that round. Taking the product of the percentage of the NHIS sample eligible for MEPS (Row Row A) with the product of the ratios for a consecutive set of MEPS rounds beginning with Round 1 produces the overall response rate through the last MEPS round specified. The overall unweighted response rate for 2021 for the combined sample of Panel 20 and Panel 21 for 2016 after pooling the respondents across the four panels was obtained by computing the products product of the relative sample sizes compositing factor associated with each panel and the corresponding overall panel response rates rate and then summing the two four products. Panel 21 26 represents about 49.0 31.5 percent of the combined sample size while size, Panel 20 25 represents about 24.7 percent of the combined sample size, Panel 24 represents about 22.1 percent, and Panel 23 represents the remaining 51.0 21.7 percent. Thus, the combined response rate of 46.0 21.8 percent was computed as 0.510 0.22 times 45.7, 22.0 (22.0 is the overall Panel 20 23 response rate through Round 5 9) plus 0.490 0.22 times 46.3, 20.7 (20.7 is the overall Panel 21 24 response rate through Round 7) plus 0.25 times 19.6 (19.6 is the overall Panel 25 response rate through Round 5) plus 0.31 times 24.3 (24.3 is the overall Panel 26 response rate through Round 3.) The overall response rate of 21.8 percent for 2021 is lower than that for 2020 (27.6 percent), reflecting the continued impact of the pandemic on data collection efforts.