Analysis

Skip to filters. View results.

What’s new on our website

View results
Sort Help
entries

Results

All (24)

All (24) (0 to 10 of 24 results)

  • 1. Improvements to the Canadian Income Survey Methodology for the 2022 Reference Year
    Articles and reports: 75F0002M2024005
    Description: The Canadian Income Survey (CIS) has introduced improvements to the methods and data sources used to produce income and poverty estimates with the release of its 2022 reference year estimates. Foremost among these improvements is a significant increase in the sample size for a large subset of the CIS content. The weighting methodology was also improved and the target population of the CIS was changed from persons aged 16 years and over to persons aged 15 years and over. This paper describes the changes made and presents the approximate net result of these changes on the income estimates and data quality of the CIS using 2021 data. The changes described in this paper highlight the ways in which data quality has been improved while having little impact on key CIS estimates and trends.
    Release date: 2024-04-26
  • 2. Model-based stratification of payment populations in Medicare integrity investigations
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200001
    Description: When a Medicare healthcare provider is suspected of billing abuse, a population of payments X made to that provider over a fixed timeframe is isolated. A certified medical reviewer, in a time-consuming process, can determine the overpayment Y = X - (amount justified by the evidence) associated with each payment. Typically, there are too many payments in the population to examine each with care, so a probability sample is selected. The sample overpayments are then used to calculate a 90% lower confidence bound for the total population overpayment. This bound is the amount demanded for recovery from the provider. Unfortunately, classical methods for calculating this bound sometimes fail to provide the 90% confidence level, especially when using a stratified sample.

    In this paper, 166 redacted samples from Medicare integrity investigations are displayed and described, along with 156 associated payment populations. The 7,588 examined (Y, X) sample pairs show (1) Medicare audits have high error rates: more than 76% of these payments were considered to have been paid in error; and (2) the patterns in these samples support an “All-or-Nothing” mixture model for (Y, X) previously defined in the literature. Model-based Monte Carlo testing procedures for Medicare sampling plans are discussed, as well as stratification methods based on anticipated model moments. In terms of viability (achieving the 90% confidence level) a new stratification method defined here is competitive with the best of the many existing methods tested and seems less sensitive to choice of operating parameters. In terms of overpayment recovery (equivalent to precision) the new method is also comparable to the best of the many existing methods tested. Unfortunately, no stratification algorithm tested was ever viable for more than about half of the 104 test populations.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 3. A method for estimating the effect of classification errors on statistics for two domains
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200002
    Description: Being able to quantify the accuracy (bias, variance) of published output is crucial in official statistics. Output in official statistics is nearly always divided into subpopulations according to some classification variable, such as mean income by categories of educational level. Such output is also referred to as domain statistics. In the current paper, we limit ourselves to binary classification variables. In practice, misclassifications occur and these contribute to the bias and variance of domain statistics. Existing analytical and numerical methods to estimate this effect have two disadvantages. The first disadvantage is that they require that the misclassification probabilities are known beforehand and the second is that the bias and variance estimates are biased themselves. In the current paper we present a new method, a Gaussian mixture model estimated by an Expectation-Maximisation (EM) algorithm combined with a bootstrap, referred to as the EM bootstrap method. This new method does not require that the misclassification probabilities are known beforehand, although it is more efficient when a small audit sample is used that yields a starting value for the misclassification probabilities in the EM algorithm. We compared the performance of the new method with currently available numerical methods: the bootstrap method and the SIMEX method. Previous research has shown that for non-linear parameters the bootstrap outperforms the analytical expressions. For nearly all conditions tested, the bias and variance estimates that are obtained by the EM bootstrap method are closer to their true values than those obtained by the bootstrap and SIMEX methods. We end this paper by discussing the results and possible future extensions of the method.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 4. Dealing with undercoverage for non-probability survey samples
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200005
    Description: Population undercoverage is one of the main hurdles faced by statistical analysis with non-probability survey samples. We discuss two typical scenarios of undercoverage, namely, stochastic undercoverage and deterministic undercoverage. We argue that existing estimation methods under the positivity assumption on the propensity scores (i.e., the participation probabilities) can be directly applied to handle the scenario of stochastic undercoverage. We explore strategies for mitigating biases in estimating the mean of the target population under deterministic undercoverage. In particular, we examine a split population approach based on a convex hull formulation, and construct estimators with reduced biases. A doubly robust estimator can be constructed if a followup subsample of the reference probability survey with measurements on the study variable becomes feasible. Performances of six competing estimators are investigated through a simulation study and issues which require further investigation are briefly discussed.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 5. Constructing all determinantal sampling designs
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200008
    Description: In this article, we use a slightly simplified version of the method by Fickus, Mixon and Poteet (2013) to define a flexible parameterization of the kernels of determinantal sampling designs with fixed first-order inclusion probabilities. For specific values of the multidimensional parameter, we get back to a matrix from the family PII from Loonis and Mary (2019). We speculate that, among the determinantal designs with fixed inclusion probabilities, the minimum variance of the Horvitz and Thompson estimator (1952) of a variable of interest is expressed relative to PII. We provide experimental R programs that facilitate the appropriation of various concepts presented in the article, some of which are described as non-trivial by Fickus et al. (2013). A longer version of this article, including proofs and a more detailed presentation of the determinantal designs, is also available.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 6. Jean-Claude Deville’s contributions to survey theory and official statistics
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200017
    Description: Jean-Claude Deville, who passed away in October 2021, was one of the most influential researchers in the field of survey statistics over the past 40 years. This article traces some of his contributions that have had a profound impact on both survey theory and practice. This article will cover the topics of balanced sampling using the cube method, calibration, the weight-sharing method, the development of variance expressions of complex estimators using influence function and quota sampling.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 7. Improvements to the Canadian Income Survey Methodology for the 2021 Reference Year
    Articles and reports: 75F0002M2023005
    Description: The Canadian Income Survey (CIS) has introduced improvements to the methods and systems used to produce income estimates with the release of its 2021 reference year estimates. This paper describes the changes and presents the approximate net result of these changes on income estimates using data for 2019 and 2020. The changes described in this paper highlight the ways in which data quality has been improved while producing minimal impact on key CIS estimates and trends.
    Release date: 2023-08-29
  • 8. Bayes, buttressed by design-based ideas, is the best overarching paradigm for sample survey inference
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200001
    Description:

    Conceptual arguments and examples are presented suggesting that the Bayesian approach to survey inference can address the many and varied challenges of survey analysis. Bayesian models that incorporate features of the complex design can yield inferences that are relevant for the specific data set obtained, but also have good repeated-sampling properties. Examples focus on the role of auxiliary variables and sampling weights, and methods for handling nonresponse. The article offers ten top reasons for favoring the Bayesian approach to survey inference.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
  • 9. Comments by Sharon L. Lohr on “Statistical inference with non-probability survey samples”
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200005
    Description:

    Strong assumptions are required to make inferences about a finite population from a nonprobability sample. Statistics from a nonprobability sample should be accompanied by evidence that the assumptions are met and that point estimates and confidence intervals are fit for use. I describe some diagnostics that can be used to assess the model assumptions, and discuss issues to consider when deciding whether to use data from a nonprobability sample.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
  • 10. Are deep learning models superior for missing data imputation in surveys? Evidence from an empirical comparison
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200009
    Description:

    Multiple imputation (MI) is a popular approach for dealing with missing data arising from non-response in sample surveys. Multiple imputation by chained equations (MICE) is one of the most widely used MI algorithms for multivariate data, but it lacks theoretical foundation and is computationally intensive. Recently, missing data imputation methods based on deep learning models have been developed with encouraging results in small studies. However, there has been limited research on evaluating their performance in realistic settings compared to MICE, particularly in big surveys. We conduct extensive simulation studies based on a subsample of the American Community Survey to compare the repeated sampling properties of four machine learning based MI methods: MICE with classification trees, MICE with random forests, generative adversarial imputation networks, and multiple imputation using denoising autoencoders. We find the deep learning imputation methods are superior to MICE in terms of computational time. However, with the default choice of hyperparameters in the common software packages, MICE with classification trees consistently outperforms, often by a large margin, the deep learning imputation methods in terms of bias, mean squared error, and coverage under a range of realistic settings.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
Stats in brief (1)

Stats in brief (1) ((1 result))

  • 1. Created Equal
    Stats in brief: 45-20-00032022002
    Description:

    Canada’s diversity and rich cultural heritage have been shaped by the people who have come from all over the world to call it home. But even in our multicultural society, eliminating all forms of discrimination remains a challenge. In this episode, we turn a critical eye to the ways that cognitive bias risks perpetuating systemic racism. Statistics are supposed to accurately reflect the world around us, but are all data created equal? Join our guests, Sarah Messou-Ghelazzi, Communications Officer, Filsan Hujaleh, Analyst with the Centre for Social Data Insights and Innovation, and Jeff Latimer, Director General - Accountable for Health, Justice, Diversity and Populations at Statistics Canada as we explore the role data can play to make Canada a more equal society for all.

    Release date: 2022-03-16
Articles and reports (23)

Articles and reports (23) (0 to 10 of 23 results)

  • 1. Improvements to the Canadian Income Survey Methodology for the 2022 Reference Year
    Articles and reports: 75F0002M2024005
    Description: The Canadian Income Survey (CIS) has introduced improvements to the methods and data sources used to produce income and poverty estimates with the release of its 2022 reference year estimates. Foremost among these improvements is a significant increase in the sample size for a large subset of the CIS content. The weighting methodology was also improved and the target population of the CIS was changed from persons aged 16 years and over to persons aged 15 years and over. This paper describes the changes made and presents the approximate net result of these changes on the income estimates and data quality of the CIS using 2021 data. The changes described in this paper highlight the ways in which data quality has been improved while having little impact on key CIS estimates and trends.
    Release date: 2024-04-26
  • 2. Model-based stratification of payment populations in Medicare integrity investigations
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200001
    Description: When a Medicare healthcare provider is suspected of billing abuse, a population of payments X made to that provider over a fixed timeframe is isolated. A certified medical reviewer, in a time-consuming process, can determine the overpayment Y = X - (amount justified by the evidence) associated with each payment. Typically, there are too many payments in the population to examine each with care, so a probability sample is selected. The sample overpayments are then used to calculate a 90% lower confidence bound for the total population overpayment. This bound is the amount demanded for recovery from the provider. Unfortunately, classical methods for calculating this bound sometimes fail to provide the 90% confidence level, especially when using a stratified sample.

    In this paper, 166 redacted samples from Medicare integrity investigations are displayed and described, along with 156 associated payment populations. The 7,588 examined (Y, X) sample pairs show (1) Medicare audits have high error rates: more than 76% of these payments were considered to have been paid in error; and (2) the patterns in these samples support an “All-or-Nothing” mixture model for (Y, X) previously defined in the literature. Model-based Monte Carlo testing procedures for Medicare sampling plans are discussed, as well as stratification methods based on anticipated model moments. In terms of viability (achieving the 90% confidence level) a new stratification method defined here is competitive with the best of the many existing methods tested and seems less sensitive to choice of operating parameters. In terms of overpayment recovery (equivalent to precision) the new method is also comparable to the best of the many existing methods tested. Unfortunately, no stratification algorithm tested was ever viable for more than about half of the 104 test populations.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 3. A method for estimating the effect of classification errors on statistics for two domains
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200002
    Description: Being able to quantify the accuracy (bias, variance) of published output is crucial in official statistics. Output in official statistics is nearly always divided into subpopulations according to some classification variable, such as mean income by categories of educational level. Such output is also referred to as domain statistics. In the current paper, we limit ourselves to binary classification variables. In practice, misclassifications occur and these contribute to the bias and variance of domain statistics. Existing analytical and numerical methods to estimate this effect have two disadvantages. The first disadvantage is that they require that the misclassification probabilities are known beforehand and the second is that the bias and variance estimates are biased themselves. In the current paper we present a new method, a Gaussian mixture model estimated by an Expectation-Maximisation (EM) algorithm combined with a bootstrap, referred to as the EM bootstrap method. This new method does not require that the misclassification probabilities are known beforehand, although it is more efficient when a small audit sample is used that yields a starting value for the misclassification probabilities in the EM algorithm. We compared the performance of the new method with currently available numerical methods: the bootstrap method and the SIMEX method. Previous research has shown that for non-linear parameters the bootstrap outperforms the analytical expressions. For nearly all conditions tested, the bias and variance estimates that are obtained by the EM bootstrap method are closer to their true values than those obtained by the bootstrap and SIMEX methods. We end this paper by discussing the results and possible future extensions of the method.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 4. Dealing with undercoverage for non-probability survey samples
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200005
    Description: Population undercoverage is one of the main hurdles faced by statistical analysis with non-probability survey samples. We discuss two typical scenarios of undercoverage, namely, stochastic undercoverage and deterministic undercoverage. We argue that existing estimation methods under the positivity assumption on the propensity scores (i.e., the participation probabilities) can be directly applied to handle the scenario of stochastic undercoverage. We explore strategies for mitigating biases in estimating the mean of the target population under deterministic undercoverage. In particular, we examine a split population approach based on a convex hull formulation, and construct estimators with reduced biases. A doubly robust estimator can be constructed if a followup subsample of the reference probability survey with measurements on the study variable becomes feasible. Performances of six competing estimators are investigated through a simulation study and issues which require further investigation are briefly discussed.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 5. Constructing all determinantal sampling designs
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200008
    Description: In this article, we use a slightly simplified version of the method by Fickus, Mixon and Poteet (2013) to define a flexible parameterization of the kernels of determinantal sampling designs with fixed first-order inclusion probabilities. For specific values of the multidimensional parameter, we get back to a matrix from the family PII from Loonis and Mary (2019). We speculate that, among the determinantal designs with fixed inclusion probabilities, the minimum variance of the Horvitz and Thompson estimator (1952) of a variable of interest is expressed relative to PII. We provide experimental R programs that facilitate the appropriation of various concepts presented in the article, some of which are described as non-trivial by Fickus et al. (2013). A longer version of this article, including proofs and a more detailed presentation of the determinantal designs, is also available.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 6. Jean-Claude Deville’s contributions to survey theory and official statistics
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200017
    Description: Jean-Claude Deville, who passed away in October 2021, was one of the most influential researchers in the field of survey statistics over the past 40 years. This article traces some of his contributions that have had a profound impact on both survey theory and practice. This article will cover the topics of balanced sampling using the cube method, calibration, the weight-sharing method, the development of variance expressions of complex estimators using influence function and quota sampling.
    Release date: 2024-01-03
  • 7. Improvements to the Canadian Income Survey Methodology for the 2021 Reference Year
    Articles and reports: 75F0002M2023005
    Description: The Canadian Income Survey (CIS) has introduced improvements to the methods and systems used to produce income estimates with the release of its 2021 reference year estimates. This paper describes the changes and presents the approximate net result of these changes on income estimates using data for 2019 and 2020. The changes described in this paper highlight the ways in which data quality has been improved while producing minimal impact on key CIS estimates and trends.
    Release date: 2023-08-29
  • 8. Bayes, buttressed by design-based ideas, is the best overarching paradigm for sample survey inference
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200001
    Description:

    Conceptual arguments and examples are presented suggesting that the Bayesian approach to survey inference can address the many and varied challenges of survey analysis. Bayesian models that incorporate features of the complex design can yield inferences that are relevant for the specific data set obtained, but also have good repeated-sampling properties. Examples focus on the role of auxiliary variables and sampling weights, and methods for handling nonresponse. The article offers ten top reasons for favoring the Bayesian approach to survey inference.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
  • 9. Comments by Sharon L. Lohr on “Statistical inference with non-probability survey samples”
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200005
    Description:

    Strong assumptions are required to make inferences about a finite population from a nonprobability sample. Statistics from a nonprobability sample should be accompanied by evidence that the assumptions are met and that point estimates and confidence intervals are fit for use. I describe some diagnostics that can be used to assess the model assumptions, and discuss issues to consider when deciding whether to use data from a nonprobability sample.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
  • 10. Are deep learning models superior for missing data imputation in surveys? Evidence from an empirical comparison
    Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200200009
    Description:

    Multiple imputation (MI) is a popular approach for dealing with missing data arising from non-response in sample surveys. Multiple imputation by chained equations (MICE) is one of the most widely used MI algorithms for multivariate data, but it lacks theoretical foundation and is computationally intensive. Recently, missing data imputation methods based on deep learning models have been developed with encouraging results in small studies. However, there has been limited research on evaluating their performance in realistic settings compared to MICE, particularly in big surveys. We conduct extensive simulation studies based on a subsample of the American Community Survey to compare the repeated sampling properties of four machine learning based MI methods: MICE with classification trees, MICE with random forests, generative adversarial imputation networks, and multiple imputation using denoising autoencoders. We find the deep learning imputation methods are superior to MICE in terms of computational time. However, with the default choice of hyperparameters in the common software packages, MICE with classification trees consistently outperforms, often by a large margin, the deep learning imputation methods in terms of bias, mean squared error, and coverage under a range of realistic settings.

    Release date: 2022-12-15
Journals and periodicals (0)

Journals and periodicals (0) (0 results)

No content available at this time.

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Date modified:

Search help

How do I use the filters and the search box?

  • You can initiate a search by entering keywords or selecting filters (e.g., under Subject, Geography, etc.) on the left side of the page.

  • Filters can be used together or in any combination. Each time you select a filter, the results on the page are updated.

  • To start a new search, click on the Clear all button above the search box or deselect each filter.

  • Specified keywords and filters appear above the search box. You can deselect any or all the tags to refine or clear your search.

How do I refine my search?

  • You can enter keywords in the search box. It is not necessary to use “+” or “, “ or “AND”.

  • You can delete some or all of the keywords from your search string.

  • Quotes around keywords limit the search to a specific phrase.

    • For example, “labour force survey” will limit results to products containing this phrase.

  • Use “or” between keywords to obtain results that contain one or more search terms.

    • For example, labour or­ force or survey will limit results to products containing any or all of these words.

How does the search work?

  • This search looks for results that have your query term in the title, description, subject, geography, product number or other information about the product.

    • For example, when searching the term ‘Diseases’, all results with the word ‘Diseases’ in the title, description or tagged the subject appear.

  • The text within an article or publication are not searched. For full text searching of articles, use the site search.

Sort help

How are the results ordered?

The Sort by feature provides three options:

  • By date – sorts results by product release date starting with the most recent.
  • By relevance is only needed or beneficial when you use the search box and submit a search query. Results are ordered by a combination of where the search term appears in the content, e.g., if it appears in the title, it likely means the product is more relevant to your search; how up to date or new the content in the product is; how popular the product is; and other factors.
  • By title – sorts results alphabetically.

Sort help

How are the results ordered?

The Sort by feature provides four options:

  • By date – sorts results by product release date starting with the most recent.
  • By most popular – gives priority to results that are most frequently selected by users, followed by the most recent.
  • By relevance is only needed or beneficial when you use the search box and submit a search query. Results are ordered by a combination of where the search term appears in the content, e.g., if it appears in the title, it likely means the product is more relevant to your search; how up to date or new the content in the product is; how popular the product is; and other factors.
  • By title – sorts results alphabetically.