1. Implementing DDI in a Survey Organisation
10/05/2019
Implementing DDI in a Survey Organisation
3 December 2012

2. 10/05/2019
Contents
Background
Our aims
The transition

3. 10/05/2019
Background 1.

4. 10/05/2019
Background
NatCen Social Research is an independent social research organisation in the UK
Carry out large scale surveys from design to reporting
Health Survey for England and Scottish Health Survey
British Social Attitudes Survey
Growing Up in Scotland
English Longitudinal Study of Ageing
Understanding Society
Make data available for secondary analysis through the UK Data Service
Produce user documentation that allows data users to understand the data

5. Documentation User Guide
10/05/2019
Documentation
User Guide
Background to study
Sampling
Survey methodology
Weighting
Response rates
Documentation of survey instrument showing question text, answer categories, routing and variable name
Information on transformations carried out on the data, derived variables, recode
Dataset documentation – variable lists arranged by topic
(All documentation is provided as PDF files)

6. Documentation – other issues
10/05/2019
Documentation – other issues
Some studies involve collecting biomarkers (blood, saliva, urine), separate self-completion data
Longitudinal studies also need to document changes between waves
Other types of data collection, audio files, social media etc.
Currently this information is compiled as text from various sources
But all this is metadata and needs to be managed and made accessible

7. Current working patterns
10/05/2019
Current working patterns
Studies run by research groups within the organisation
Larger projects have data managers, in smaller projects, data management is done by researchers
Each group evolved their own way of producing documentation – often last thing done in the project
Metadata ‘hidden’ in text/pdf files, sometimes not easily found for re-use
After recent reorganisation we are reviewing how we do data management, including capturing and managing metadata

8. 10/05/2019
Our aims 2.

9. 10/05/2019
Aims
Move away from the situation where metadata ‘capture’ is done at the end of a study by someone who may not have been involved in the stages they are documenting
Metadata ‘capture’ will be done at the stage the information is first generated AND this should not be an extra burden for anyone
Final documentation will be produced using the existing metadata from each of the earlier stages

10. 10/05/2019
How will we do this
Not necessarily looking for an off the shelf complete study package
We want to:
exploit capacity of our existing software and processes to capture/export metadata
find opportunities to introduce new tools that enhance our current process

11. 10/05/2019
How will we do this
We believe that metadata tools are useful/acceptable if:
they provide a straightforward, structured way of capturing and communicating information
they offer some benefit at the capture stage
the information provided can be easily extracted later

12. 10/05/2019
Transition 3.
How do we get from where we are now to where we’d like to be

13. Existing flows (illustrative)
10/05/2019
Existing flows (illustrative)
CAPI
Blaise
Study design
Question design
Survey implementation
CAWI
Word
Word
Self completion
Word / pdf
Word, Blaise
Coding / editing
Data processing
SPSS
FW monitoring
Newfield
Data delivery
SPSS
Most projects this whole cycle.
1 study design (various, mainly word, some / xl) researchers->collaborators/clients
2. Q design (various – mostly word, some other – some copying from previous, some direct into blaise)
3. Implementation in some mode(s) (blaise / word->pdf)
4. Fw monitoring / reporting (newfield SQLs / xls / other)
5. Coding (blaise / qdcor)(word spec) also 1st stage cleaning / some DVs / reconciliation
6. Data processing (SPSS) 2nd stage cleaning / DVs / weights / labels
7 data delivery (SPSS / SAS / Stata)
8 archive (SPSS)
Documentation from all these places
Could add to this – project management, other things. Automatically
Up till recently have been thinking about CAI instrument and dataset as metadata source
Now looking at beginning of process and throughout the cycle
Documentation
Word / pdfD
Archive
SPSS
Other sources
Publications, citations, etc.

14. Stages where a new tool would be welcomed
10/05/2019
Stages where a new tool would be welcomed
Questionnaire design
Coding and editing
Project database
Stages where a new tool would be welcomed
Where it would provide a structure way of communicating information. Where there would be a tangible benefit to team AND where the information provided can be extracted as metadata.
Currently identified 3 possible ‘entry points’ DON’T TALK ABOUT THEM YET – NEXT 3 SLIDES
Q design
Coding/editing spec
Proj database / proj design initiation

15. Questionnaire design stage
10/05/2019
Questionnaire design stage
Researcher works with client to define and test questions
Researcher passes final question specification to programmer
Programmers would like a consistent structured way for this to happen.
Questionnaire design stage – communication between researcher and programmer
Researcher works with client to define and test questions or choose validated questions to reuse from other studies. Browser interface on our server for client to access???
Researcher lets programmer know which questions to add to CAPI programme or to reuse from other studies. Usually done by researcher sending Word draft and requesting changes by or Excel ‘log’. Varies across projects.
Programmers would like a consistent structured way for this to happen. Researcher types the text anyway. So ideal place to introduce software that allows question specification and can export DDI3 XML

16. 10/05/2019
Coding and edit
Researcher produces list of questions that will need coding with details and instructions
Could be replaced with a structured document
Coding and edit sta
Researcher produces list of questions that will need coding and provides code frames (or for standard questions like occupational coding, coding team have existing code frames.
Again currently done as Word document.
Could be replaced with a structured ‘document’ where field are completed by researcher and DDI3 XML exported
ge – communication between researcher, data manager, programmer and coding team

17. Project database – administration
10/05/2019
Project database – administration
Kept by our administrator, with basic information about each project
Fields could be added to provide a wider range of metadata
Project database – administration
Kept by our administrator. Basic information about each project. Project number, name, research director in charge, fieldwork manager, client.
SQL database ?
Fields could be added to provide a wider range of metadata – elements of project design
Could provide the basis for a metadata repository or feed into it.

18. 10/05/2019
Thank you
If you want further information or would like to contact the authors,
Joan Corbett
Senior Data Manager E.
Roger Stafford E.
Visit us online, natcen.ac.uk