Hi, I just discovered a problem with the IPT1 coverage indicator.
It was using "New ANC clients" as denominator, and was also set to be an annualised indicator. When using monthly service data as denominator, the indicator cannot be annualised. As a consequence the monthly values where 12 times higher than the correct value, since annualised indicators are multiplied by 12 for monthly values. That is why the IPT 1 coverage values were so high compared to the other ANC coverage indicators. The IPT 2 coverage indicator is using a different denominator, "Estimated number of deliveries", which is an annual value from the census. In this case it is correct to use "annualised". For now I have changed the denominator of the IPT 1 coverage indicator to also use "Estimated number of deliveries" as well, and to be annualised. I think IPT 1 and 2 coverage indicators should both use the same kind of denominator (either monthly value from service data or annual census value), but not sure which one is better. Wanjala, any comments on these formulas based on discussions in your indicator meetings? BTW, are the indicator formulas from that meeting (activity) finalised and ready to be included in the DHIS? Ola --------- ---------------------------------- Ola Hodne Titlestad (Mr) HISP Department of Informatics University of Oslo Mobile: +47 48069736 Home address: Vetlandsvn. 95B, 0685 Oslo, Norway. Googlemaps link<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Vetlandsvn.+95B,+0685+Oslo,+Norway>
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-kenya Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-kenya More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
