Skip to main content
Log in

Conducting a National Survey of Women’s Perinatal Experiences in Canada

Sampling Challenges

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In 1999, the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System of Health Canada decided to undertake a national survey of Canadian women’s experiences of their pregnancy, birth and postpartum care. The challenges encountered in selecting a representative sampling frame and developing a sound methodology for conducting a survey of Canadian women at six months after birth are addressed. We considered the advantages and disadvantages of six different sampling options. A sample based on the Census emerged as the optimal approach for providing the most reliable and representative sample.

Résumé

En 1999, les responsables du Système de surveillance périnatale de Santé Canada ont décidé d’entreprendre une enquête nationale sur l’expérience des Canadiennes relativement à leur grossesse, à leur accouchement et aux soins postnatals qu’elles ont reçus. Nous présentons ici les problèmes rencontrés à propos du choix d’une base d’échantillonnage représentative et de l’élaboration d’une méthode valable pour mener une enquête auprès de Canadiennes six mois après leur accouchement. Nous avons tenu compte des avantages et des inconvénients de six formules d’échantillonnage, et celle fondée sur le recensement nous a semblé la meilleure pour obtenir l’échantillon le plus fiable et le plus représentatif.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Health Canada. Canadian Perinatal Health Report, 2003. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Van Teijlingen ER, Rennie A-M, Mundley V, Graham W. The importance of conducting and reporting pilot studies: The example of the Scottish Births Survey. J Adv Nurs 2001;34:289–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fraser AM, Brockert JE, Ward RH. Association of young maternal age with adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 1995;332:1113–17.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Luo ZC, Kierans WJ, Wilkins R, Listong RM, Uh SH, Kramer MS. Infant mortality among First Nations versus non-First Nations in British Columbia: Temporal trends in rural versus urban areas, 1981–2000. Int J Epidemiol 2004;3(6):1252–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Women’s Health Office. Immigrant and Refugee Women’s Health Care. McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences Newsletter, March 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brown S, Lumley J. The 1993 Survey of Recent Mothers: Issues in survey design, analysis and influencing policy. Int J Qual Hlth Care 1997;9(4):265–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Health Canada. Exclusive Breastfeeding Duration–2004 Health Canada Recommendation. Available online at: https://doi.org/www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/nutrition/child-enfant/infant-nourisson/excl_bf_dur-dur_am_excl_e.html (Accessed September 26, 2005).

  8. Dzakpasu S, Chalmers B, for the Maternity Experiences Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System. Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey: Pilot Study. Birth 2005;32:34–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fair M, Cyr M. The Canadian Birth Data Base: A new research tool to study reproductive outcomes. Hlth Reports 1993;5(3):281–87.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bell-Syer S, Moffett J. Recruiting patients to randomized trials in primary care: Principles and case studies. Fam Practice 2000;17(20):187–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Peto V, Coulter A, Bond A. Factors affecting general practitioner’s recruitment of patients into a prospective study. Fam Practice 1993;10:207–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stilton B, Woffard J, Gosselink C, McClatchey M, Brelke K, Conbroy C, et al. Recruitment and retention of physicians for primary care research. J Community Health 2002;27(2):79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. de Witt N, Quantero D, Zuthoff P, Neumans M. Participation and successful patient recruitment in primary care. J Fam Practice - online. 2001;50(11):976.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chan B, Willett J. Factors influencing participation in obstetrics by obstetrician gynecologists. Obstet and Gynecol 2004;103(3):493–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Levitt C, Kaczorowski J. Provision of intra-partum care by GP/FP’s in Canada: An update. CMAJ 1999;160(6):815–16.

  16. Kepner C, Tregoe B. The New Rational Manager. Windsor: Kepner-Tregoe Publications, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Statistics Canada’s Quality Assurance Framework, 2002. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry, 2002. Catalogue No. 12-586-XIE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beverley Chalmers DSc(Med), PhD.

Additional information

For the Maternity Experiences Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System, Public Health Agency of Canada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chalmers, B., Dzakpasu, S., Heaman, M. et al. Conducting a National Survey of Women’s Perinatal Experiences in Canada. Can J Public Health 98, 281–283 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405403

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405403

MeSH terms

Navigation