WE MADE A MISTAKE! PLEASE USE THE REVISED DATA NOTE ON TRACKING ANEMIA IN INDIA 

Please click HERE to download PDF

During a post-publication check, we realized that we have made a few errors in our Data Note on ‘Tracking anemia and its determinants from 2006 to 2016 in India: Insights from the National Family Health Survey-4’. We apologize for it and have now corrected these errors.

This was an important learning process for us – and after realizing we had found an error in this, we went back to conduct further checks on our other data products like state coverage notes, maps, and profiles.  That took us a while!  We would like to assure our readers that everything is in place for those other knowledge products and that the map errors we identified were restricted to our data note on anemia.  The error arose because of the use of a different geographic identification variable for the districts.  Phew!

Here are the specific mistakes we found and have now corrected in our Data Note on anemia:

• In ‘Map 6: Anemia among men (20-49 years)’, the correct number of districts for anemia prevalence of

<25%                   -              is 434 in place of 409.

25% to <50%      -              is 199 in place of 224.

• In ‘Map 9: Percentage of women (15-49 years) who consumed dark green leafy vegetables (GLVs)’, the correct number of districts for anemia prevalence of

<25%                   -              is 125 in place of 129.

25% to <50%      -              is 158 in place of 142.

50% to <75%      -              is 271 in place of 259.

>=75%               -              is 86 in place of 110.

• In ‘Map 10: Percentage of women (15-49 years) who consumed fish or meat’, the correct number of districts for anemia prevalence of

<25%                   -              is 251 in place of 389.

25% to <50%      -              is 147 in place of 176.

50% to <75%      -              is 135 in place of 70.

>=75%               -              is 107 in place of 5.

• In Maps 1-18, there were erroneous color codes for a few districts, which have now been corrected.

Finding mistakes in data work is hard for those of us who pride ourselves on quality and accuracy, but we would be remiss if we did not communicate these with our readership and in public.  We realize some of our work goes far and wide, so please, if you have used or sent around this Data Note on anemia, we ask that you update your records and use this updated edition of the note.  Please discard the earlier version!