IPUMS NHIS: descr: WLDAY2WK

IPUMS NHIS

NHIS
MEPS

NATIONAL HEALTH INTERVIEW SURVEY

Select samples

WLDAY2WK

Work loss days in past 2 weeks

Description

WLDAY2WK reports the number of days (from 0 to 14) that illness or injury kept an adult from work during the preceding two weeks. Interviewers showed respondents a hand calendar with the relevant two weeks, beginning with a Monday and ending with a Sunday, outlined in red.

Question Wording

The question was asked of all adults (age 17+ in 1968-1981, and age 18+ in 1982-1996), regardless of whether they were employed during the reference period. Analysts who wish to focus exclusively on working adults may further restrict the universe using EMPSTAT.

[show more]

In 1968-1981, the question was:

During the previous two weeks "how many days did illness or injury keep [person] from work? (For females): not counting work around the house."

In 1982-1996, the question was:

During the previous two weeks, "how many days did [person] miss more than half of the day from [his or her] job or business because of illness or injury?"

Related Variables[show more]

In 1997 forward, WLDAYR reports the number of days that illness or injury kept sample adults from work during the past 12 months.

In the original public use files, a value of 00 (none) was given for children, who were not asked about work loss days. The IPUMS NHIS version of this variable moves children into the NIU category for WLDAY2WK. The comparable variable measuring the effects of illness or injury on children during the preceding two weeks is SLDAY2WK, School loss days. Other variables providing insight into the effects of illness or injury in the preceding two weeks are RADAY2WK, Restricted activity days, and BDDAY2WK, Bed disability days.

Comparability

Along with a change in the universe, the question wording for WLDAY2WK changed in 1982.

[show more]

1968-1981

The question wording of WLDAY2WK depended on the sex of the subject. For men, the question was, "During those two weeks, how many days did illness or injury keep [person] from work?" For women, the question was, "Not counting work around the house, during those two weeks, how many days did illness or injury keep [person] from work?" While the question was probably intended to elicit information about absenteeism from paid employment due to illness or injury, the wording was somewhat ambiguous. Men were not directed to exclude work around the house; no guidance was provided on how to treat work days shortened by illness or injury; and some respondents may have treated other activities (e.g., attending college classes or searching for a job) as falling under the broad heading of "work."

1982-1996

Unlike 1968-1981, the question wording of WLDAY2WK did not depend on the sex of the person. Beginning in 1982, interviewers elicited information using more precise questions that were the same for males and females. Respondents were first asked, "During that 2-week period, did [person] miss any time from a job or business because of illness or injury?" If the answer was affirmative, interviewers asked the follow-up question, "During that 2-week period, how many days did [person] miss more than half of the day from [person's] job or business because of illness or injury?"

Because of these changes, researchers should exercise caution in comparing results for WLDAY2WK before and after 1982.

Loading...

Data Cart

Your data extract

Codes and Frequencies

Description

Comparability

Universe

Availability

Weights