Participation and Activity Limitation Survey 2006: Tables (part VI) - Technical notes
Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please "contact us" to request a format other than those available.
Derivation of variables on "help with everyday activities".
2001 and 2006: Table 1 to 5
Notice that the 2006 data regarding Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut have not been included in the following tables in order to maintain the comparability between these 2 years.
The Participation and activity limitation survey (PALS) respondents had to answer a series of questions that were used to determine if they were receiving help to accomplish some of their everyday activities because of their health condition. Respondents also had to indicate if they needed help for their everyday activities.
For these series of tables, we divided people that answered needed help for their everyday activities into three categories. The first category represents people that are receiving help, but need more. The second regroups people that are not receiving help but need some. These 2 groups represent people with unmet needs, i.e. partially or totally. Finally, the third category includes people that are receiving all the help needed. Therefore, this last category represents those who have needs that are entirely satisfied.
In the survey, help with everyday activities included the following 9 activities:
(1) Meal preparation;
(2) Everyday housework (e.g. dusting and tidying up);
(3) Heavy household chores (e.g. spring cleaning and yard work);
(4) Appointments (getting to appointments, running errands and grocery shopping);
(5) Looking after personal finances (e.g. making bank transactions or paying bills);
(6) Child care;
(7) Personal care;
(8) Specialized nursing care;
(9) Moving about inside the home/residence.
In order to determine how persons with a limitation have access to the help they needed, the information concerning help received and help needed have been combined into a derived variable (we used different variables than those that were used in the 2001 publication).
RNHELP has been developed by using the following 2 derived variables:
AHEA_D_REC: Comes from the questions: Do you usually receive help with… each of the everyday activities.
AHEA_D_ND: Comes from the following questions: Do you need additional help with… each of the everyday activities.
If AHEA_D_REC = 1 (Yes) & AHEA_D_ND =1 (Yes) then RNHELP=1;
If AHEA_D_REC =2 (No) & AHEA_D_ND=1 (Yes) then RNHELP=2;
If AHEA_D_REC =1 (Yes) & AHEA_D_ND=2 (No) then RNHELP=3.
RNHELP= 1 - Receiving help but needing more;
RNHELP= 2 - Not receiving help but needing some;
RNHELP= 3 - Receiving all help needed.
The sum of the three is then equal to the population with needs.
Part devoted only to 2006 data: Tables 6 and 7
Because the structure of questions were modified in 2006, comparison of this section with 2001 data was impossible at the analytic level. Furthermore, the 2 tables in this section included Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut.
Unmet need (Table 6)
We ask respondents to choose amongst the 9 reasons proposed, indicating why they did not receive the help that they needed, for each of the everyday activities they identified.
List of possible reasons that were offer to the respondents:
(1) You applied for home care and were turned down;
(2) You are presently on a waiting list;
(3) It is not covered by insurance;
(4) It is too expensive;
(5) You do not know where to obtain it;
(6) Help is not available in the area;
(7) Informal help, e.g., from family or friends, is not available;
(8) Another reason (specify);
(9) None selected.
Help providers
Group under 5 categories :
The respondent had to identify the person that was helping him. He could identify up to 3 help providers.
Subsequently, we asked the respondent what their relationship was with the help provider. Here are the possible relationships:
11 Spouse/partner of respondent
12 Ex-spouse/Ex-partner of respondent
13 Son of respondent
14 Daughter of respondent
15 Father of respondent
16 Mother of respondent
17 Brother of respondent
18 Sister of respondent
20 Grandson of respondent
21 Granddaughter of respondent
22 Grandfather of respondent
23 Grandmother of respondent
30 Son-in-law of respondent
31 Daughter-in-law of respondent
32 Father-in-law of respondent
33 Mother-in-law of respondent
34 Brother-in-law of respondent
35 Sister-in-law of respondent
40 Nephew of respondent
41 Niece of respondent
42 Uncle of respondent
43 Aunt of respondent
44 Cousin of respondent
70 Same sex partner of respondent
80 Close friend of respondent
81 Neighbor of respondent
82 Co-worker of respondent
83 Non-Governmental Organization (Includes clients and patients of self-employed professionals)
84 Paid employee/worker of respondent
85 Other (Do not include organizations here)
86 Governmental (All levels and taxes)
Subsequently, we have grouped together these choices under 5 large themes or categories: Family, Friends, Organisations, Employees and Other and we created our derived variables:
Family: If Caregiver = 11 or 12 or 13 or 14 or 15 or 16 or 17 or 18 or 20 or 21 or 22 or 23 or 30 or 31 or 32 or 33 or 34 or 35 or 40 or 41 or 42 or 43 or 44 or 70, then help provider is Family;
Friend: If Caregiver = 80 or 81 or 82, then help provider is Friend;
Employee: If Caregiver = 84, then help provider is Employee;
Organisation: If Caregiver = 83 or 86, then help provider is Organisation;
Other: If Caregiver = 85, then help provider is Other;
- Date modified: