Att I - Slides for Focus Group

Data Linkage Focus Group

Date/Time

<number>

 

• Please let us know 

• • ◦Your name 

  • ◦Job title 

  • ◦Duties in relation to CODES/linkage 

  • ◦Organization 

• Please give your assent to be recorded 

<number>

Introductions

 

• Share objectives 

• Establish ground rules 

• Actual question and answer session 

Length of focus group – Two hours maximum

<number>

Agenda for Focus Group

 

• To gain a better understanding of the characteristics of successful linkage and analysis programs in your state. 

• To identify barriers and facilitators of current linkage and analysis programs in your state. 

• To learn more about the sustainability of linkage and analysis programs for the future. 

<number>

Objectives

 

• The focus group session will run for two hours and no longer.  

• There are six areas that will need to be covered.  We will have a separate person serve as time keeper for the session to help us stay on task. 

• No answer is a bad answer. 

• All participants will be asked to give some information. We will go around the room encouraging everyone to respond to each question in some manner. 

• All information and ideas will be recorded. 

• Any additional ground rules? 

<number>

Base Ground Rules

 

	State Department of Public Health (n)	*Transportation-related state agency (n)	**Other (n)
The coordination of your overall linkage/CODES project?	48% (12)	4% (1)	48% (12)
Your primary linkage/CODES project linkage?	60% (15)	4% (1)	36% (9)
Your primary linkage/CODES project data analysis?	56% (14)	4% (1)	40% (10)

<number>

Table of Agency Roles N=25

 

Organization	% states reporting organization as a member  (n)
State Department of Public Health	95% (20)
State Highway Safety Office	86% (18)
State Department of Transportation/Highways	85% (17)
State Department of Motor Vehicles	71% (15)
State Police	71% (15)
State Deparment of Public Safety	52% (11)
University	48% (10)
State level hospital association	33% (7)
State trauma board	29% (6)

<number>

Organizations on Board of Directors N=21

 

Agency	Percent of states funded by agency (n)
NHTSA	82% (18)
State Highway Safety Office	50% (11)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention	27% (6)
State Department of Public Health	18% (4)
State Department of Transportation/Highways	9% (2)
*Other	9% (2)

<number>

Funding Sources N=22

 

Agency	Interact N=25		Provide data N=24		Data requests N=23
	Freq	Occ	Freq	Occ	Freq	Occ
Traffic Records Coordinating Committee	84%	16%	21%	42%	17%	30%
Department of Public Health-Injury Surveillance	60%	32%	17%	46%	18%	45%
Strategic Highway Safety Plan	48%	28%	17%	21%	18%	26%
State Core Violence and Injury Prevention Program	48%	16%	17%	17%	17%	5%
NHTSA Regional Office	15%	36%	9%	13%	0%	13%

<number>

Interactions with other Agencies

 

Purpose	Use data N=22
	Ongoing basis/ several times a year	Occasionally	Rarely/ Never
To identify traffic safety problems	55% (12)	32% (7)	14% (3)
To support traffic safety decision makers	36% (8)	41% (9)	23% (5)
To educate the public	41% (9)	36% (8)	23% (5)
For use in legislative decision making	36% (8)	41% (9)	23% (5)

<number>

Frequency of using linked data by purpose

 

Software	Proficiency in linking			Proficiency analysis
	Expert	Int	Beg	Exp	Int	Beg
Linksolv	28%	22%	17%	8%	15%	15%
CODES2000	32%	36%	5%	13%	20%	13%
IVEWARE	5%	24%	19%	14%	29%	14%
SAS/ACCESS	64%	23%	0%	74%	26%	0%
EXCEL	44%	23%	0%	22%	0%	0%

<number>

State’s capability in software

 

Area		Percent
Data Preparation	Understanding the structure and content of crash data (n=22)	59% (13)
	Creating clean useable datasets for analysis: using linkage results (n=21)	57% (12)
Linkage	Linkage using CODES2000 (n=22)	77% (17)
	Linkage using Linksolv (n=20)	50% (10)
	Linkage using other linkage software (n=17)	18%   (3)
Analysis	Missing data imputation (n=22)	77% (17)
	Analyzing linked, imputed data (n=21)	71% (15)

<number>

Areas in which state received technical assistance or training

 

<number>

Lag times for receiving data

LibreOffice/6.4.7.2$Linux_X86_64 LibreOffice_project/639b8ac485750d5696d7590a72ef1b496725cfb5 % / /

;

;

;

 

 

• Data problems  

• • ◦quality 

  • ◦lack of identifier 

  • ◦prepping source data 

• Linkage software 

  • ◦buggy 

  • ◦hard to learn 

  • ◦lack of timely technical assistance 

• Staffing 

  • ◦hard to obtain  

  • ◦turnover 

• Funding issues 

• Computer capabilities 

  • ◦speed 

  • ◦memory, etc. 

• Competing priorities 

<number>

Challenges in linking data

 

• Data limitations 

• • ◦lacking variables of interest 

  • ◦converting linked data to analytical database 

  • ◦lack of data dictionary 

  • ◦data quality 

• Staffing  

  • ◦not enough time  

  • ◦high turnover  

  • ◦need high level staff 

• Funding issues 

• Statistical knowledge lacking 

• Lack understanding of databases 

• Training others to understand analysis 

• Competing priorities 

<number>

Challenges in analyzing data

 

File Type	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
File Modified	0000-00-00
File Created	0000-00-00

---

© 2025 OMB.report | Privacy Policy

---