update Bujumbura values

[ruthmccabe]

…ources

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 93.33333% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 88.77%. Comparing base (e9664da) to head (31c59bf).
Report is 13 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
R/parameters.R	93.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #66      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.74%   88.77%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines        1679     1684       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits         1490     1495       +5     
  Misses        189      189              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lwhittles]

Suggested change

	p_SW <- 3852/(792503*0.5) ## key pops report, taken as median of Bujumbura Mairie in Figure 7
	p_poss_SW <- sum(N_ASW + N_CSW)/ sum(N_age)
	p_SW <- 3852 / (792503 * p_poss_SW) ## key pops report, taken as median of Bujumbura Mairie in Figure 7

This should be as a % of total pop right? we multiply by 0.5 above because the other figures are quoted as % of women engaging in SW
I think the suggestion above should make sure the total number of SW comes out at 3852 but please check!

[ruthmccabe]

When I run this it comes out as 3852 for ASWs + 1352 for CSWs = 5324 which is too high I think - should be 3852 overall no?

[ruthmccabe]

OK did some digging and I know why - we use the figure for Bujumbura Mairie for the SW prop but then the "total" bujumbura population also includes Isare. When I remove Isare this is all fine.
According to the KP document there are less SWs in Isare so we might have overinflated the value here, but I'm not sure how big a deal that is given the uncertainty in the SW size anyway @lwhittles