Dataset for Linear Regression with two Independent variables and one Dependent variable. Focused on Testing, Visualization and Statistical Analysis. The dataset is synthetic and contains 100 instances.

This paper explores a unique dataset of all the SET ratings provided by students of one university in Poland at the end of the winter semester of the 2020/2021 academic year. The SET questionnaire used by this university is presented in Appendix 1. The dataset is unique for several reasons. It covers all SET surveys filled by students in all fields and levels of study offered by the university. In the period analysed, the university was entirely in the online regime amid the Covid-19 pandemic. While the expected learning outcomes formally have not been changed, the online mode of study could have affected the grading policy and could have implications for some of the studied SET biases. This Covid-19 effect is captured by econometric models and discussed in the paper. The average SET scores were matched with the characteristics of the teacher for degree, seniority, gender, and SET scores in the past six semesters; the course characteristics for time of day, day of the week, course type, course breadth, class duration, and class size; the attributes of the SET survey responses as the percentage of students providing SET feedback; and the grades of the course for the mean, standard deviation, and percentage failed. Data on course grades are also available for the previous six semesters. This rich dataset allows many of the biases reported in the literature to be tested for and new hypotheses to be formulated, as presented in the introduction section. The unit of observation or the single row in the data set is identified by three parameters: teacher unique id (j), course unique id (k) and the question number in the SET questionnaire (n ϵ {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9} ). It means that for each pair (j,k), we have nine rows, one for each SET survey question, or sometimes less when students did not answer one of the SET questions at all. For example, the dependent variable SET_score_avg(j,k,n) for the triplet (j=Calculus, k=John Smith, n=2) is calculated as the average of all Likert-scale answers to question nr 2 in the SET survey distributed to all students that took the Calculus course taught by John Smith. The data set has 8,015 such observations or rows. The full list of variables or columns in the data set included in the analysis is presented in the attached filesection. Their description refers to the triplet (teacher id = j, course id = k, question number = n). When the last value of the triplet (n) is dropped, it means that the variable takes the same values for all n ϵ {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}.Two attachments:- word file with variables description- Rdata file with the data set (for R language).Appendix 1. Appendix 1. The SET questionnaire was used for this paper. Evaluation survey of the teaching staff of [university name] Please, complete the following evaluation form, which aims to assess the lecturer’s performance. Only one answer should be indicated for each question. The answers are coded in the following way: 5- I strongly agree; 4- I agree; 3- Neutral; 2- I don’t agree; 1- I strongly don’t agree. Questions 1 2 3 4 5 I learnt a lot during the course. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I think that the knowledge acquired during the course is very useful. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The professor used activities to make the class more engaging. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ If it was possible, I would enroll for the course conducted by this lecturer again. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The classes started on time. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The lecturer always used time efficiently. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The lecturer delivered the class content in an understandable and efficient way. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The lecturer was available when we had doubts. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The lecturer treated all students equally regardless of their race, background and ethnicity. ○ ○

This individual (part 3a) dataset is displayed by statistical area 1 geography and contains information on:

• Work and labour force status

• Status in employment

• Occupation – major group, by usual residence address

• Occupation – major group, by workplace address*

• Industry (division), by usual residence address

• Industry (division), by workplace address*

* Workplace address is coded from information supplied by respondents about their workplaces. Where respondents do not supply sufficient information, their responses are coded to ‘not further defined’. The statistical area 1 dataset for 2018 Census excludes these ‘not further defined’ areas.

This dataset contains counts at statistical area 1 for selected variables from the 2018, 2013, and 2006 censuses. The geography corresponds to 2018 boundaries.

The data uses fixed random rounding to protect confidentiality. Some counts of less than 6 are suppressed according to 2018 confidentiality rules. Values of ‘-999’ indicate suppressed data.

For further information on this dataset please refer to the Statistical area 1 dataset for 2018 Census webpage - footnotes for individual part 3a, Excel workbooks, and CSV files are available to download. Data quality ratings for 2018 Census variables, summarising the quality rating and priority levels for 2018 Census variables, are available.

For information on the statistical area 1 geography please refer to the Statistical standard for geographic areas 2018.

No description found

Abstract

The Afrobarometer is a comparative series of public attitude surveys that assess African citizen's attitudes to democracy and governance, markets, and civil society, among other topics.

The 12 country datasetis a combined dataset for the 12 African countries surveyed during round 1 of the survey, conducted between 1999-2000 (Botswana, Ghana, Lesotho, Mali, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe), plus data from the old Southern African Democracy Barometer, and similar surveys done in West and East Africa.

Geographic coverage

The Round 1 Afrobarometer surveys have national coverage for the following countries: Botswana, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

The sample universe for Afrobarometer surveys includes all citizens of voting age within the country. In other words, we exclude anyone who is not a citizen and anyone who has not attained this age (usually 18 years) on the day of the survey. Also excluded are areas determined to be either inaccessible or not relevant to the study, such as those experiencing armed conflict or natural disasters, as well as national parks and game reserves. As a matter of practice, we have also excluded people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories and persons in prisons or nursing homes.

What to do about areas experiencing political unrest? On the one hand we want to include them because they are politically important. On the other hand, we want to avoid stretching out the fieldwork over many months while we wait for the situation to settle down. It was agreed at the 2002 Cape Town Planning Workshop that it is difficult to come up with a general rule that will fit all imaginable circumstances. We will therefore make judgments on a case-by-case basis on whether or not to proceed with fieldwork or to exclude or substitute areas of conflict. National Partners are requested to consult Core Partners on any major delays, exclusions or substitutions of this sort.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Afrobarometer uses national probability samples designed to meet the following criteria. Samples are designed to generate a sample that is a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of being selected for an interview. They achieve this by:

• using random selection methods at every stage of sampling; • sampling at all stages with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible to ensure that larger (i.e., more populated) geographic units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample.

The sampling universe normally includes all citizens age 18 and older. As a standard practice, we exclude people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories, patients in hospitals, and persons in prisons or nursing homes. Occasionally, we must also exclude people living in areas determined to be inaccessible due to conflict or insecurity. Any such exclusion is noted in the technical information report (TIR) that accompanies each data set.

Sample size and design Samples usually include either 1,200 or 2,400 cases. A randomly selected sample of n=1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than +/-2.8% with a confidence level of 95 percent. With a sample size of n=2400, the margin of error decreases to +/-2.0% at 95 percent confidence level.

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample. Specifically, we first stratify the sample according to the main sub-national unit of government (state, province, region, etc.) and by urban or rural location.

Area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. Afrobarometer occasionally purposely oversamples certain populations that are politically significant within a country to ensure that the size of the sub-sample is large enough to be analysed. Any oversamples is noted in the TIR.

Sample stages Samples are drawn in either four or five stages:

Stage 1: In rural areas only, the first stage is to draw secondary sampling units (SSUs). SSUs are not used in urban areas, and in some countries they are not used in rural areas. See the TIR that accompanies each data set for specific details on the sample in any given country. Stage 2: We randomly select primary sampling units (PSU). Stage 3: We then randomly select sampling start points. Stage 4: Interviewers then randomly select households. Stage 5: Within the household, the interviewer randomly selects an individual respondent. Each interviewer alternates in each household between interviewing a man and interviewing a woman to ensure gender balance in the sample.

To keep the costs and logistics of fieldwork within manageable limits, eight interviews are clustered within each selected PSU.

Data weights For some national surveys, data are weighted to correct for over or under-sampling or for household size. "Withinwt" should be turned on for all national -level descriptive statistics in countries that contain this weighting variable. It is included as the last variable in the data set, with details described in the codebook. For merged data sets, "Combinwt" should be turned on for cross-national comparisons of descriptive statistics. Note: this weighting variable standardizes each national sample as if it were equal in size.

Further information on sampling protocols, including full details of the methodologies used for each stage of sample selection, can be found at https://afrobarometer.org/surveys-and-methods/sampling-principles

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Because Afrobarometer Round 1 emerged out of several different survey research efforts, survey instruments were not standardized across all countries, there are a number of features of the questionnaires that should be noted, as follows: • In most cases, the data set only includes those questions/variables that were asked in nine or more countries. Complete Round 1 data sets for each individual country have already been released, and are available from ICPSR or from the Afrobarometer website at www.afrobarometer.org. • In the seven countries that originally formed the Southern Africa Barometer (SAB) - Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe - a standardized questionnaire was used, so question wording and response categories are the generally the same for all of these countries. The questionnaires in Mali and Tanzania were also essentially identical (in the original English version). Ghana, Uganda and Nigeria each had distinct questionnaires. • This merged dataset combines, into a single variable, responses from across these different countries where either identical or very similar questions were used, or where conceptually equivalent questions can be found in at least nine of the different countries. For each variable, the exact question text from each of the countries or groups of countries ("SAB" refers to the Southern Africa Barometer countries) is listed. • Response options also varied on some questions, and where applicable, these differences are also noted.

IntroductionThere is a need to develop harmonized procedures and a Minimum Data Set (MDS) for cross-border Multi Casualty Incidents (MCI) in medical emergency scenarios to ensure appropriate management of such incidents, regardless of place, language and internal processes of the institutions involved. That information should be capable of real-time communication to the command-and-control chain. It is crucial that the models adopted are interoperable between countries so that the rights of patients to cross-border healthcare are fully respected.ObjectiveTo optimize management of cross-border Multi Casualty Incidents through a Minimum Data Set collected and communicated in real time to the chain of command and control for each incident. To determine the degree of agreement among experts.MethodWe used the modified Delphi method supplemented with the Utstein technique to reach consensus among experts. In the first phase, the minimum requirements of the project, the profile of the experts who were to participate, the basic requirements of each variable chosen and the way of collecting the data were defined by providing bibliography on the subject. In the second phase, the preliminary variables were grouped into 6 clusters, the objectives, the characteristics of the variables and the logistics of the work were approved. Several meetings were held to reach a consensus to choose the MDS variables using a Modified Delphi technique. Each expert had to score each variable from 1 to 10. Non-voting variables were eliminated, and the round of voting ended. In the third phase, the Utstein Style was applied to discuss each group of variables and choose the ones with the highest consensus. After several rounds of discussion, it was agreed to eliminate the variables with a score of less than 5 points. In phase four, the researchers submitted the variables to the external experts for final assessment and validation before their use in the simulations. Data were analysed with SPSS Statistics (IBM, version 2) software.ResultsSix data entities with 31 sub-entities were defined, generating 127 items representing the final MDS regarded as essential for incident management. The level of consensus for the choice of items was very high and was highest for the category ‘Incident’ with an overall kappa of 0.7401 (95% CI 0.1265–0.5812, p 0.000), a good level of consensus in the Landis and Koch model. The items with the greatest degree of consensus at ten were those relating to location, type of incident, date, time and identification of the incident. All items met the criteria set, such as digital collection and real-time transmission to the chain of command and control.ConclusionsThis study documents the development of a MDS through consensus with a high degree of agreement among a group of experts of different nationalities working in different fields. All items in the MDS were digitally collected and forwarded in real time to the chain of command and control. This tool has demonstrated its validity in four large cross-border simulations involving more than eight countries and their emergency services.

A critical issue in intelligent building control is detecting energy consumption anomalies based on intelligent device status data. The building field is plagued by energy consumption anomalies caused by a number of factors, many of which are associated with one another in apparent temporal relationships. For the detection of abnormalities, most traditional detection methods rely solely on a single variable of energy consumption data and its time series changes. Therefore, they are unable to examine the correlation between the multiple characteristic factors that affect energy consumption anomalies and their relationship in time. The outcomes of anomaly detection are one-sided. To address the above problems, this paper proposes an anomaly detection method based on multivariate time series. Firstly, in order to extract the correlation between different feature variables affecting energy consumption, this paper introduces a graph convolutional network to build an anomaly detection framework. Secondly, as different feature variables have different influences on each other, the framework is enhanced by a graph attention mechanism so that time series features with higher influence on energy consumption are given more attention weights, resulting in better anomaly detection of building energy consumption. Finally, the effectiveness of this paper’s method and existing methods for detecting energy consumption anomalies in smart buildings are compared using standard data sets. The experimental results show that the model has better detection accuracy.

Dataset Description

This dataset contains a simulated collection of 1,00000 patient records designed to explore hypertension management in resource-constrained settings. It provides comprehensive data for analyzing blood pressure control rates, associated risk factors, and complications. The dataset is ideal for predictive modelling, risk analysis, and treatment optimization, offering insights into demographic, clinical, and treatment-related variables.

Dataset Structure

1. Dataset Volume

   • Size: 10,000 records. • Features: 19 variables, categorized into Sociodemographic, Clinical, Complications, and Treatment/Control groups.

2. Variables and Categories

A. Sociodemographic Variables

1. Age:
•  Continuous variable in years.
•  Range: 18–80 years.
•  Mean ± SD: 49.37 ± 12.81.
2. Sex:
•  Categorical variable.
•  Values: Male, Female.
3. Education:
•  Categorical variable.
•  Values: No Education, Primary, Secondary, Higher Secondary, Graduate, Post-Graduate, Madrasa.
4. Occupation:
•  Categorical variable.
•  Values: Service, Business, Agriculture, Retired, Unemployed, Housewife.
5. Monthly Income:
•  Categorical variable in Bangladeshi Taka.
•  Values: <5000, 5001–10000, 10001–15000, >15000.
6. Residence:
•  Categorical variable.
•  Values: Urban, Sub-urban, Rural.

B. Clinical Variables

7. Systolic BP:
•  Continuous variable in mmHg.
•  Range: 100–200 mmHg.
•  Mean ± SD: 140 ± 15 mmHg.
8. Diastolic BP:
•  Continuous variable in mmHg.
•  Range: 60–120 mmHg.
•  Mean ± SD: 90 ± 10 mmHg.
9. Elevated Creatinine:
•  Binary variable (\geq 1.4 \, \text{mg/dL}).
•  Values: Yes, No.
10. Diabetes Mellitus:
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.
11. Family History of CVD:
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.
12. Elevated Cholesterol:
•  Binary variable (\geq 200 \, \text{mg/dL}).
•  Values: Yes, No.
13. Smoking:
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.

C. Complications

14. LVH (Left Ventricular Hypertrophy):
•  Binary variable (ECG diagnosis).
•  Values: Yes, No.
15. IHD (Ischemic Heart Disease):
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.
16. CVD (Cerebrovascular Disease):
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.
17. Retinopathy:
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Yes, No.

D. Treatment and Control

18. Treatment:
•  Categorical variable indicating therapy type.
•  Values: Single Drug, Combination Drugs.
19. Control Status:
•  Binary variable.
•  Values: Controlled, Uncontrolled.

Dataset Applications

1. Predictive Modeling:
•  Develop models to predict blood pressure control status using demographic and clinical data.
2. Risk Analysis:
•  Identify significant factors influencing hypertension control and complications.
3. Severity Scoring:
•  Quantify hypertension severity for patient risk stratification.
4. Complications Prediction:
•  Forecast complications like IHD, LVH, and CVD for early intervention.
5. Treatment Guidance:
•  Analyze therapy efficacy to recommend optimal treatment strategies.

Descriptive statistics and correlations among the study variables in Study 1.

This dataset presents a rich collection of physicochemical parameters from 147 reservoirs distributed across the conterminous U.S. One hundred and eight of the reservoirs were selected using a statistical survey design and can provide unbiased inferences to the condition of all U.S. reservoirs. These data could be of interest to local water management specialists or those assessing the ecological condition of reservoirs at the national scale. These data have been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. This dataset is not publicly accessible because: It is too large. It can be accessed through the following means: https://portal-s.edirepository.org/nis/mapbrowse?scope=edi&identifier=2033&revision=1. Format: This dataset presents water quality and related variables for 147 reservoirs distributed across the U.S. Water quality parameters were measured during the summers of 2016, 2018, and 2020 – 2023. Measurements include nutrient concentration, algae abundance, dissolved oxygen concentration, and water temperature, among many others. Dataset includes links to other national and global scale data sets that provide additional variables.

Context

A multivariate time series has more than one time-dependent variable. Each variable depends not only on its past values but also has some dependency on other variables.

We have accumulated property sales data for the 2007-2019 period for one specific region. The data contains sales prices for houses and units with 1,2,3,4,5 bedrooms. These are the cross-depended variables. The chart illustrates these variables for houses:

Raw Data: https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F2858272%2F94d5f8d79c60d468f1c50b29d6ae7527%2Fdownload.png?generation=1565753055319944&alt=media" alt="">

Data re-sampled at quarterly intervals using a median aggregator: https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F2858272%2Fb8b5c3bee9442a25cb71659176ca8d20%2Fdownload1.png?generation=1565753032380625&alt=media" alt="">

The data can be summarised as:

• date of sale
• price
• property type: unit or house
• number of bedrooms: 1,2,3,4,5 (these are the multi-variables we are targeting)
• 4digit postcode (this is for reference only, we don't expect that this data point will be useful)

Content

• raw_sales.csv contains house sales data ranging from 2007-2019
• ma_lga_12345.csv transforms the raw sales data, re-sampling it at quarterly intervals with median price aggregation and step 4 moving average smoothing

Inspiration

What model would you use to forecast 8 future quarters for each property type and # of bedrooms? Would the traditional multi-variate forecasting models from the VARMAX family or multi-variate regression outperform LSTM, DLM, RNN networks for this problem?

Dataset contains counts and measures for individuals from the 2013, 2018, and 2023 Censuses. Data is available by statistical area 2.

​

The variables included in this dataset are for the census usually resident population count (unless otherwise stated). All data is for level 1 of the classification (unless otherwise stated).

​

The variables for part 1 of the dataset are:

• Census usually resident population count
• Census night population count
• Age (5-year groups)
• Age (life cycle groups)
• Median age
• Birthplace (NZ born/overseas born)
• Birthplace (broad geographic areas)
• Ethnicity (total responses) for level 1 and ‘Other Ethnicity’ grouped by ‘New Zealander’ and ‘Other Ethnicity nec’
• Māori descent indicator
• Languages spoken (total responses)
• Official language indicator
• Gender
• Cisgender and transgender status – census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Sex at birth
• Rainbow/LGBTIQ+ indicator for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Sexual identity for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Legally registered relationship status for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Partnership status in current relationship for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Number of children born for the sex at birth female census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Average number of children born for the sex at birth female census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Religious affiliation (total responses)
• Cigarette smoking behaviour for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
• Disability indicator for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty communicating for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty hearing for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty remembering or concentrating for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty seeing for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty walking for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over
• Difficulty washing for the census usually resident population count aged 5 years and over.

​

Download lookup file for part 1 from Stats NZ ArcGIS Online or embedded attachment in Stats NZ geographic data service. Download data table (excluding the geometry column for CSV files) using the instructions in the Koordinates help guide.

​

Footnotes

Te Whata

Under the Mana Ōrite Relationship Agreement, Te Kāhui Raraunga (TKR) will be publishing Māori descent and iwi affiliation data from the 2023 Census in partnership with Stats NZ. This will be available on Te Whata, a TKR platform.

​

Geographical boundaries

Statistical standard for geographic areas 2023 (updated December 2023) has information about geographic boundaries as of 1 January 2023. Address data from 2013 and 2018 Censuses was updated to be consistent with the 2023 areas. Due to the changes in area boundaries and coding methodologies, 2013 and 2018 counts published in 2023 may be slightly different to those published in 2013 or 2018.

​

Subnational census usually resident population

The census usually resident population count of an area (subnational count) is a count of all people who usually live in that area and were present in New Zealand on census night. It excludes visitors from overseas, visitors from elsewhere in New Zealand, and residents temporarily overseas on census night. For example, a person who usually lives in Christchurch city and is visiting Wellington city on census night will be included in the census usually resident population count of Christchurch city.

​

Population counts

Stats NZ publishes a number of different population counts, each using a different definition and methodology. Population statistics – user guide has more information about different counts.

​

Caution using time series

Time series data should be interpreted with care due to changes in census methodology and differences in response rates between censuses. The 2023 and 2018 Censuses used a combined census methodology (using census responses and administrative data), while the 2013 Census used a full-field enumeration methodology (with no use of administrative data).

​

Study participation time series

In the 2013 Census study participation was only collected for the census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over.

​

About the 2023 Census dataset

For information on the 2023 dataset see Using a combined census model for the 2023 Census. We combined data from the census forms with administrative data to create the 2023 Census dataset, which meets Stats NZ's quality criteria for population structure information. We added real data about real people to the dataset where we were confident the people who hadn’t completed a census form (which is known as admin enumeration) will be counted. We also used data from the 2018 and 2013 Censuses, administrative data sources, and statistical imputation methods to fill in some missing characteristics of people and dwellings.

​

Data quality

The quality of data in the 2023 Census is assessed using the quality rating scale and the quality assurance framework to determine whether data is fit for purpose and suitable for release. Data quality assurance in the 2023 Census has more information.

​

Concept descriptions and quality ratings

Data quality ratings for 2023 Census variables has additional details about variables found within totals by topic, for example, definitions and data quality.

​

Disability indicator

This data should not be used as an official measure of disability prevalence. Disability prevalence estimates are only available from the 2023 Household Disability Survey. Household Disability Survey 2023: Final content has more information about the survey.

Activity limitations are measured using the Washington Group Short Set (WGSS). The WGSS asks about six basic activities that a person might have difficulty with: seeing, hearing, walking or climbing stairs, remembering or concentrating, washing all over or dressing, and communicating. A person was classified as disabled in the 2023 Census if there was at least one of these activities that they had a lot of difficulty with or could not do at all.

​

Using data for good

Stats NZ expects that, when working with census data, it is done so with a positive purpose, as outlined in the Māori Data Governance Model (Data Iwi Leaders Group, 2023). This model states that "data should support transformative outcomes and should uplift and strengthen our relationships with each other and with our environments. The avoidance of harm is the minimum expectation for data use. Māori data should also contribute to iwi and hapū tino rangatiratanga”.

​

Confidentiality

The 2023 Census confidentiality rules have been applied to 2013, 2018, and 2023 data. These rules protect the confidentiality of individuals, families, households, dwellings, and undertakings in 2023 Census data. Counts are calculated using fixed random rounding to base 3 (FRR3) and suppression of ‘sensitive’ counts less than six, where tables report multiple geographic variables and/or small populations. Individual figures may not always sum to stated totals. Applying confidentiality rules to 2023 Census data and summary of changes since 2018 and 2013 Censuses has more information about 2023 Census confidentiality rules.

​

Measures

Measures like averages, medians, and other quantiles are calculated from unrounded counts, with input noise added to or subtracted from each contributing value during measures calculations. Averages and medians based on less than six units (e.g. individuals, dwellings, households, families, or extended families) are suppressed. This suppression threshold changes for other quantiles. Where the cells have been suppressed, a placeholder value has been used.

​

Percentages

To calculate percentages, divide the figure for the category of interest by the figure for 'Total stated' where this applies.

​

Symbol

-997 Not available

-999 Confidential

​

Inconsistencies in definitions

Please note that there may be differences in definitions between census classifications and those used for other data collections.

Title: Kidney Disease Dataset

Description: This dataset contains synthetic data related to kidney disease patients. It was created for educational and research purposes and does not represent real patient data. The dataset includes various features related to the patients' demographics, medical history, and treatment information.

Features: 1. Patient_ID: Unique identifier for each patient. 2. Age: Age of the patient. 3. Gender: Gender of the patient (Male or Female). 4. Serum_Creatinine: Serum creatinine level in mg/dL, a measure of kidney function. 5. Blood_Pressure: Systolic blood pressure in mmHg. 6. Diabetes: Binary variable (0 or 1) indicating whether the patient has diabetes (0 = No, 1 = Yes). 7. Days_In_Hospital: Number of days the patient spent in the hospital. 8. Received_Treatment: Binary variable (0 or 1) indicating whether the patient received treatment (0 = No, 1 = Yes). 9. Deaths: Binary variable (0 or 1) indicating whether the patient died (0 = No, 1 = Yes). 10. City: The city where the patient is located.

Use Case: This dataset can be used for educational purposes to explore various data analysis and machine learning techniques. Researchers can also use it to develop and test predictive models for kidney disease outcomes based on patient information.

Disclaimer: This dataset is entirely synthetic and generated for educational and research purposes only. It does not represent real-world patient data, and any resemblance to real patients or individuals is purely coincidental. Please use this dataset responsibly and ensure compliance with ethical guidelines and privacy regulations when using it for any analysis or research.

Feel free to customize this description according to your specific dataset and analysis. Ensure to provide accurate and clear information to Kaggle users, explaining the purpose and context of the dataset to avoid any confusion.

Abstract

The harmonized data set on health, created and published by the ERF, is a subset of Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012. It was derived from the household, individual and health modules, collected in the context of the above mentioned survey. The sample was then used to create a harmonized health survey, comparable with the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2007 micro data set.

----> Overview of the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012:

Iraq is considered a leader in household expenditure and income surveys where the first was conducted in 1946 followed by surveys in 1954 and 1961. After the establishment of Central Statistical Organization, household expenditure and income surveys were carried out every 3-5 years in (1971/ 1972, 1976, 1979, 1984/ 1985, 1988, 1993, 2002 / 2007). Implementing the cooperation between CSO and WB, Central Statistical Organization (CSO) and Kurdistan Region Statistics Office (KRSO) launched fieldwork on IHSES on 1/1/2012. The survey was carried out over a full year covering all governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

The survey has six main objectives. These objectives are:

1. Provide data for poverty analysis and measurement and monitor, evaluate and update the implementation Poverty Reduction National Strategy issued in 2009.
2. Provide comprehensive data system to assess household social and economic conditions and prepare the indicators related to the human development.
3. Provide data that meet the needs and requirements of national accounts.
4. Provide detailed indicators on consumption expenditure that serve making decision related to production, consumption, export and import.
5. Provide detailed indicators on the sources of households and individuals income.
6. Provide data necessary for formulation of a new consumer price index number.

The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Office were then harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, to create a comparable version with the 2006/2007 Household Socio Economic Survey in Iraq. Harmonization at this stage only included unifying variables' names, labels and some definitions. See: Iraq 2007 & 2012- Variables Mapping & Availability Matrix.pdf provided in the external resources for further information on the mapping of the original variables on the harmonized ones, in addition to more indications on the variables' availability in both survey years and relevant comments.

Geographic coverage

National coverage: Covering a sample of urban, rural and metropolitan areas in all the governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

Analysis unit

1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.

Universe

The survey was carried out over a full year covering all governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

----> Design:

Sample size was (25488) household for the whole Iraq, 216 households for each district of 118 districts, 2832 clusters each of which includes 9 households distributed on districts and governorates for rural and urban.

----> Sample frame:

Listing and numbering results of 2009-2010 Population and Housing Survey were adopted in all the governorates including Kurdistan Region as a frame to select households, the sample was selected in two stages: Stage 1: Primary sampling unit (blocks) within each stratum (district) for urban and rural were systematically selected with probability proportional to size to reach 2832 units (cluster). Stage two: 9 households from each primary sampling unit were selected to create a cluster, thus the sample size of total survey clusters was 25488 households distributed on the governorates, 216 households in each district.

----> Sampling Stages:

In each district, the sample was selected in two stages: Stage 1: based on 2010 listing and numbering frame 24 sample points were selected within each stratum through systematic sampling with probability proportional to size, in addition to the implicit breakdown urban and rural and geographic breakdown (sub-district, quarter, street, county, village and block). Stage 2: Using households as secondary sampling units, 9 households were selected from each sample point using systematic equal probability sampling. Sampling frames of each stages can be developed based on 2010 building listing and numbering without updating household lists. In some small districts, random selection processes of primary sampling may lead to select less than 24 units therefore a sampling unit is selected more than once , the selection may reach two cluster or more from the same enumeration unit when it is necessary.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

----> Preparation:

The questionnaire of 2006 survey was adopted in designing the questionnaire of 2012 survey on which many revisions were made. Two rounds of pre-test were carried out. Revision were made based on the feedback of field work team, World Bank consultants and others, other revisions were made before final version was implemented in a pilot survey in September 2011. After the pilot survey implemented, other revisions were made in based on the challenges and feedbacks emerged during the implementation to implement the final version in the actual survey.

----> Questionnaire Parts:

The questionnaire consists of four parts each with several sections: Part 1: Socio – Economic Data: - Section 1: Household Roster - Section 2: Emigration - Section 3: Food Rations - Section 4: housing - Section 5: education - Section 6: health - Section 7: Physical measurements - Section 8: job seeking and previous job

Part 2: Monthly, Quarterly and Annual Expenditures: - Section 9: Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 30 days). - Section 10 : Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 90 days). - Section 11: Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 12 months). - Section 12: Expenditures on Non-food Frequent Food Stuff and Commodities (7 days). - Section 12, Table 1: Meals Had Within the Residential Unit. - Section 12, table 2: Number of Persons Participate in the Meals within Household Expenditure Other Than its Members.

Part 3: Income and Other Data: - Section 13: Job - Section 14: paid jobs - Section 15: Agriculture, forestry and fishing - Section 16: Household non – agricultural projects - Section 17: Income from ownership and transfers - Section 18: Durable goods - Section 19: Loans, advances and subsidies - Section 20: Shocks and strategy of dealing in the households - Section 21: Time use - Section 22: Justice - Section 23: Satisfaction in life - Section 24: Food consumption during past 7 days

Part 4: Diary of Daily Expenditures: Diary of expenditure is an essential component of this survey. It is left at the household to record all the daily purchases such as expenditures on food and frequent non-food items such as gasoline, newspapers…etc. during 7 days. Two pages were allocated for recording the expenditures of each day, thus the roster will be consists of 14 pages.

Cleaning operations

----> Raw Data:

Data Editing and Processing: To ensure accuracy and consistency, the data were edited at the following stages: 1. Interviewer: Checks all answers on the household questionnaire, confirming that they are clear and correct. 2. Local Supervisor: Checks to make sure that questions has been correctly completed. 3. Statistical analysis: After exporting data files from excel to SPSS, the Statistical Analysis Unit uses program commands to identify irregular or non-logical values in addition to auditing some variables. 4. World Bank consultants in coordination with the CSO data management team: the World Bank technical consultants use additional programs in SPSS and STAT to examine and correct remaining inconsistencies within the data files. The software detects errors by analyzing questionnaire items according to the expected parameter for each variable.

----> Harmonized Data:

• The SPSS package is used to harmonize the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2007 with Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012.
• The harmonization process starts with raw data files received from the Statistical Office.
• A program is generated for each dataset to create harmonized variables.
• Data is saved on the household and individual level, in SPSS and then converted to STATA, to be disseminated.

Response rate

Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) reached a total of 25488 households. Number of households refused to response was 305, response rate was 98.6%. The highest interview rates were in Ninevah and Muthanna (100%) while the lowest rates were in Sulaimaniya (92%).

ERA5 is the fifth generation ECMWF reanalysis for the global climate and weather for the past 8 decades. Data is available from 1940 onwards. ERA5 replaces the ERA-Interim reanalysis. Reanalysis combines model data with observations from across the world into a globally complete and consistent dataset using the laws of physics. This principle, called data assimilation, is based on the method used by numerical weather prediction centres, where every so many hours (12 hours at ECMWF) a previous forecast is combined with newly available observations in an optimal way to produce a new best estimate of the state of the atmosphere, called analysis, from which an updated, improved forecast is issued. Reanalysis works in the same way, but at reduced resolution to allow for the provision of a dataset spanning back several decades. Reanalysis does not have the constraint of issuing timely forecasts, so there is more time to collect observations, and when going further back in time, to allow for the ingestion of improved versions of the original observations, which all benefit the quality of the reanalysis product. ERA5 provides hourly estimates for a large number of atmospheric, ocean-wave and land-surface quantities. An uncertainty estimate is sampled by an underlying 10-member ensemble at three-hourly intervals. Ensemble mean and spread have been pre-computed for convenience. Such uncertainty estimates are closely related to the information content of the available observing system which has evolved considerably over time. They also indicate flow-dependent sensitive areas. To facilitate many climate applications, monthly-mean averages have been pre-calculated too, though monthly means are not available for the ensemble mean and spread. ERA5 is updated daily with a latency of about 5 days (monthly means are available around the 6th of each month). In case that serious flaws are detected in this early release (called ERA5T), this data could be different from the final release 2 to 3 months later. In case that this occurs users are notified. The data set presented here is a regridded subset of the full ERA5 data set on native resolution. It is online on spinning disk, which should ensure fast and easy access. It should satisfy the requirements for most common applications. An overview of all ERA5 datasets can be found in this article. Information on access to ERA5 data on native resolution is provided in these guidelines. Data has been regridded to a regular lat-lon grid of 0.25 degrees for the reanalysis and 0.5 degrees for the uncertainty estimate (0.5 and 1 degree respectively for ocean waves). There are four main sub sets: hourly and monthly products, both on pressure levels (upper air fields) and single levels (atmospheric, ocean-wave and land surface quantities). The present entry is "ERA5 monthly mean data on single levels from 1940 to present".

The U.S. Population Grids (Summary File 1), 2000: Houston Metropolitan Statistical Area, Alpha Version data set contains an ARC/INFO Workspace with grids of demographic data from the 2000 census. The grids have a resolution of 7.5 arc-seconds (0.002075 decimal degrees), or approximately 250 square meters. The gridded variables are based on census block geography from Census 2000 TIGER/Line Files and census variables (population, households, and housing variables) from Summary File 1. This data set is produced by the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

This dataset provides annual climate summaries derived from Daymet Version 4 R1 daily data at a 1 km x 1 km spatial resolution for five Daymet variables: minimum and maximum temperature, precipitation, vapor pressure, and snow water equivalent. Annual averages are provided for minimum and maximum temperature, vapor pressure, and snow water equivalent, and annual totals are provided for the precipitation variable. Each data file is provided as a single year by variable and covers the same period of record as the Daymet V4 R1 daily data. The annual climatology files are derived from the larger datasets of daily weather parameters produced on a 1 km x 1 km grid for North America (including Canada, the United States, and Mexico), Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Separate annual files are provided for the land areas of continental North America, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Data are distributed in standardized Climate and Forecast (CF)-compliant netCDF (.nc) and Cloud Optimized GeoTIFF (.tif) file formats. In Version 4 R1, all 2020 and 2021 files (60 total) were updated to improve predictions especially in high-latitude areas. It was found that input files used for deriving 2020 and 2021 data had, for a significant portion of Canadian weather stations, missing daily variable readings for the month of January. NCEI has corrected issues with the Environment Canada ingest feed which led to the missing readings. The revised 2020 and 2021 Daymet V4 R1 files were derived with new GHCNd inputs. Files outside of 2020 and 2021 have not changed from the previous V4 release.

The dataset were developed to predict the compressive strength, flexural strength, workability, and porosity of Ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) in order to expedite the design process of UHPC. The dataset has 1,228 experimental data covering 24 mix design variables of UHPC. The mix design variables can be grouped into four categories: (1) Category 1: variables of the cementitious systems, (2) Category 2: variables of the reinforcing fibers, (3) Category 3: curing time, and (4) Category 4: dimensions of the test specimens. For more information about the development of the datasets, please refer to the accompanying research article.

Overview This project analyzes life expectancy across countries, utilizing data from 2000 to 2015. The study examines how key socioeconomic and health factors influence life expectancy. Factors such as GDP, adult mortality, schooling, HIV/AIDS prevalence, and BMI are included in the analysis, which uses multiple linear regression and mixed-effects modeling to determine which variables significantly affect life expectancy.

Data Description The dataset includes life expectancy information and its influencing factors from various countries over a 15-year period (2000-2015). The data was sourced from the WHO Life Expectancy Dataset available on Kaggle. It comprises both continuous and categorical variables, including: • Life Expectancy (Dependent Variable): Average number of years an individual is expected to live. Continuous Variables: o GDP per capita o Adult Mortality (per 1000 individuals aged 15-65) o Schooling (mean years of education) o Alcohol consumption per capita Categorical Variables: o HIV/AIDS prevalence o Country status (Developed vs. Developing) o BMI category (Underweight, Normal, Overweight, Obese)

Problem Statement Life expectancy is a crucial metric for assessing the overall health and well-being of populations. It varies significantly between countries due to economic, social, and health factors. This project seeks to identify the most important variables that predict life expectancy, offering insights for policymakers on improving public health and longevity in their populations. Hypotheses 1. Higher GDP leads to higher life expectancy. 2. Higher adult mortality results in lower life expectancy. 3. More years of schooling increase life expectancy. 4. Higher HIV/AIDS prevalence reduces life expectancy. 5. Living in a developed country increases life expectancy. 6. Higher BMI (underweight or obese) correlates with reduced life expectancy. 7. Higher alcohol consumption reduces life expectancy.

Methodology • Data Preprocessing: Missing values were handled by imputation, and skewed variables (like GDP) were log-transformed to improve model performance. • Exploratory Data Analysis: Visualizations (histograms, scatterplots, and box plots) were used to understand the relationships between independent variables and life expectancy. Modeling: o Multiple Linear Regression was used to examine how each continuous and categorical variable impacts life expectancy. o Mixed-effects modeling was applied to account for country-specific effects, capturing variability across different nations.

Key Results 1. GDP: Log-transformed GDP had a significant positive effect on life expectancy, with an adjusted R² of 0.29. Higher income is positively correlated with longer life expectancy. 2. Adult Mortality: Increased adult mortality significantly reduced life expectancy. For every unit increase in adult mortality, life expectancy decreased by 0.042 years. 3. Schooling: More years of schooling was strongly correlated with longer life expectancy, reflecting the importance of education in enhancing health outcomes. 4. HIV/AIDS: Countries with higher HIV/AIDS prevalence had lower life expectancy, with significant negative coefficients for all levels of prevalence. 5. Country Status: Developed countries had significantly higher life expectancy than developing countries, with an average difference of about 1.52 years. 6. BMI: While underweight and obese categories were significant predictors, the relationship between BMI and life expectancy was complex, suggesting that high-income countries might offset health risks through medical care. 7. Alcohol Consumption: Contrary to initial expectations, alcohol consumption did not have a statistically significant effect on life expectancy in this model.

Data source: SHARE waves 1, 2, and 4.