With an emphasis on reaching historically underrepresented populations, the All of Us Research Program recruits adults aged 18 and above across the United States to share their health data to enable new insights into human health and research on precision medicine. Participants contribute electronic health records (EHR), survey responses, biospecimens, wearable devices (biometrics), and physical measurements.

The six All of Us surveys assess the areas listed below:

• Basic demographic information
• Lifestyle/substance use (i.e., tobacco, alcohol, and recreational drugs)
• Overall health (general health status, daily activities, and women’s health)
• Medical history (medical conditions and approximate age of diagnosis)
• Family medical history (medical history of immediate biological family members)
• Health care access and utilization (self-reported use of various health services)

There are currently three tiers of data access.

• Public Tier: Anonymized, aggregate data that can be viewed with the Data Browser.
• Registered Tier: Contains individual-level data and is available only to approved researchers on the Researcher Workbench. Authorized users also have access to tools such as the Cohort Builder, Jupyter Notebooks, and Dataset Builder.
• Controlled Tier: Includes genomic data in the form of whole genome sequencing and genotyping arrays, demographic data fields from EHRs and surveys that are suppressed in other tiers, and unshifted dates.

In this article, we investigate potential disparities in healthcare access and utilization among actinic keratosis (AK) patients, with a focus on racial and ethnic differences. Utilizing data from the NIH’s “All of Us” Research program, the study identifies patterns in socioeconomic factors and healthcare usage among AK-diagnosed individuals.

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a platform designed for conducting survey question evaluation and statistical research. RANDS is an ongoing series of surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels used for methodological research at the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). RANDS estimates are generated using an experimental approach that differs from the survey design approaches generally used by NCHS, including possible biases from different response patterns and sampling frames as well as increased variability from lower sample sizes. Use of the RANDS platform allows NCHS to produce more timely data than would be possible using traditional data collection methods. RANDS is not designed to replace NCHS’ higher quality, core data collections. Below are experimental estimates of reduced access to healthcare for three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19. Data collection for the three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19 occurred between June 9, 2020 and July 6, 2020, August 3, 2020 and August 20, 2020, and May 17, 2021 and June 30, 2021. Information needed to interpret these estimates can be found in the Technical Notes. RANDS during COVID-19 included questions about unmet care in the last 2 months during the coronavirus pandemic. Unmet needs for health care are often the result of cost-related barriers. The National Health Interview Survey, conducted by NCHS, is the source for high-quality data to monitor cost-related health care access problems in the United States. For example, in 2018, 7.3% of persons of all ages reported delaying medical care due to cost and 4.8% reported needing medical care but not getting it due to cost in the past year. However, cost is not the only reason someone might delay or not receive needed medical care. As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, people also may not get needed medical care due to cancelled appointments, cutbacks in transportation options, fear of going to the emergency room, or an altruistic desire to not be a burden on the health care system, among other reasons. The Household Pulse Survey (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/reduced-access-to-care.htm), an online survey conducted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Census Bureau in partnership with other federal agencies including NCHS, also reports estimates of reduced access to care during the pandemic (beginning in Phase 1, which started on April 23, 2020). The Household Pulse Survey reports the percentage of adults who delayed medical care in the last 4 weeks or who needed medical care at any time in the last 4 weeks for something other than coronavirus but did not get it because of the pandemic. The experimental estimates on this page are derived from RANDS during COVID-19 and show the percentage of U.S. adults who were unable to receive medical care (including urgent care, surgery, screening tests, ongoing treatment, regular checkups, prescriptions, dental care, vision care, and hearing care) in the last 2 months. Technical Notes: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/rands/reduced-access-to-care.htm#limitations

The IPUMS Contextual Determinants of Health (CDOH) data series includes measures of disparities, policies, and counts, by state or county, for historically marginalized populations in the United States including Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latina/o/e/x, and LGBTQ+ persons, and women. The IPUMS CDOH data are made available through ICPSR/DSDR for merging with the National Couples' Health and Time Study (NCHAT), United States, 2020-2021 (ICPSR 38417) by approved restricted data researchers. All other researchers can access the IPUMS CDOH data via the IPUMS CDOH website. Unlike other IPUMS products, the CDOH data are organized into multiple categories related to Race and Ethnicity, Sexual and Gender Minority, Gender, and Politics. The CDOH measures were created from a wide variety of data sources (e.g., IPUMS NHGIS, the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Movement Advancement Project, and Myers Abortion Facility Database). Measures are currently available for states or counties from approximately 2015 to 2020. The Gender measures in this release include state-level abortion access, which reports the proportion of a state's females aged 15-44 who reside in counties with an abortion provider by year and month from 2009-2022. To work with the IPUMS CDOH data, researchers will need to first merge the NCHAT data to DS1 (MATCH ID and State FIPS Data). This merged file can then be linked to the IPUMS CDOH datafile (DS2) using the STATEFIPS variable.

The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is an expansive resource offering access to 118 unique report feeds, providing in-depth insights into various aspects of the U.S. healthcare system. With over 25.8 billion rows of data meticulously collected since 2007, this dataset is invaluable for healthcare professionals, analysts, researchers, and businesses seeking to understand and analyze healthcare trends, performance metrics, and demographic shifts over time. The dataset is updated monthly, ensuring that users always have access to the most current and relevant data available.

Dataset Overview:

118 Report Feeds: - The dataset includes a wide array of report feeds, each providing unique insights into different dimensions of healthcare. These topics range from Medicare and Medicaid service metrics, patient demographics, provider information, financial data, and much more. The breadth of information ensures that users can find relevant data for nearly any healthcare-related analysis. - As CMS releases new report feeds, they are automatically added to this dataset, keeping it current and expanding its utility for users.

25.8 Billion Rows of Data:

• With over 25.8 billion rows of data, this dataset provides a comprehensive view of the U.S. healthcare system. This extensive volume of data allows for granular analysis, enabling users to uncover insights that might be missed in smaller datasets. The data is also meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring accuracy and ease of use.

Historical Data Since 2007: - The dataset spans from 2007 to the present, offering a rich historical perspective that is essential for tracking long-term trends and changes in healthcare delivery, policy impacts, and patient outcomes. This historical data is particularly valuable for conducting longitudinal studies and evaluating the effects of various healthcare interventions over time.

Monthly Updates:

• To ensure that users have access to the most current information, the dataset is updated monthly. These updates include new reports as well as revisions to existing data, making the dataset a continuously evolving resource that stays relevant and accurate.

Data Sourced from CMS:

• The data in this dataset is sourced directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). After collection, the data is meticulously cleaned and its attributes are aligned, ensuring consistency, accuracy, and ease of use for any application. Furthermore, any new updates or releases from CMS are automatically integrated into the dataset, keeping it comprehensive and current.

Use Cases:

Market Analysis:

• The dataset is ideal for market analysts who need to understand the dynamics of the healthcare industry. The extensive historical data allows for detailed segmentation and analysis, helping users identify trends, market shifts, and growth opportunities. The comprehensive nature of the data enables users to perform in-depth analyses of specific market segments, making it a valuable tool for strategic decision-making.

Healthcare Research:

• Researchers will find the All CMS Data Feeds dataset to be a robust foundation for academic and commercial research. The historical data, combined with the breadth of coverage across various healthcare metrics, supports rigorous, in-depth analysis. Researchers can explore the effects of healthcare policies, study patient outcomes, analyze provider performance, and more, all within a single, comprehensive dataset.

Performance Tracking:

• Healthcare providers and organizations can use the dataset to track performance metrics over time. By comparing data across different periods, organizations can identify areas for improvement, monitor the effectiveness of initiatives, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. The dataset provides the detailed, reliable data needed to track and analyze key performance indicators.

Compliance and Regulatory Reporting:

• The dataset is also an essential tool for compliance officers and those involved in regulatory reporting. With detailed data on provider performance, patient outcomes, and healthcare utilization, the dataset helps organizations meet regulatory requirements, prepare for audits, and ensure adherence to best practices. The accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data make it a trusted resource for regulatory compliance.

Data Quality and Reliability:

The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is designed with a strong emphasis on data quality and reliability. Each row of data is meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring that it is both accurate and consistent. This attention to detail makes the dataset a trusted resource for high-stakes applications, where data quality is critical.

Integration and Usability:

Ease of Integration:

• The dataset is provided in a CSV format, which is widely compatible with most data analysis tools and platforms. This ensures that users can easily integrate the data into their existing wo...

United States agricultural researchers have many options for making their data available online. This dataset aggregates the primary sources of ag-related data and determines where researchers are likely to deposit their agricultural data. These data serve as both a current landscape analysis and also as a baseline for future studies of ag research data. Purpose As sources of agricultural data become more numerous and disparate, and collaboration and open data become more expected if not required, this research provides a landscape inventory of online sources of open agricultural data. An inventory of current agricultural data sharing options will help assess how the Ag Data Commons, a platform for USDA-funded data cataloging and publication, can best support data-intensive and multi-disciplinary research. It will also help agricultural librarians assist their researchers in data management and publication. The goals of this study were to

establish where agricultural researchers in the United States-- land grant and USDA researchers, primarily ARS, NRCS, USFS and other agencies -- currently publish their data, including general research data repositories, domain-specific databases, and the top journals compare how much data is in institutional vs. domain-specific vs. federal platforms determine which repositories are recommended by top journals that require or recommend the publication of supporting data ascertain where researchers not affiliated with funding or initiatives possessing a designated open data repository can publish data

Approach The National Agricultural Library team focused on Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and United States Forest Service (USFS) style research data, rather than ag economics, statistics, and social sciences data. To find domain-specific, general, institutional, and federal agency repositories and databases that are open to US research submissions and have some amount of ag data, resources including re3data, libguides, and ARS lists were analysed. Primarily environmental or public health databases were not included, but places where ag grantees would publish data were considered.
Search methods We first compiled a list of known domain specific USDA / ARS datasets / databases that are represented in the Ag Data Commons, including ARS Image Gallery, ARS Nutrition Databases (sub-components), SoyBase, PeanutBase, National Fungus Collection, i5K Workspace @ NAL, and GRIN. We then searched using search engines such as Bing and Google for non-USDA / federal ag databases, using Boolean variations of “agricultural data” /“ag data” / “scientific data” + NOT + USDA (to filter out the federal / USDA results). Most of these results were domain specific, though some contained a mix of data subjects. We then used search engines such as Bing and Google to find top agricultural university repositories using variations of “agriculture”, “ag data” and “university” to find schools with agriculture programs. Using that list of universities, we searched each university web site to see if their institution had a repository for their unique, independent research data if not apparent in the initial web browser search. We found both ag specific university repositories and general university repositories that housed a portion of agricultural data. Ag specific university repositories are included in the list of domain-specific repositories. Results included Columbia University – International Research Institute for Climate and Society, UC Davis – Cover Crops Database, etc. If a general university repository existed, we determined whether that repository could filter to include only data results after our chosen ag search terms were applied. General university databases that contain ag data included Colorado State University Digital Collections, University of Michigan ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research), and University of Minnesota DRUM (Digital Repository of the University of Minnesota). We then split out NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) repositories. Next we searched the internet for open general data repositories using a variety of search engines, and repositories containing a mix of data, journals, books, and other types of records were tested to determine whether that repository could filter for data results after search terms were applied. General subject data repositories include Figshare, Open Science Framework, PANGEA, Protein Data Bank, and Zenodo. Finally, we compared scholarly journal suggestions for data repositories against our list to fill in any missing repositories that might contain agricultural data. Extensive lists of journals were compiled, in which USDA published in 2012 and 2016, combining search results in ARIS, Scopus, and the Forest Service's TreeSearch, plus the USDA web sites Economic Research Service (ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Rural Development (RD), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The top 50 journals' author instructions were consulted to see if they (a) ask or require submitters to provide supplemental data, or (b) require submitters to submit data to open repositories. Data are provided for Journals based on a 2012 and 2016 study of where USDA employees publish their research studies, ranked by number of articles, including 2015/2016 Impact Factor, Author guidelines, Supplemental Data?, Supplemental Data reviewed?, Open Data (Supplemental or in Repository) Required? and Recommended data repositories, as provided in the online author guidelines for each the top 50 journals. Evaluation We ran a series of searches on all resulting general subject databases with the designated search terms. From the results, we noted the total number of datasets in the repository, type of resource searched (datasets, data, images, components, etc.), percentage of the total database that each term comprised, any dataset with a search term that comprised at least 1% and 5% of the total collection, and any search term that returned greater than 100 and greater than 500 results. We compared domain-specific databases and repositories based on parent organization, type of institution, and whether data submissions were dependent on conditions such as funding or affiliation of some kind. Results A summary of the major findings from our data review:

Over half of the top 50 ag-related journals from our profile require or encourage open data for their published authors. There are few general repositories that are both large AND contain a significant portion of ag data in their collection. GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), ICPSR, and ORNL DAAC were among those that had over 500 datasets returned with at least one ag search term and had that result comprise at least 5% of the total collection.
Not even one quarter of the domain-specific repositories and datasets reviewed allow open submission by any researcher regardless of funding or affiliation.

See included README file for descriptions of each individual data file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Journals. File Name: Journals.csvResource Title: Journals - Recommended repositories. File Name: Repos_from_journals.csvResource Title: TDWG presentation. File Name: TDWG_Presentation.pptxResource Title: Domain Specific ag data sources. File Name: domain_specific_ag_databases.csvResource Title: Data Dictionary for Ag Data Repository Inventory. File Name: Ag_Data_Repo_DD.csvResource Title: General repositories containing ag data. File Name: general_repos_1.csvResource Title: README and file inventory. File Name: README_InventoryPublicDBandREepAgData.txt

US Healthcare NPI Data is a comprehensive resource offering detailed information on health providers registered in the United States.

Dataset Highlights:

• NPI Numbers: Unique identification numbers for health providers.
• Contact Details: Includes addresses and phone numbers.
• State License Numbers: State-specific licensing information.
• Additional Identifiers: Other identifiers related to the providers.
• Business Names: Names of the provider’s business entities.
• Taxonomies: Classification of provider types and specialties.

Taxonomy Data:

• Includes codes, groupings, and classifications.
• Facilitates detailed analysis and categorization of providers.

Data Updates:

• Weekly Delta Changes: Ensures the dataset is current with the latest changes.
• Monthly Full Refresh: Comprehensive update to maintain accuracy.

Use Cases:

• Market Analysis: Understand the distribution and types of healthcare providers across the US. Analyze market trends and identify potential gaps in healthcare services.
• Outreach: Create targeted marketing campaigns to reach specific types of healthcare providers. Use contact details for direct outreach and engagement with providers.
• Research: Conduct in-depth research on healthcare providers and their specialties. Analyze provider attributes to support academic or commercial research projects.
• Compliance and Verification: Verify provider credentials and compliance with state licensing requirements. Ensure accurate provider information for regulatory and compliance purposes.

Data Quality and Reliability:

• The dataset is meticulously curated to ensure high quality and reliability. Regular updates, both weekly and monthly, ensure that users have access to the most current information. The comprehensive nature of the data, combined with its regular updates, makes it a valuable tool for a wide range of applications in the healthcare sector.

Access and Integration: - CSV Format: The dataset is provided in CSV format, making it easy to integrate with various data analysis tools and platforms. - Ease of Use: The structured format of the data ensures that it can be easily imported, analyzed, and utilized for various applications without extensive preprocessing.

Ideal for:

• Healthcare Professionals: Physicians, nurses, and other healthcare providers who need to verify information about their peers.
• Analysts: Data analysts and business analysts who require detailed and accurate healthcare provider data for their projects.
• Businesses: Companies in the healthcare sector looking to understand market dynamics and reach out to providers.
• Researchers: Academic and commercial researchers conducting studies on healthcare providers and services.

Why Choose This Dataset?

• Comprehensive Coverage: Detailed information on millions of healthcare providers across the US.
• Regular Updates: Weekly and monthly updates ensure that the data remains current and reliable.
• Ease of Integration: Provided in a user-friendly CSV format for easy integration with your existing systems.
• Versatility: Suitable for a wide range of applications, from market analysis to compliance and research.

By leveraging the US Healthcare NPI & Taxonomy Data, users can gain valuable insights into the healthcare landscape, enhance their outreach efforts, and conduct detailed research with confidence in the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data.

Summary:

• This dataset is an invaluable resource for anyone needing detailed and up-to-date information on US healthcare providers. Whether for market analysis, research, outreach, or compliance, the US Healthcare NPI & Taxonomy Data offers the detailed, reliable information needed to achieve your goals.

The COKI Open Access Dataset measures open access performance for 142 countries and 5117 institutions and is available in JSON Lines format. The data is visualised at the COKI Open Access Dashboard: https://open.coki.ac/.

The COKI Open Access Dataset is created with the COKI Academic Observatory data collection pipeline, which fetches data about research publications from multiple sources, synthesises the datasets and creates the open access calculations for each country and institution.

Each week a number of specialised research publication datasets are collected. The datasets that are used for the COKI Open Access Dataset release include Crossref Metadata, Microsoft Academic Graph, Unpaywall and the Research Organization Registry.

After fetching the datasets, they are synthesised to produce aggregate time series statistics for each country and institution in the dataset. The aggregate timeseries statistics include publication count, open access status and citation count.

See https://open.coki.ac/data/ for the dataset schema. A new version of the dataset is deposited every week.

Code

• The COKI Academic Observatory data collection pipeline is used to create the dataset.
• The COKI OA Website Github project contains the code for the web app that visualises the dataset at open.coki.ac. It can be found on Zenodo here.

License
COKI Open Access Dataset © 2022 by Curtin University is licenced under CC BY 4.0.

Attributions
This work contains information from:

• Microsoft Academic Graph which is made available under the ODC Attribution Licence.
• Crossref Metadata via the Metadata Plus program. Bibliographic metadata is made available without copyright restriction and Crossref generated data under a CC0 licence. See metadata licence information for more details.
• Unpaywall. The Unpaywall Data Feed is used under license. Data is freely available from Unpaywall via the API, data dumps and as a data feed.
• Research Organization Registry which is made available under a CC0 licence.

Objective To investigate the nature of physicians' use of research evidence in experimental conditions of open access to inform training and policy. Design This qualitative study was a component of a larger mixed-methods initiative that provided 336 physicians with relatively complete access to research literature via PubMed and UpToDate, for 1 year via an online portal, with their usage recorded in web logs. Using a semistructured interview protocol, a subset of 38 physician participants were interviewed about their use of research articles in general and were probed about their reasons for accessing specific articles as identified through their web logs. Transcripts were analysed using a general inductive approach. Setting Physician participants were recruited from and registered in the USA. Participants 38 physicians from 16 US states, engaged in 22 medical specialties, possessing more than 1 year of experience postresidency training participated. Results 26 participants attested to the value of consulting research literature within the context of the study by making reference to their roles as clinicians, educators, researchers, learners, administrators and advocates. The physicians reported previously encountering what they experienced as a prohibitive paywall barrier to the research literature and other frustrations with the nature of information systems, such as the need for passwords. Conclusions The findings, against the backdrop of growing open access to biomedical research, indicate that a minority of physicians, at least initially, is likely to seek out and use research and do so in a variety of common roles. Physicians' use of research in these roles has not traditionally been part of their training or part of the considerations for open access policies. The findings have implications for educational and policy initiatives directed towards increasing the effectiveness of this access to and use of research in improving the quality of healthcare.

The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is an expansive resource offering access to 118 unique report feeds, providing in-depth insights into various aspects of the U.S. healthcare system. With over 25.8 billion rows of data meticulously collected since 2007, this dataset is invaluable for healthcare professionals, analysts, researchers, and businesses seeking to understand and analyze healthcare trends, performance metrics, and demographic shifts over time. The dataset is updated monthly, ensuring that users always have access to the most current and relevant data available.

Dataset Overview:

118 Report Feeds: - The dataset includes a wide array of report feeds, each providing unique insights into different dimensions of healthcare. These topics range from Medicare and Medicaid service metrics, patient demographics, provider information, financial data, and much more. The breadth of information ensures that users can find relevant data for nearly any healthcare-related analysis. - As CMS releases new report feeds, they are automatically added to this dataset, keeping it current and expanding its utility for users.

25.8 Billion Rows of Data:

• With over 25.8 billion rows of data, this dataset provides a comprehensive view of the U.S. healthcare system. This extensive volume of data allows for granular analysis, enabling users to uncover insights that might be missed in smaller datasets. The data is also meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring accuracy and ease of use.

Historical Data Since 2007: - The dataset spans from 2007 to the present, offering a rich historical perspective that is essential for tracking long-term trends and changes in healthcare delivery, policy impacts, and patient outcomes. This historical data is particularly valuable for conducting longitudinal studies and evaluating the effects of various healthcare interventions over time.

Monthly Updates:

• To ensure that users have access to the most current information, the dataset is updated monthly. These updates include new reports as well as revisions to existing data, making the dataset a continuously evolving resource that stays relevant and accurate.

Data Sourced from CMS:

• The data in this dataset is sourced directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). After collection, the data is meticulously cleaned and its attributes are aligned, ensuring consistency, accuracy, and ease of use for any application. Furthermore, any new updates or releases from CMS are automatically integrated into the dataset, keeping it comprehensive and current.

Use Cases:

Market Analysis:

• The dataset is ideal for market analysts who need to understand the dynamics of the healthcare industry. The extensive historical data allows for detailed segmentation and analysis, helping users identify trends, market shifts, and growth opportunities. The comprehensive nature of the data enables users to perform in-depth analyses of specific market segments, making it a valuable tool for strategic decision-making.

Healthcare Research:

• Researchers will find the All CMS Data Feeds dataset to be a robust foundation for academic and commercial research. The historical data, combined with the breadth of coverage across various healthcare metrics, supports rigorous, in-depth analysis. Researchers can explore the effects of healthcare policies, study patient outcomes, analyze provider performance, and more, all within a single, comprehensive dataset.

Performance Tracking:

• Healthcare providers and organizations can use the dataset to track performance metrics over time. By comparing data across different periods, organizations can identify areas for improvement, monitor the effectiveness of initiatives, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. The dataset provides the detailed, reliable data needed to track and analyze key performance indicators.

Compliance and Regulatory Reporting:

• The dataset is also an essential tool for compliance officers and those involved in regulatory reporting. With detailed data on provider performance, patient outcomes, and healthcare utilization, the dataset helps organizations meet regulatory requirements, prepare for audits, and ensure adherence to best practices. The accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data make it a trusted resource for regulatory compliance.

Data Quality and Reliability:

The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is designed with a strong emphasis on data quality and reliability. Each row of data is meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring that it is both accurate and consistent. This attention to detail makes the dataset a trusted resource for high-stakes applications, where data quality is critical.

Integration and Usability:

Ease of Integration:

• The dataset is provided in a CSV format, which is widely compatible with most data analysis tools and platforms. This ensures that users can easily integrate the data into their existing wo...

Note: Reporting of new COVID-19 Case Surveillance data will be discontinued July 1, 2024, to align with the process of removing SARS-CoV-2 infections (COVID-19 cases) from the list of nationally notifiable diseases. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, the dataset will no longer be updated.

Authorizations to collect certain public health data expired at the end of the U.S. public health emergency declaration on May 11, 2023. The following jurisdictions discontinued COVID-19 case notifications to CDC: Iowa (11/8/21), Kansas (5/12/23), Kentucky (1/1/24), Louisiana (10/31/23), New Hampshire (5/23/23), and Oklahoma (5/2/23). Please note that these jurisdictions will not routinely send new case data after the dates indicated. As of 7/13/23, case notifications from Oregon will only include pediatric cases resulting in death.

This case surveillance public use dataset has 19 elements for all COVID-19 cases shared with CDC and includes demographics, geography (county and state of residence), any exposure history, disease severity indicators and outcomes, and presence of any underlying medical conditions and risk behaviors.

Currently, CDC provides the public with three versions of COVID-19 case surveillance line-listed data: this 19 data element dataset with geography, a 12 data element public use dataset, and a 33 data element restricted access dataset.

The following apply to the public use datasets and the restricted access dataset:

• Data elements can be found on the COVID-19 case report form located at www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/pui-form.pdf.
• Data are considered provisional by CDC and are subject to change until the data are reconciled and verified with the state and territorial data providers.
• Some data are suppressed to protect individual privacy.
• Datasets will include all cases with the earliest date available in each record (date received by CDC or date related to illness/specimen collection) at least 14 days prior to the creation of the current datasets. This 14-day lag allows case reporting to be stabilized and ensure that time-dependent outcome data are accurately captured.
• Datasets are updated monthly.
• Datasets are created using CDC’s Policy on Public Health Research and Nonresearch Data Management and Access and include protections designed to protect individual privacy.
• For more information about data collection and reporting, please see https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/about-us-cases-deaths.html.
• For more information about the COVID-19 case surveillance data, please see https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/faq-surveillance.html
  

Overview

The COVID-19 case surveillance database includes individual-level data reported to U.S. states and autonomous reporting entities, including New York City and the District of Columbia (D.C.), as well as U.S. territories and affiliates. On April 5, 2020, COVID-19 was added to the Nationally Notifiable Condition List and classified as “immediately notifiable, urgent (within 24 hours)” by a Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) Interim Position Statement (<a href="https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.cste.org/resource/resmgr/ps/positionstatement2020/Interim-20-ID-01_COVID

Background: Multiple factors, including experiences with unethical research practices, have made some Indigenous groups in the United States and Canada reticent to participate in potentially beneficial health-related research. Yet, Indigenous peoples have also expressed a willingness to participate in research when certain conditions related to the components of data management—including data collection, analysis, security and storage, sharing, dissemination, and withdrawal—are met. A scoping review was conducted to better understand the terms of data management employed in health-related research involving Indigenous communities in the United States and Canada.Methods: PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and Web of Science were searched using terms related to the populations and topics of interest. Results were screened and articles deemed eligible for inclusion were extracted for content on data management, community engagement, and community-level research governance.Results: The search strategy returned 734 articles. 31 total articles were extracted, of which nine contained in-depth information on data management and underwent detailed extraction. All nine articles reported the development and implementation of data management tools, including research ethics codes, data-sharing agreements, and biobank access policies.These articles reported that communities were involved in activities and decisions related to data collection (n=7), data analysis (n=5), data-sharing (n=9), dissemination (n=7), withdrawal (n=4), and development of data management tools (n=9). The articles also reported that communities had full or shared ownership of (n=5), control over (n=9), access to (n=1), and possession of data (n=5).All nine articles discussed the role of community engagement in research and community-level research governance as means for aligning the terms of data management with the values, needs, and interests of communities.Conclusions: There is need for more research and improved reporting on data management in health-related research involving Indigenous peoples in the United States and Canada. Findings from this review can provide guidance for the identification of data management terms and practices that may be acceptable to Indigenous communities considering participation in health-related research.

The dataset contains all the data produced running the research software for the study:"Open Science for Social Sciences and Humanities: Open Access availability and distribution across disciplines and Countries in OpenCitations Meta".

Disclaimer: these results are not considered to be representative, because we have fount that Mega Journals skewed significantly some of the data. The result datasets without Mega Journals are published here.

Description of datasets:

SSH_Publications_in_OC_Meta_and_Open_Access_status.csv: containing information about OpenCitations Meta coverage of ERIH PLUS Journals as well as their Open Access availability. In this dataset, every row holds data for a Journal of ERIH PLUS also covered by OpenCitations Meta database. It is structured with the following columns: "EP_id", the internal ERIH PLUS identifier; "Publications_in_venue", the numbers of Publications counted in each venue; "OC_omid", the internal OpenCitations Meta identifier for the venue; "issn", numbers of publications in each venue; "Open Access", a value to represent if the journal is OA or not, either "True" or "Unknown".

SSH_Publications_by_Discipline.csv: containing information about number of publications per discipline (in addition, number of journals per discipline are also included). The dataset has three columns, the first, labeled "Discipline", contains single disciplines of the ERIH classificaton, the second and the third, labeled "Journal_count" and "Publication_count", respectively, the number of Journals and the number of Publications counted for each discipline.

SSH_Publications_and_Journals_by_Country: containing information about number of publications and journals per country. The dataset has three columns, the first, labeled "Country", contains single countries of the ERIH classificaton, the second and the third, labeled "Journal_count" and "Publication_count", respectively, the number of Journals and the number of Publications counted for each discipline.

result_disciplines.json: the dictionary containing all disciplines as key and a list of related ERIH PLUS venue identifiers as value.

result_countries.json: the dictionary containing all countries as key and a list of related ERIH PLUS venue identifiers as value.

duplicate_omids.csv: a dataset containing the duplicated Journal entries in OpenCitations Meta, structured with two columns: "OC_omid", the internal OC Meta identifier; "issn", the issn values associated to that identifier

eu_data.csv: contains the data specific for European countries' SSH Journals covered in OCMeta. It is structured with the following columns: "EP_id", the internal ERIH PLUS identifier; "Publications_in_venue", the numbers of Publications counted in each venue; "Original_Title", "Country_of_Publication","ERIH_PLUS_Disciplines", "disc_count", the number of disciplines per Journal.

eu_disciplines_count.csv: containing information about number of publications per discipline and number of journals per discipline of european countries. The dataset has three columns, the first, labeled "Discipline", contains single disciplines of the ERIH classificaton, the second and the third, labeled "Journal_count" and "Publication_count", respectively, the number of Journals and the number of Publications counted for each discipline.

meta_coverage_eu.csv: contains the data specific for European countries' SSH Journals covered in OCMeta. It is structured with the following columns: "EP_id", the internal ERIH PLUS identifier; "Publications_in_venue", the numbers of Publications counted in each venue; "OC_omid", the internal OpenCitations Meta identifier for the venue; "issn", numbers of publications in each venue; "Open Access", a value to represent if the journal is OA or not, either "True" or "Unknown".

us_data.csv: contains the data specific for the United States' SSH Journals covered in OCMeta. It is structured with the following columns: "EP_id", the internal ERIH PLUS identifier; "Publications_in_venue", the numbers of Publications counted in each venue; "Original_Title", "Country_of_Publication","ERIH_PLUS_Disciplines", "disc_count", the number of disciplines per Journal.

us_disciplines_count.csv: containing information about number of publications per discipline and number of journals per discipline of the United States. The dataset has three columns, the first, labeled "Discipline", contains single disciplines of the ERIH classificaton, the second and the third, labeled "Journal_count" and "Publication_count", respectively, the number of Journals and the number of Publications counted for each discipline.

meta_coverage_us.csv: contains the data specific for the United States' SSH Journals covered in OCMeta. It is structured with the following columns: "EP_id", the internal ERIH PLUS identifier; "Publications_in_venue", the numbers of Publications counted in each venue; "OC_omid", the internal OpenCitations Meta identifier for the venue; "issn", numbers of publications in each venue; "Open Access", a value to represent if the journal is OA or not, either "True" or "Unknown".

Abstract of the research:

Purpose: this study aims to investigate the representation and distribution of Social Science and Humanities (SSH) journals within the OpenCitations Meta database, with a particular emphasis on their Open Access (OA) status, as well as their spread across different disciplines and countries. The underlying premise is that open infrastructures play a pivotal role in promoting transparency, reproducibility, and trust in scientific research. Study Design and Methodology: the study is grounded on the premise that open infrastructures are crucial for ensuring transparency, reproducibility, and fostering trust in scientific research. The research methodology involved the use of secondary data sources, namely the OpenCitations Meta database, the ERIH PLUS bibliographic index, and the DOAJ index. A custom research software was developed in Python to facilitate the processing and analysis of the data. Findings: the results reveal that 78.1% of SSH journals listed in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH-PLUS) are included in the OpenCitations Meta database. The discipline of Psychology has the highest number of publications. The United States and the United Kingdom are the leading contributors in terms of the number of publications. However, the study also uncovers that only 38% of the SSH journals in the OpenCitations Meta database are OA. Originality: this research adds to the existing body of knowledge by providing insights into the representation of SSH in open bibliographic databases and the role of open access in this domain. The study highlights the necessity for advocating OA practices within SSH and the significance of open data for bibliometric studies. It further encourages additional research into the impact of OA on various facets of citation patterns and the factors leading to disparity across disciplinary representation.

Related resources:

Ghasempouri S., Ghiotto M., & Giacomini S. (2023). Open Science for Social Sciences and Humanities: Open Access availability and distribution across disciplines and Countries in OpenCitations Meta - RESEARCH ARTICLE. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8263908

Ghasempouri, S., Ghiotto, M., Giacomini, S., (2023). Open Science for Social Sciences and Humanities: Open Access availability and distribution across disciplines and Countries in OpenCitations Meta - DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN (Version 4). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8174644

Ghasempouri, S., Ghiotto, M., Giacomini, S. (2023e). Open Science for Social Sciences and Humanities: Open Access availability and distribution across disciplines and Countries in OpenCitations Meta - PROTOCOL. V.5. (https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.5jyl8jo1rg2w/v5)

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ, formerly the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research) maintains the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). HCUP is a Federal-State-industry partnership to build a standardized, multi-State health data system. AHRQ has taken the lead in developing HCUP databases, Web-based products, and software tools and making them available for restricted access public release.

HCUP comprises a family of administrative longitudinal databases-including State-specific hospital-discharge databases and a national sample of discharges from community hospitals.

HCUP databases contain patient-level information compiled in a uniform format with privacy protections in place. * The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) includes inpatient data from a national sample (about 20% of U.S. community hospitals) including roughly 7 million discharges from about 1,000 hospitals. It is the largest all-payer inpatient database in the U.S.; data are now available from 1988-1998. The NIS is ideal for developing national estimates, for analyzing national trends, and for research that requires a large sample size. * The State Inpatient Databases (SID) cover individual data sets in community hospitals from 22 participating States that represent more than half of all U.S. hospital discharges. The data have been translated into a uniform format to facilitate cross-State comparisons. The SID are particularly well-suited for policy inquiries unique to a specific State, studies comparing two or more States, market area research, and small area variation analyses.

• The State Ambulatory Surgery Databases (SASD) contain data from ambulatory care encounters in 9 participating States. The SASD capture surgeries performed on the same day in which patients are admitted and released form hospital- affiliated ambulatory surgery sites. The SASD are well suited for research that requires complete enumeration of hospital-based ambulatory surgeries within market areas and States.

• The project's newest restricted access public release is the Kids' Inpatient Database (KID), containing hospital inpatient stays for children 18 years of age and younger. Researchers and policymakers can use the KID to identify, track, and analyze national trends in health care utilization, access, charges, quality, and outcomes. The KID is the only all-payer inpatient care database for children in the U.S. It contains data from approximately 1.9 million hospital discharges for children. The data are drawn from 22 HCUP 1997 State Inpatient Databases and include a sample of pediatric general discharges from over 2,500 U.S. community hospitals (defined as short-term, non-Federal, general and specialty hospitals, excluding hospital units of other institutions). A key strength of the KID is that the large sample size enables analyses of both common and rare conditions; uncommon treatments, and organ transplantation. The KID also includes charge information on all patients, regardless of payer, including children covered by Medicaid, private insurance, and the uninsured.

  HCUP also contains powerful, user-friendly software that can be used with both HCUP data and with other administrative databases. The AHRQ has developed three powerful software tools Quality Indicators (QIs), Clinical Classification Software (CCS) and HCUPnet. See more on the agency's webpages.

Hydrologic data, primarily precipitation and runoff, have been collected on experimental watersheds operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) and on other lands in southeastern Arizona since the 1950s. These data are of national and international importance and make up one of the most comprehensive semiarid watershed data sets in the world. The USDA-ARS Southwest Watershed Research Center has recently developed an electronic data processing system that includes an online interface (https://tucson.ars.ag.gov/dap) to provide public access to the data. The goal of the system is to promote analyses and interpretations of historic and current data by improving data access. The publicly accessible part of the system consists of an interactive Web site, which provides an interface to the data, and a relational database, which is used to process, store, and manage data. In addition, DAP was expanded to put sediment, meteorological, soil moisture and temperature, vegetation, CO2 and water flux, geographic information system (GIS) and aircraft and satellite spectral imagery data on line and to publish metadata for all WGEW long-term measurements. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Web Page. File Name: WGEWsoils.xls, url: https://www.tucson.ars.ag.gov/dap/Files/WGEWsoils.xls

Hospitals play a critical role in healthcare, offering specialized treatments and emergency services essential for public health, regardless of economic fluctuations or individuals' financial situations. Rising incomes and broader access to insurance have fueled demand for care in recent years, supporting hospitals' post-pandemic recovery initiated by federal policies and funding. The recovery for many hospitals was also promoted by mergers that lessened financial strains, especially in rural hospitals. This trend toward consolidation has resulted in fewer enterprises relative to establishments, enhancing hospitals' bargaining power regarding input costs and insurance reimbursements. With this improved position, hospitals are expected to see revenue climb at a CAGR of 2.0%, reaching $1.5 trillion by 2025, with a 3.2% increase in 2025 alone. Competition, economic conditions and regulatory changes will impact hospitals based on size and location. Smaller hospitals, particularly rural ones, may encounter more significant obstacles as the industry transitions from fee-based to value-based care. Independent hospitals face wage inflation, staffing shortages and drug supply costs. Although state and federal policies aim to support small rural hospitals in addressing hospital deserts, uncertainties linger over federal Medicare funding and Medicaid reimbursements, which account for nearly half of hospital care spending. Even so, increasing per capita disposable income and increasing the number of individuals with private insurance will boost revenues from private insurers and out-of-pocket payments for all hospitals, big and small. Hospitals will continue incorporating technological advancements in AI, telemedicine and wearables to enhance their services and reduce cost. These technologies aid hospital systems in strategically expanding outpatient services, mitigating the increasing competitive pressures from Ambulatory Surgery Centers (ASCs) and capitalizing on the increased needs of an aging adult population and shifts in healthcare delivery preferences. As the consolidation trend advances and technology adoption further leverages economies of scale, industry revenue is expected to strengthen at a CAGR of 2.4%, reaching $1.7 trillion by 2030, with steady profit over the period.

The New England Journal of Medicine FAQ - ResearchHelpDesk - The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) is the world’s leading medical journal and website. Published continuously for over 200 years, NEJM delivers high-quality, peer-reviewed research and interactive clinical content to physicians, educators, and the global medical community. Our mission is to bring physicians the best research and information at the intersection of biomedical science and clinical practice and to present this information in understandable and clinically useful formats that inform health care delivery and improve patient outcomes. To these ends, the NEJM editorial team employs rigorous: Editorial, peer, and statistical review processes to evaluate manuscripts for scientific accuracy, novelty, and importance. Policies and practices to ensure that authors disclose all relevant financial associations and that such associations in no way influence the content NEJM publishes. A truly global brand, NEJM keeps health care professionals at the leading edge of medical knowledge, helps them to gain broad understanding in their areas of interest, and provides valuable perspectives on the practice of medicine. Today, NEJM is the most widely read, cited, and influential general medical periodical in the world. More than 600,000 people from nearly every country read NEJM in print and online each week. Each year, NEJM receives more than 16,000 research and other submissions for consideration for publication. About 5% of original research submissions achieve publication by NEJM; more than half originate from outside the U.S. NEJM is cited more often in scientific literature than any other medical journal, and has the highest Journal Impact Factor (70.670) of all general medical journals (2018 Journal Citation Reports, Web of Science Group, 2019). NEJM is a Public Access Journal. All original research content is freely available on NEJM.org six months after the date of publication. In addition, qualifying low-income countries are granted free access to all articles on NEJM.org dating back to 1990. The editors may also make certain materials including articles on global health and of public health importance free to all readers immediately upon publication on NEJM.org

Analysis of ‘Reduced Access to Care During COVID-19’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/3f716763-bea5-4d84-989a-b1e688150d3d on 26 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a platform designed for conducting survey question evaluation and statistical research. RANDS is an ongoing series of surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels used for methodological research at the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). RANDS estimates are generated using an experimental approach that differs from the survey design approaches generally used by NCHS, including possible biases from different response patterns and sampling frames as well as increased variability from lower sample sizes. Use of the RANDS platform allows NCHS to produce more timely data than would be possible using traditional data collection methods. RANDS is not designed to replace NCHS’ higher quality, core data collections. Below are experimental estimates of reduced access to healthcare for three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19. Data collection for the three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19 occurred between June 9, 2020 and July 6, 2020, August 3, 2020 and August 20, 2020, and May 17, 2021 and June 30, 2021. Information needed to interpret these estimates can be found in the Technical Notes. RANDS during COVID-19 included questions about unmet care in the last 2 months during the coronavirus pandemic. Unmet needs for health care are often the result of cost-related barriers. The National Health Interview Survey, conducted by NCHS, is the source for high-quality data to monitor cost-related health care access problems in the United States. For example, in 2018, 7.3% of persons of all ages reported delaying medical care due to cost and 4.8% reported needing medical care but not getting it due to cost in the past year. However, cost is not the only reason someone might delay or not receive needed medical care. As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, people also may not get needed medical care due to cancelled appointments, cutbacks in transportation options, fear of going to the emergency room, or an altruistic desire to not be a burden on the health care system, among other reasons. The Household Pulse Survey (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/reduced-access-to-care.htm), an online survey conducted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Census Bureau in partnership with other federal agencies including NCHS, also reports estimates of reduced access to care during the pandemic (beginning in Phase 1, which started on April 23, 2020). The Household Pulse Survey reports the percentage of adults who delayed medical care in the last 4 weeks or who needed medical care at any time in the last 4 weeks for something other than coronavirus but did not get it because of the pandemic. The experimental estimates on this page are derived from RANDS during COVID-19 and show the percentage of U.S. adults who were unable to receive medical care (including urgent care, surgery, screening tests, ongoing treatment, regular checkups, prescriptions, dental care, vision care, and hearing care) in the last 2 months. Technical Notes: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/rands/reduced-access-to-care.htm#limitations

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

The United States Consumer Identity and Access Management (IAM) Market is Segmented Cloud and On-Premise. The Market Size and Forecasts are Provided in Terms of Value (USD) for all the Above Segments.

This dataset represents a group of paper records (a "series") within the Harvard School of Public Health Longitudinal Studies of Child Health and Development records, 1918-2015 (inclusive), 1930-1989 (bulk), which can be accessed on-site at the Center for the History of Medicine at the Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine in Boston, Massachusetts. The series consists of manuscript drafts for various scientific papers on social functioning research conducted as part of the Harvard School of Public Health Longitudinal Studies of Child Health and Development. Frequent authors include Ruth M. Butler (1917-2007). Topics include adolescent play, human behavior, and social environment, among others. Data and associated records are accessible onsite at the Center for the History of Medicine per the conditions governing access described below. Conditions Governing Access to Original Collection Materials: Researchers should consult Public Services for more information on accessing the collection. The Harvard School of Public Health Longitudinal Studies of Child Health and Development records were processed with grant funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, as awarded and administered by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) in 2016. An online finding aid to the collection may be accessed here: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HMS.Count:med00211