This layer shows age and sex demographics. Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.This layer is symbolized to the percent of the population ages 18 to 24 years old. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). To view only the census tracts that are predominantly in Tempe, add the expression City is Tempe in the filter settings. Layer includes:Key demographicsTotal populationMale total populationFemale total populationPercent male total population (calculated)Percent female total population (calculated)Age and other indicatorsTotal population by AGE (various ranges)Total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)Total population by SUMMARY INDICATORS (including median age, sex ratio, age dependency ratio, old age dependency ratio, child dependency ratio)Percent total population by AGE (various ranges)Percent total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)Male by ageMale total population by AGE (various ranges)Male total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)Male total population Median age (years)Percent male total population by AGE (various ranges)Percent male total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)Female by ageFemale total population by AGE (various ranges)Female total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)Female total population Median age (years)Percent female total population by AGE (various ranges)Percent female total population by SELECTED AGE CATEGORIES (various ranges)A ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Current Vintage: 2018-2022ACS Table(s): S0101 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community SurveyDate of Census update: Dec 15, 2023Data Preparation: Data table downloaded and joined with Census Tract boundaries that are within or adjacent to the City of Tempe boundaryNational Figures: data.census.gov

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

This publication reports information from the CSDS. This is a monthly report on publicly funded community services for children, young people and adults using data from the Community Services Data Set (CSDS) reported in England for October 2018. The CSDS is a patient-level dataset providing information relating to publicly funded community services for children, young people and adults. These services can include health centres, schools, mental health trusts, and health visiting services. The data collected includes personal and demographic information, diagnoses including long-term conditions and disabilities and care events plus screening activities. It has been developed to help achieve better outcomes for children, young people and adults. It provides data that will be used to commission services in a way that improves health, reduces inequalities, and supports service improvement and clinical quality. Prior to October 2017, the predecessor Children and Young Peoples Health Services (CYPHS) Data Set collected data for children and young people aged 0-18. The CSDS superseded the CYPHS data set to allow adult community data to be submitted, expanding the scope of the existing data set by removing the 0-18 age restriction. The structure and content of the CSDS remains the same as the previous CYPHS data set. Further information about the CYPHS and related statistical reports is available in the related links below. References to children and young people covers records submitted for 0-18 year olds and references to adults covers records submitted for those aged over 18. Where analysis for both groups have been combined, this is referred to as all patients. These statistics are classified as experimental and should be used with caution. Experimental statistics are new official statistics undergoing evaluation. They are published in order to involve users and stakeholders in their development and as a means to build in quality at an early stage. More information about experimental statistics can be found on the UK Statistics Authority website. We hope this information is helpful and would be grateful if you could spare a couple of minutes to complete a short customer satisfaction survey. Please use the survey in the related links to provide us with any feedback or suggestions for improving the report.

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2017-18 JPFHS: - Collected data at the national level that allowed calculation of key demographic indicators - Explored the direct and indirect factors that determine levels of and trends in fertility and childhood mortality - Measured levels of contraceptive knowledge and practice - Collected data on key aspects of family health, including immunisation coverage among children, the prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea and other diseases among children under age 5, and maternity care indicators such as antenatal visits and assistance at delivery among ever-married women - Obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and ever-married women age 15-49 - Conducted haemoglobin testing on children age 6-59 months and ever-married women age 15-49 to provide information on the prevalence of anaemia among these groups - Collected data on knowledge and attitudes of ever-married women and men about sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV/AIDS - Obtained data on ever-married women’s experience of emotional, physical, and sexual violence - Obtained data on household health expenditures

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15-59

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), children age 0-5 years, women age 15-49 years and men age 15-59 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used for the 2017-18 JPFHS is based on Jordan's Population and Housing Census (JPHC) frame for 2015. The current survey is designed to produce results representative of the country as a whole, of urban and rural areas separately, of three regions, of 12 administrative governorates, and of three national groups: Jordanians, Syrians, and a group combined from various other nationalities.

The sample for the 2017-18 JPFHS is a stratified sample selected in two stages from the 2015 census frame. Stratification was achieved by separating each governorate into urban and rural areas. Each of the Syrian camps in the governorates of Zarqa and Mafraq formed its own sampling stratum. In total, 26 sampling strata were constructed. Samples were selected independently in each sampling stratum, through a two-stage selection process, according to the sample allocation. Before the sample selection, the sampling frame was sorted by district and sub-district within each sampling stratum. By using a probability-proportional-to-size selection for the first stage of selection, an implicit stratification and proportional allocation were achieved at each of the lower administrative levels.

In the first stage, 970 clusters were selected with probability proportional to cluster size, with the cluster size being the number of residential households enumerated in the 2015 JPHC. The sample allocation took into account the precision consideration at the governorate level and at the level of each of the three special domains. After selection of PSUs and clusters, a household listing operation was carried out in all selected clusters. The resulting household lists served as the sampling frame for selecting households in the second stage. A fixed number of 20 households per cluster were selected with an equal probability systematic selection from the newly created household listing.

For further details on sample design, see Appendix A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Four questionnaires were used for the 2017-18 JPFHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, and the Biomarker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey questionnaires, were adapted to reflect population and health issues relevant to Jordan. After all questionnaires were finalised in English, they were translated into Arabic.

Cleaning operations

All electronic data files for the 2017-18 JPFHS were transferred via IFSS to the DOS central office in Amman, where they were stored on a password-protected computer. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the duration of fieldwork, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in October 2017 and completed in February 2018.

Response rate

A total of 19,384 households were selected for the sample, of which 19,136 were found to be occupied at the time of the fieldwork. Of the occupied households, 18,802 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98%.

In the interviewed households, 14,870 women were identified as eligible for an individual interview; interviews were completed with 14,689 women, yielding a response rate of 99%. A total of 6,640 eligible men were identified in the sampled households and 6,429 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. Response rates for both women and men were similar across urban and rural areas.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2017-18 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and sample size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95% of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected by simple random sampling, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2017-18 JPFHS sample was the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed using SAS programmes developed by ICF International. These programmes use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

The Taylor linearisation method treats any percentage or average as a ratio estimate, r = y/x, where y represents the total sample value for variable y, and x represents the total number of cases in the group or subgroup under consideration.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey final report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the survey final report.

Data SourcesAmerican Community Survey (ACS):Conducted by: U.S. Census BureauDescription: The ACS is an ongoing survey that provides detailed demographic and socio-economic data on the population and housing characteristics of the United States.Content: The survey collects information on various topics such as income, education, employment, health insurance coverage, and housing costs and conditions.Frequency: The ACS offers more frequent and up-to-date information compared to the decennial census, with annual estimates produced based on a rolling sample of households.Purpose: ACS data is essential for policymakers, researchers, and communities to make informed decisions and address the evolving needs of the population.CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI):Created by: ATSDR’s Geospatial Research, Analysis & Services Program (GRASP)Utilized by: CDCDescription: The SVI is designed to identify and map communities that are most likely to need support before, during, and after hazardous events.Content: SVI ranks U.S. Census tracts based on 15 social factors, including unemployment, minority status, and disability, and groups them into four related themes. Each tract receives rankings for each Census variable and for each theme, as well as an overall ranking, indicating its relative vulnerability.Purpose: SVI data provides insights into the social vulnerability of communities at both the tract and zip code levels, helping public health officials and emergency response planners allocate resources effectively.Utilization and IntegrationBy integrating data from both the ACS and the SVI, this dataset enables an in-depth analysis and understanding of various socio-economic and demographic indicators at the census tract level. This integrated data is valuable for research, policymaking, and community planning purposes, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of social and economic dynamics across different geographical areas in the United States.ApplicationsTargeted Interventions: Facilitates the development of targeted interventions to address the needs of vulnerable populations within specific zip codes.Resource Allocation: Assists emergency response planners in allocating resources more effectively based on community vulnerability at the zip code level.Research: Provides a rich dataset for academic and applied research in socio-economic and demographic studies at a granular zip code level.Community Planning: Supports the planning and development of community programs and initiatives aimed at improving living conditions and reducing vulnerabilities within specific zip code areas.Note: Due to limitations in the data environment, variable names may be truncated. Refer to the provided table for a clear understanding of the variables. CSV Variable NameShapefile Variable NameDescriptionStateNameStateNameName of the stateStateFipsStateFipsState-level FIPS codeState nameStateNameName of the stateCountyNameCountyNameName of the countyCensusFipsCensusFipsCounty-level FIPS codeState abbreviationStateFipsState abbreviationCountyFipsCountyFipsCounty-level FIPS codeCensusFipsCensusFipsCounty-level FIPS codeCounty nameCountyNameName of the countyAREA_SQMIAREA_SQMITract area in square milesE_TOTPOPE_TOTPOPPopulation estimates, 2013-2017 ACSEP_POVEP_POVPercentage of persons below poverty estimateEP_UNEMPEP_UNEMPUnemployment Rate estimateEP_HBURDEP_HBURDHousing cost burdened occupied housing units with annual income less than $75,000EP_UNINSUREP_UNINSURUninsured in the total civilian noninstitutionalized population estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_PCIEP_PCIPer capita income estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_DISABLEP_DISABLPercentage of civilian noninstitutionalized population with a disability estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_SNGPNTEP_SNGPNTPercentage of single parent households with children under 18 estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_MINRTYEP_MINRTYPercentage minority (all persons except white, non-Hispanic) estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_LIMENGEP_LIMENGPercentage of persons (age 5+) who speak English "less than well" estimate, 2013-2017 ACSEP_MUNITEP_MUNITPercentage of housing in structures with 10 or more units estimateEP_MOBILEEP_MOBILEPercentage of mobile homes estimateEP_CROWDEP_CROWDPercentage of occupied housing units with more people than rooms estimateEP_NOVEHEP_NOVEHPercentage of households with no vehicle available estimateEP_GROUPQEP_GROUPQPercentage of persons in group quarters estimate, 2014-2018 ACSBelow_5_yrBelow_5_yrUnder 5 years: Percentage of Total populationBelow_18_yrBelow_18_yrUnder 18 years: Percentage of Total population18-39_yr18_39_yr18-39 years: Percentage of Total population40-64_yr40_64_yr40-64 years: Percentage of Total populationAbove_65_yrAbove_65_yrAbove 65 years: Percentage of Total populationPop_malePop_malePercentage of total population malePop_femalePop_femalePercentage of total population femaleWhitewhitePercentage population of white aloneBlackblackPercentage population of black or African American aloneAmerican_indianamerican_iPercentage population of American Indian and Alaska native aloneAsianasianPercentage population of Asian aloneHawaiian_pacific_islanderhawaiian_pPercentage population of Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander aloneSome_othersome_otherPercentage population of some other race aloneMedian_tot_householdsmedian_totMedian household income in the past 12 months (in 2019 inflation-adjusted dollars) by household size – total householdsLess_than_high_schoolLess_than_Percentage of Educational attainment for the population less than 9th grades and 9th to 12th grade, no diploma estimateHigh_schoolHigh_schooPercentage of Educational attainment for the population of High school graduate (includes equivalency)Some_collegeSome_collePercentage of Educational attainment for the population of Some college, no degreeAssociates_degreeAssociatesPercentage of Educational attainment for the population of associate degreeBachelor’s_degreeBachelor_sPercentage of Educational attainment for the population of Bachelor’s degreeMaster’s_degreeMaster_s_dPercentage of Educational attainment for the population of Graduate or professional degreecomp_devicescomp_devicPercentage of Household having one or more types of computing devicesInternetInternetPercentage of Household with an Internet subscriptionBroadbandBroadbandPercentage of Household having Broadband of any typeSatelite_internetSatelite_iPercentage of Household having Satellite Internet serviceNo_internetNo_internePercentage of Household having No Internet accessNo_computerNo_computePercentage of Household having No computerThis table provides a mapping between the CSV variable names and the shapefile variable names, along with a brief description of each variable.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of United States by gender across 18 age groups. It lists the male and female population in each age group along with the gender ratio for United States. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of United States by gender and age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group for both Men and Women in United States. Additionally, it can be used to see how the gender ratio changes from birth to senior most age group and male to female ratio across each age group for United States.

Key observations

Largest age group (population): Male # 25-29 years (11.57 million) | Female # 30-34 years (11.18 million). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis.

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the United States population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the United States is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the United States is shown in the following column.
• Gender Ratio: Also known as the sex ratio, this column displays the number of males per 100 females in United States for each age group.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for United States Population by Gender. You can refer the same here

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

As of April 2024, around 16.5 percent of global active Instagram users were men between the ages of 18 and 24 years. More than half of the global Instagram population worldwide was aged 34 years or younger.

              Teens and social media

              As one of the biggest social networks worldwide, Instagram is especially popular with teenagers. As of fall 2020, the photo-sharing app ranked third in terms of preferred social network among teenagers in the United States, second to Snapchat and TikTok. Instagram was one of the most influential advertising channels among female Gen Z users when making purchasing decisions. Teens report feeling more confident, popular, and better about themselves when using social media, and less lonely, depressed and anxious.
              Social media can have negative effects on teens, which is also much more pronounced on those with low emotional well-being. It was found that 35 percent of teenagers with low social-emotional well-being reported to have experienced cyber bullying when using social media, while in comparison only five percent of teenagers with high social-emotional well-being stated the same. As such, social media can have a big impact on already fragile states of mind.

"Enrollment counts are based on the October 31 Audited Register for the 2017-18 to 2019-20 school years. To account for the delay in the start of the school year, enrollment counts are based on the November 13 Audited Register for 2020-21 and the November 12 Audited Register for 2021-22. * Please note that October 31 (and November 12-13) enrollment is not audited for charter schools or Pre-K Early Education Centers (NYCEECs). Charter schools are required to submit enrollment as of BEDS Day, the first Wednesday in October, to the New York State Department of Education." Enrollment counts in the Demographic Snapshot will likely exceed operational enrollment counts due to the fact that long-term absence (LTA) students are excluded for funding purposes. Data on students with disabilities, English Language Learners, students' povery status, and students' Economic Need Value are as of the June 30 for each school year except in 2021-22. Data on SWDs, ELLs, Poverty, and ENI in the 2021-22 school year are as of March 7, 2022. 3-K and Pre-K enrollment totals include students in both full-day and half-day programs. Four-year-old students enrolled in Family Childcare Centers are categorized as 3K students for the purposes of this report. All schools listed are as of the 2021-22 school year. Schools closed before 2021-22 are not included in the school level tab but are included in the data for citywide, borough, and district. Programs and Pre-K NYC Early Education Centers (NYCEECs) are not included on the school-level tab. Due to missing demographic information in rare cases at the time of the enrollment snapshot, demographic categories do not always add up to citywide totals. Students with disabilities are defined as any child receiving an Individualized Education Program (IEP) as of the end of the school year (or March 7 for 2021-22). NYC DOE "Poverty" counts are based on the number of students with families who have qualified for free or reduced price lunch, or are eligible for Human Resources Administration (HRA) benefits. In previous years, the poverty indicator also included students enrolled in a Universal Meal School (USM), where all students automatically qualified, with the exception of middle schools, D75 schools and Pre-K centers. In 2017-18, all students in NYC schools became eligible for free lunch. In order to better reflect free and reduced price lunch status, the poverty indicator does not include student USM status, and retroactively applies this rule to previous years. "The school’s Economic Need Index is the average of its students’ Economic Need Values. The Economic Need Index (ENI) estimates the percentage of students facing economic hardship. The 2014-15 school year is the first year we provide ENI estimates. The metric is calculated as follows: * The student’s Economic Need Value is 1.0 if: o The student is eligible for public assistance from the NYC Human Resources Administration (HRA); o The student lived in temporary housing in the past four years; or o The student is in high school, has a home language other than English, and entered the NYC DOE for the first time within the last four years. * Otherwise, the student’s Economic Need Value is based on the percentage of families (with school-age children) in the student’s census tract whose income is below the poverty level, as estimated by the American Community Survey 5-Year estimate (2020 ACS estimates were used in calculations for 2021-22 ENI). The student’s Economic Need Value equals this percentage divided by 100. Due to differences in the timing of when student demographic, address and census data were pulled, ENI values may vary, slightly, from the ENI values reported in the School Quality Reports. In previous years, student census tract data was based on students’ addresses at the time of ENI calculation. Beginning in 2018-19, census tract data is based on students’ addresses as of the Audited Register date of the g

Created for the 2023-2025 State of Black Los Angeles County (SBLA) interactive report. To learn more about this effort, please visit the report home page at https://ceo.lacounty.gov/ardi/sbla/. For more information about the purpose of this data, please contact CEO-ARDI. For more information about the configuration of this data, please contact ISD-Enterprise GIS. table_name indicator_name Universe source timeframe source_url

life_expectancy_countyhealthrankings_2020 Life Expectancy Total Population County Health Rankings 2018-2020 https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/app/california/2022/measure/outcomes/147/data

obese_est_adult_lachs_2018 Obese Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

obese_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Obese Percent (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

overweight_est_adult_lachs_2018 Overweight Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

overweight_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Overweight Percent (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

diabetes_est_adult_lachs_2018 Ever Diagnosed with Diabetes Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

diabetes_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Ever Diagnosed with Diabetes Percent (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

regular_source_of_care_est_adult_lachs_2018 Reported Having a Regular Source of Health Care Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

regular_source_of_care_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Reported Having a Regular Source of Health Care Percent (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

depression_est_adult_lachs_2018 Ever Diagnosed with Depression Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

depression_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Ever Diagnosed with Depression Percent (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

perceived_safe_est_adult_lachs_2018 Perceived Their Neighborhood to Be Safe from Crime Estimate (#) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

perceived_safe_perc_adult_lachs_2018 Perceived Their Neighborhood to Be Safe from Crime Estimate (%) Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) LAC Health Survey 2018 www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

dental_care_est_child_lachs_2018 Had Dental Care within the past Year Estimate (#) Children (Ages 17 Years and Younger) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

dental_care_perc_child_lachs_2018 Had Dental Care within the past Year Percent (%) Children (Ages 17 Years and Younger) LAC Health Survey 2018www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/LACHSDataTopics2018.htm

no_usual_source_est_chis_2020 No usual source of care Estimate (#) Total Population California Health Interview Survey 2020 https://ask.chis.ucla.edu/AskCHIS/tools/_layouts/AskChisTool/home.aspx

no_usual_source_perc_chis_2020 No usual source of care Percent (%) Total Population California Health Interview Survey 2020 https://ask.chis.ucla.edu/AskCHIS/tools/_layouts/AskChisTool/home.aspx

delayed_care_est_chis_2020 Delayed or didn't get medical care last year Estimate (#) Total Population California Health Interview Survey 2020 https://ask.chis.ucla.edu/AskCHIS/tools/_layouts/AskChisTool/home.aspx

delayed_care_est_chis_2020 Delayed or didn't get medical care last year Percent (%) Total Population California Health Interview Survey 2020 https://ask.chis.ucla.edu/AskCHIS/tools/_layouts/AskChisTool/home.aspx

covid_vax_one_or_more_est_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose Estimate (#) Population 6 months and older LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_perc_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose Percent (%) Population 6 months and older LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_full_est_2022 COVID-19 Fully Vaccinated Estimate (#) Population 6 months and older LAC DPH Sep-22publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_full_perc_2022 COVID-19 Fully Vaccinated Percent (%) Population 6 months and older LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_children_est_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose - Children under 5 Estimate (#) Population older than 6 months and under 5 years LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_children_perc_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose Children under 5 Percent (%) Population older than 6 months and under 5 years LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_youth_est_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose - Youth 5-17 Estimate (#) Population 5-17 years LAC DPH Sep-22publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_youth_perc_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose Youth 5-17 Percent (%) Population 5-17 years LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_adults_est_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose - Adults Estimate (#) Population 18 and older LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

covid_vax_one_or_more_adults_perc_2022 COVID-19 Vaccination 1+ Dose Adults Percent (%) Population 18 and older LAC DPH Sep-22 publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/coronavirus/vaccine/vaccine-dashboard.htm

insured_pop_est_acs_2020 Insured population # Civilian noninstitutionalized population 2016-2020 ACS - S2701 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?g=0500000US06037&tid=ACSST5Y2020.S2701

insured_pop_perc_acs_2020 Insured population % Civilian noninstitutionalized population 2016-2020 ACS - S2701 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?g=0500000US06037&tid=ACSST5Y2020.S2701

mch_indicators_2019 Babies Born with Positive MCH Indicators Babies born in time frame Strong Start Index 2016-2019 https://infogram.com/1pj576jwy166z1s6ywvk32l5lkammrym3wy?live

current_asthma Percent of Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) with Current Asthma Adults Los Angeles County Health Survey 2018 https://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/HA_DATA_TRENDS.htm

no_med_insurance Percent of Insured Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) Who Reported a Time Without Medical Insurance in the past 12 Months. Adults Los Angeles County Health Survey 2011 https://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/HA_DATA_TRENDS.htm

transportation_problems Percent of Adults (Ages 18 Years and Older) Who Reported That Transportation Problems Kept Them from Obtaining Needed Medical Care in the past Year. Adults Los Angeles County Health Survey 2007 https://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/ha/HA_DATA_TRENDS.htm

This statistic reveals the religious affiliation of young people aged 18 to 30 in France in March 2018, depending on their employment situation. From the graph, it can be seen that more than ** percent of those looking for work declared themselves to be without religion. Most of actives in an office were catholics.

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

Abstract

The 2017-18 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (2017-18 BDHS) is a nationwide survey with a nationally representative sample of approximately 20,250 selected households. All ever-married women age 15-49 who are usual members of the selected households or who spent the night before the survey in the selected households were eligible for individual interviews. The survey was designed to produce reliable estimates for key indicators at the national level as well as for urban and rural areas and each of the country’s eight divisions: Barishal, Chattogram, Dhaka, Khulna, Mymensingh, Rajshahi, Rangpur, and Sylhet.

The main objective of the 2017-18 BDHS is to provide up-to-date information on fertility and fertility preferences; childhood mortality levels and causes of death; awareness, approval, and use of family planning methods; maternal and child health, including breastfeeding practices and nutritional status; newborn care; women’s empowerment; selected noncommunicable diseases (NCDS); and availability and accessibility of health and family planning services at the community level.

This information is intended to assist policymakers and program managers in monitoring and evaluating the 4th Health, Population and Nutrition Sector Program (4th HPNSP) 2017-2022 of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW) and to provide estimates for 14 major indicators of the HPNSP Results Framework (MOHFW 2017).

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Community

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49 and all children aged 0-5 resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 2017-18 BDHS is nationally representative and covers the entire population residing in non-institutional dwelling units in the country. The survey used a list of enumeration areas (EAs) from the 2011 Population and Housing Census of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, provided by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), as a sampling frame (BBS 2011). The primary sampling unit (PSU) of the survey is an EA with an average of about 120 households.

Bangladesh consists of eight administrative divisions: Barishal, Chattogram, Dhaka, Khulna, Mymensingh, Rajshahi, Rangpur, and Sylhet. Each division is divided into zilas and each zila into upazilas. Each urban area in an upazila is divided into wards, which are further subdivided into mohallas. A rural area in an upazila is divided into union parishads (UPs) and, within UPs, into mouzas. These divisions allow the country as a whole to be separated into rural and urban areas.

The survey is based on a two-stage stratified sample of households. In the first stage, 675 EAs (250 in urban areas and 425 in rural areas) were selected with probability proportional to EA size. The sample in that stage was drawn by BBS, following the specifications provided by ICF that include cluster allocation and instructions on sample selection. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second-stage selection of households. In the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of an average of 30 households per EA was selected to provide

statistically reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas separately, and for each of the eight divisions. Based on this design, 20,250 residential households were selected. Completed interviews were expected from about 20,100 ever-married women age 15-49. In addition, in a subsample of one-fourth of the households (about 7-8 households per EA), all ever-married women age 50 and older, never-married women age 18 and older, and men age 18 and older were weighed and had their height measured. In the same households, blood pressure and blood glucose testing were conducted for all adult men and women age 18 and older.

The survey was successfully carried out in 672 clusters after elimination of three clusters (one urban and two rural) that were completely eroded by floodwater. These clusters were in Dhaka (one urban cluster), Rajshahi (one rural cluster), and Rangpur (one rural cluster). A total of 20,160 households were selected for the survey.

For further details on sample selection, see Appendix A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The 2017-18 BDHS used six types of questionnaires: (1) the Household Questionnaire, (2) the Woman’s Questionnaire (completed by ever-married women age 15-49), (3) the Biomarker Questionnaire, (4) two verbal autopsy questionnaires to collect data on causes of death among children under age 5, (5) the Community Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. The first three questionnaires were based on the model questionnaires developed for the DHS-7 Program, adapted to the situation and needs in Bangladesh and taking into account the content of the instruments employed in prior BDHS surveys. The verbal autopsy module was replicated from the questionnaires used in the 2011 BDHS, as the objectives of the 2011 BDHS and the 2017-18 BDHS were the same. The module was adapted from the standardized WHO 2016 verbal autopsy module. The Community Questionnaire was adapted from the version used in the 2014 BDHS. The adaptation process for the 2017-18 BDHS involved a series of meetings with a technical working group. Additionally, draft questionnaires were circulated to other interested groups and were reviewed by the TWG and SAC. The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla. Back translations were conducted by people not involved with the Bangla translations.

Cleaning operations

Completed BDHS questionnaires were returned to Dhaka every 2 weeks for data processing at Mitra and Associates offices. Data processing began shortly after fieldwork commenced and consisted of office editing, coding of open-ended questions, data entry, and editing of inconsistencies found by the computer program. The field teams were alerted regarding any inconsistencies or errors found during data processing. Eight data entry operators and two data entry supervisors performed the work, which commenced on November 17, 2017, and ended on March 27, 2018. Data processing was accomplished using Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) software, jointly developed by the United States Census Bureau, ICF, and Serpro S.A.

Response rate

Among the 20,160 households selected, 19,584 were occupied. Interviews were successfully completed in 19,457 (99%) of the occupied households. Among the 20,376 ever-married women age 15-49 eligible for interviews, 20,127 were interviewed, yielding a response rate of 99%. The principal reason for non-response among women was their absence from home despite repeated visits. Response rates did not vary notably by urbanrural residence.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2017-18 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2017-18 BDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95% of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2017-18 BDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearization method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

SUMMARYThis analysis, designed and executed by Ribble Rivers Trust, identifies areas across England with the greatest levels of obesity in adults (aged 18+). Please read the below information to gain a full understanding of what the data shows and how it should be interpreted.ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYThe analysis was carried out using Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data, derived from NHS Digital, relating to obesity in adults (aged 18+).This information was recorded at the GP practice level. However, GP catchment areas are not mutually exclusive: they overlap, with some areas covered by 30+ GP practices. Therefore, to increase the clarity and usability of the data, the GP-level statistics were converted into statistics based on Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) census boundaries.The percentage of each MSOA’s adult population (aged 18+) that are obese was estimated. This was achieved by calculating a weighted average based on:The percentage of the MSOA area that was covered by each GP practice’s catchment areaOf the GPs that covered part of that MSOA: the percentage of registered patients that have that illness The estimated percentage of each MSOA’s adult population that are obese was then combined with Office for National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates (2019) data for MSOAs, to estimate the number of people in each MSOA that are obese, within the relevant age range.Each MSOA was assigned a relative score between 1 and 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best) based on:A) the PERCENTAGE of the adult population within that MSOA who are estimated to be obeseB) the NUMBER of adults within that MSOA who are estimated to be obeseAn average of scores A & B was taken, and converted to a relative score between 1 and 0 (1= worst, 0 = best). The closer to 1 the score, the greater both the number and percentage of the population in the MSOA that are estimated to be obese compared to other MSOAs. In other words, those are areas where it’s estimated a large number of people are obese, and where those people make up a large percentage of the population, indicating there is a real issue with obesity within the adult population and the investment of resources to address that issue could have the greatest benefits.LIMITATIONS1. GP data for the financial year 1st April 2018 – 31st March 2019 was used in preference to data for the financial year 1st April 2019 – 31st March 2020, as the onset of the COVID19 pandemic during the latter year could have affected the reporting of medical statistics by GPs. However, for 53 GPs (out of 7670) that did not submit data in 2018/19, data from 2019/20 was used instead. Note also that some GPs (997 out of 7670) did not submit data in either year. This dataset should be viewed in conjunction with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset, to determine areas where data from 2019/20 was used, where one or more GPs did not submit data in either year, or where there were large discrepancies between the 2018/19 and 2019/20 data (differences in statistics that were > mean +/- 1 St.Dev.), which suggests erroneous data in one of those years (it was not feasible for this study to investigate this further), and thus where data should be interpreted with caution. This dataset also shows rural areas (with little or no population) that do not officially fall into any GP catchment area and for which there were no statistics regarding adult obesity (although this will not affect the results of this analysis if there are no people living in those areas).2. It was not feasible to incorporate ultra-fine-scale geographic distribution of populations that are registered with each GP practice or who live within each MSOA. Populations might be concentrated in certain areas of a GP practice’s catchment area or MSOA and relatively sparse in other areas. Therefore, the dataset should be used to identify general areas where there are high levels of adult obesity, rather than interpreting the boundaries between areas as ‘hard’ boundaries that mark definite divisions between areas with differing levels of adult obesity.TO BE VIEWED IN COMBINATION WITH:This dataset should be viewed alongside the following datasets, which highlight areas of missing data and potential outliers in the data:Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliersLevels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses (England): Missing dataDOWNLOADING THIS DATATo access this data on your desktop GIS, download the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset.DATA SOURCESThis dataset was produced using:Quality and Outcomes Framework data: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.GP Catchment Outlines. Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital. Data was cleaned by Ribble Rivers Trust before use.COPYRIGHT NOTICEThe reproduction of this data must be accompanied by the following statement:© Ribble Rivers Trust 2021. Analysis carried out using data that is: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.CaBA HEALTH & WELLBEING EVIDENCE BASEThis dataset forms part of the wider CaBA Health and Wellbeing Evidence Base.

🇸🇪 스웨덴