The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) provides data and have considerable potential to study the health and environmental exposure of the non-institutionalized US population. However, as NHANES data are plagued with multiple inconsistencies, processing these data is required before deriving new insights through large-scale analyses. Thus, we developed a set of curated and unified datasets by merging 614 separate files and harmonizing unrestricted data across NHANES III (1988-1994) and Continuous (1999-2018), totaling 135,310 participants and 5,078 variables. The variables conveydemographics (281 variables),dietary consumption (324 variables),physiological functions (1,040 variables),occupation (61 variables),questionnaires (1444 variables, e.g., physical activity, medical conditions, diabetes, reproductive health, blood pressure and cholesterol, early childhood),medications (29 variables),mortality information linked from the National Death Index (15 variables),survey weights (857 variables),environmental exposure biomarker measurements (598 variables), andchemical comments indicating which measurements are below or above the lower limit of detection (505 variables).csv Data Record: The curated NHANES datasets and the data dictionaries includes 23 .csv files and 1 excel file.The curated NHANES datasets involves 20 .csv formatted files, two for each module with one as the uncleaned version and the other as the cleaned version. The modules are labeled as the following: 1) mortality, 2) dietary, 3) demographics, 4) response, 5) medications, 6) questionnaire, 7) chemicals, 8) occupation, 9) weights, and 10) comments."dictionary_nhanes.csv" is a dictionary that lists the variable name, description, module, category, units, CAS Number, comment use, chemical family, chemical family shortened, number of measurements, and cycles available for all 5,078 variables in NHANES."dictionary_harmonized_categories.csv" contains the harmonized categories for the categorical variables.“dictionary_drug_codes.csv” contains the dictionary for descriptors on the drugs codes.“nhanes_inconsistencies_documentation.xlsx” is an excel file that contains the cleaning documentation, which records all the inconsistencies for all affected variables to help curate each of the NHANES modules.R Data Record: For researchers who want to conduct their analysis in the R programming language, only cleaned NHANES modules and the data dictionaries can be downloaded as a .zip file which include an .RData file and an .R file.“w - nhanes_1988_2018.RData” contains all the aforementioned datasets as R data objects. We make available all R scripts on customized functions that were written to curate the data.“m - nhanes_1988_2018.R” shows how we used the customized functions (i.e. our pipeline) to curate the original NHANES data.Example starter codes: The set of starter code to help users conduct exposome analysis consists of four R markdown files (.Rmd). We recommend going through the tutorials in order.“example_0 - merge_datasets_together.Rmd” demonstrates how to merge the curated NHANES datasets together.“example_1 - account_for_nhanes_design.Rmd” demonstrates how to conduct a linear regression model, a survey-weighted regression model, a Cox proportional hazard model, and a survey-weighted Cox proportional hazard model.“example_2 - calculate_summary_statistics.Rmd” demonstrates how to calculate summary statistics for one variable and multiple variables with and without accounting for the NHANES sampling design.“example_3 - run_multiple_regressions.Rmd” demonstrates how run multiple regression models with and without adjusting for the sampling design.

Sample data for exercises in Further Adventures in Data Cleaning.

When working with data, you often spend the most amount of time cleaning your data. Learn how to write more efficient code using the tidyverse in R.

Original dataset that is shared on Github can be found here. These are hands on practice datasets that were linked through the Coursera Guided Project Certificate Course for Handling Missing Values in R, a part of Coursera Project Network. The datasets links were shared by the original author and instructor of the course Arimoro Olayinka Imisioluwa.

Things you could do with this dataset: As a beginner in R, these datasets helped me to get a hang over making data clean and tidy and handling missing values(only numeric) using R. Good for anyone looking for a beginner to intermediate level understanding in these subjects.

Here are my notebooks as kernels using these datasets and using a few more preloaded datasets in R, as suggested by the instructor. TidY DatA Practice MissinG DatA HandlinG - NumeriC

Dataset

This dataset was created by Rafael R. Lima

Released under CC0: Public Domain

Contents

Subscribers can find out export and import data of 23 countries by HS code or product’s name. This demo is helpful for market analysis.

Scripts to clean EVI2 data obtained from the VIP lab (University of Arizona) website (https://vip.arizona.edu/about.php and https://vip.arizona.edu/viplab_data_explorer.php). Data obtained in 2012.- outlier detection and removal/replacement- alignment of 2 periodsThe manuscript detailing the methods and resulting data sets has been accepted for publication in Nature Scientific Data (05/11/2019).Instructions: use the R Markdown html file for instructions!Code last manipulated and tested in R 3.4.3 ("Kite-Eating Tree")

Surveys from Carpentries style workshops the results of which are presented in the accompanying manuscript.

Pre- and post-workshop surveys for each workshop (Introduction to R, Intermediate R, Data Wrangling in R, Data Visualization in R) were collected via Google Form.

The surveys administered for the fall 2018, spring 2019 academic year are included as pre_workshop_survey and post_workshop_assessment PDF files. 
The raw versions of these data are included in the Excel files ending in survey_raw or assessment_raw.

  The data files whose name includes survey contain raw data from pre-workshop surveys and the data files whose name includes assessment contain raw data from the post-workshop assessment survey.


The annotated RMarkdown files used to clean the pre-workshop surveys and post-workshop assessments are included as workshop_survey_cleaning and workshop_assessment_cleaning, r...

Shanghai Hanyang Clean Technology R Export Import Data. Follow the Eximpedia platform for HS code, importer-exporter records, and customs shipment details.

This dataset contains all data and code required to clean the data, fit the models, and create the figures and tables for the laboratory experiment portion of the manuscript:Kannan, N., Q. D. Read, and W. Zhang. 2024. A natural polymer material as a pesticide adjuvant for mitigating off-target drift and protecting pollinator health. Heliyon, in press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35510.In this dataset, we archive results from several laboratory and field trials testing different adjuvants (spray additives) that are intended to reduce particle drift, increase particle size, and slow down the particles from pesticide spray nozzles. We fit statistical models to the droplet size and speed distribution data and statistically compare different metrics between the adjuvants (sodium alginate, polyacrylamide [PAM], and control without any adjuvants). The following files are included:RawDataPAMsodAlgOxfLsr.xlsx: Raw data for primary analysesOrganizedDataPaperRevision20240614.xlsx: Raw data to produce density plots presented in Figs. 8 and 9raw_data_readme.md: Markdown file with description of the raw data filesR_code_supplement.R: All R code required to reproduce primary analysesR_code_supplement2.R: R code required to produce density plots presented in Figs. 8 and 9Intermediate R output files are also included so that tables and figures can be recreated without having to rerun the data preprocessing, model fitting, and posterior estimation steps:pam_cleaned.RData: Data combined into clean R data frames for analysisvelocityscaledlogdiamfit.rds: Fitted brms model object for velocitylnormfitreduced.rds: Fitted brms model object for diameter distributionemm_con_velo_diam_draws.RData: Posterior distributions of estimated marginal means for velocityemm_con_draws.RData: Posterior distributions of estimated marginal means for diameter distributionThe following software and package versions were used:R version 4.3.1CmdStan version 2.33.1R packages:brms version 2.20.5cmdstanr version 0.5.3fitdistrplus version 1.1-11tidybayes version 3.0.4emmeans version 1.8.9

This dataset contains the content of the subset of all files with a correct publication date from the 2017 release of files related to the JFK case (retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/2017-release). This content was extracted from the source PDF files using the R OCR libraries tesseract and pdftools.

The code to derive the dataset is given as follows:

BEGIN R DATA PROCESSING SCRIPT

library(tesseract) library(pdftools)

pdfs <- list.files("[path to your output directory containing all PDF files]")

meta <- read.csv2("[path to your input directory]/jfkrelease-2017-dce65d0ec70a54d5744de17d280f3ad2.csv",header = T,sep = ',') #the meta file containing all metadata for the PDF files (e.g. publication date)

meta$Doc.Date <- as.character(meta$Doc.Date)

meta.clean <- meta[-which(meta$Doc.Date=="" | grepl("/0000",meta$Doc.Date)),] for(i in 1:nrow(meta.clean)){ meta.clean$Doc.Date[i] <- gsub("00","01",meta.clean$Doc.Date[i])

if(nchar(meta.clean$Doc.Date[i])<10){ meta.clean$Doc.Date[i]<-format(strptime(meta.clean$Doc.Date[i],format = "%d/%m/%y"),"%m/%d/%Y") }

}

meta.clean$Doc.Date <- strptime(meta.clean$Doc.Date,format = "%m/%d/%Y")

meta.clean <- meta.clean[order(meta.clean$Doc.Date),]

docs <- data.frame(content=character(0),dpub=character(0),stringsAsFactors = F) for(i in 1:nrow(meta.clean)){

for(i in 1:3){

pdf_prop <- pdftools::pdf_info(paste0("[path to your output directory]/",tolower(meta.clean$File.Name[i]))) tmp_files <- c() for(k in 1:pdf_prop$pages){ tmp_files <- c(tmp_files,paste0("/home/STAFF/luczakma/RProjects/JFK/data/tmp/",k)) }

img_file <- pdftools::pdf_convert(paste0("[path to your output directory]/",tolower(meta.clean$File.Name[i])), format = 'tiff', pages = NULL, dpi = 700,filenames = tmp_files)

txt <- ""

for(j in 1:length(img_file)){ extract <- ocr(img_file[j], engine = tesseract("eng")) #unlink(img_file) txt <- paste(txt,extract,collapse = " ") }

docs <- rbind(docs,data.frame(content=iconv(tolower(gsub("\s+"," ",gsub("[[:punct:]]|[ ]"," ",txt))),to="UTF-8"),dpub=format(meta.clean$Doc.Date[i],"%Y/%m/%d"),stringsAsFactors = F),stringsAsFactors = F) }

write.table(docs,"[path to your output directory]/documents.csv", row.names = F)

END R DATA PROCESSING SCRIPT

For any questions about this data please email me at jacob@crimedatatool.com. If you use this data, please cite it.Version 3 release notes:Adds data in the following formats: Excel.Changes project name to avoid confusing this data for the ones done by NACJD.Version 2 release notes:Adds data for 2017.Adds a "number_of_months_reported" variable which says how many months of the year the agency reported data.Property Stolen and Recovered is a Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program data set with information on the number of offenses (crimes included are murder, rape, robbery, burglary, theft/larceny, and motor vehicle theft), the value of the offense, and subcategories of the offense (e.g. for robbery it is broken down into subcategories including highway robbery, bank robbery, gas station robbery). The majority of the data relates to theft. Theft is divided into subcategories of theft such as shoplifting, theft of bicycle, theft from building, and purse snatching. For a number of items stolen (e.g. money, jewelry and previous metals, guns), the value of property stolen and and the value for property recovered is provided. This data set is also referred to as the Supplement to Return A (Offenses Known and Reported). All the data was received directly from the FBI as text or .DTA files. I created a setup file based on the documentation provided by the FBI and read the data into R using the package asciiSetupReader. All work to clean the data and save it in various file formats was also done in R. For the R code used to clean this data, see here: https://github.com/jacobkap/crime_data. The Word document file available for download is the guidebook the FBI provided with the raw data which I used to create the setup file to read in data.There may be inaccuracies in the data, particularly in the group of columns starting with "auto." To reduce (but certainly not eliminate) data errors, I replaced the following values with NA for the group of columns beginning with "offenses" or "auto" as they are common data entry error values (e.g. are larger than the agency's population, are much larger than other crimes or months in same agency): 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, 8000, 9000, 10000, 20000, 30000, 40000, 50000, 60000, 70000, 80000, 90000, 100000, 99942. This cleaning was NOT done on the columns starting with "value."For every numeric column I replaced negative indicator values (e.g. "j" for -1) with the negative number they are supposed to be. These negative number indicators are not included in the FBI's codebook for this data but are present in the data. I used the values in the FBI's codebook for the Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest data.To make it easier to merge with other data, I merged this data with the Law Enforcement Agency Identifiers Crosswalk (LEAIC) data. The data from the LEAIC add FIPS (state, county, and place) and agency type/subtype. If an agency has used a different FIPS code in the past, check to make sure the FIPS code is the same as in this data.

Google Ads Sales Dataset for Data Analytics Campaigns (Raw & Uncleaned) 📝 Dataset Overview This dataset contains raw, uncleaned advertising data from a simulated Google Ads campaign promoting data analytics courses and services. It closely mimics what real digital marketers and analysts would encounter when working with exported campaign data — including typos, formatting issues, missing values, and inconsistencies.

It is ideal for practicing:

Data cleaning

Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA)

Marketing analytics

Campaign performance insights

Dashboard creation using tools like Excel, Python, or Power BI

📁 Columns in the Dataset Column Name ----- -Description Ad_ID --------Unique ID of the ad campaign Campaign_Name ------Name of the campaign (with typos and variations) Clicks --Number of clicks received Impressions --Number of ad impressions Cost --Total cost of the ad (in ₹ or $ format with missing values) Leads ---Number of leads generated Conversions ----Number of actual conversions (signups, sales, etc.) Conversion Rate ---Calculated conversion rate (Conversions ÷ Clicks) Sale_Amount ---Revenue generated from the conversions Ad_Date------ Date of the ad activity (in inconsistent formats like YYYY/MM/DD, DD-MM-YY) Location ------------City where the ad was served (includes spelling/case variations) Device------------ Device type (Mobile, Desktop, Tablet with mixed casing) Keyword ----------Keyword that triggered the ad (with typos)

⚠️ Data Quality Issues (Intentional) This dataset was intentionally left raw and uncleaned to reflect real-world messiness, such as:

Inconsistent date formats

Spelling errors (e.g., "analitics", "anaytics")

Duplicate rows

Mixed units and symbols in cost/revenue columns

Missing values

Irregular casing in categorical fields (e.g., "mobile", "Mobile", "MOBILE")

🎯 Use Cases Data cleaning exercises in Python (Pandas), R, Excel

Data preprocessing for machine learning

Campaign performance analysis

Conversion optimization tracking

Building dashboards in Power BI, Tableau, or Looker

💡 Sample Analysis Ideas Track campaign cost vs. return (ROI)

Analyze click-through rates (CTR) by device or location

Clean and standardize campaign names and keywords

Investigate keyword performance vs. conversions

🔖 Tags Digital Marketing · Google Ads · Marketing Analytics · Data Cleaning · Pandas Practice · Business Analytics · CRM Data

Data set consisting of data joined for analyzing the SBIR/STTR program. Data consists of individual awards and agency-level observations. The R and python code required for pulling, cleaning, and creating useful data sets has been included. Allard_Get and Clean Data.R This file provides the code for getting, cleaning, and joining the numerous data sets that this project combined. This code is written in the R language and can be used in any R environment running R 3.5.1 or higher. If the other files in this Dataverse are downloaded to the working directory, then this Rcode will be able to replicate the original study without needing the user to update any file paths. Allard SBIR STTR WebScraper.py This is the code I deployed to multiple Amazon EC2 instances to scrape data o each individual award in my data set, including the contact info and DUNS data. Allard_Analysis_APPAM SBIR project Forthcoming Allard_Spatial Analysis Forthcoming Awards_SBIR_df.Rdata This unique data set consists of 89,330 observations spanning the years 1983 - 2018 and accounting for all eleven SBIR/STTR agencies. This data set consists of data collected from the Small Business Administration's Awards API and also unique data collected through web scraping by the author. Budget_SBIR_df.Rdata 246 observations for 20 agencies across 25 years of their budget-performance in the SBIR/STTR program. Data was collected from the Small Business Administration using the Annual Reports Dashboard, the Awards API, and an author-designed web crawler of the websites of awards. Solicit_SBIR-df.Rdata This data consists of observations of solicitations published by agencies for the SBIR program. This data was collected from the SBA Solicitations API. Primary Sources Small Business Administration. “Annual Reports Dashboard,” 2018. https://www.sbir.gov/awards/annual-reports. Small Business Administration. “SBIR Awards Data,” 2018. https://www.sbir.gov/api. Small Business Administration. “SBIR Solicit Data,” 2018. https://www.sbir.gov/api.

This data set contains the scripts used for importing, trimming, cleaning, analysing, and plotting a large dataset of inclination experiments with an SOFC module. The measurement data is confidential, so it could not be published alongside the scripts. One row of dummy input data is published to illustrate the structure of the analysed data. The analysis is used for the journal paper "Experimental Evaluation of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System Exposed to Inclinations and Accelerations by Ship Motions".

The scripts contain:

- A script that reads the data, removes unusable data and transforms into analysable dataframes (Clean and trim.R)

- Two files to make a wide variety of plots (Plotting.R and Specificplots.R)

- A file data does a Gaussian Progress regression to estimate the degradation rate (Degradation estimation.R)

Use the project file first, then open the cleaning R file to clean the raw data. Then use the R file called OLS analysis to analyze the cleaned data, which was outputted as a .rds file.

The LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus)August 2019 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk) Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny MirkesThe data is extracted from the Web of Science® [1] You may not copy or distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of Clarivate Analytics.Getting StartedThis text provides background information on the LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) and pre-processing steps on abstracts, and describes the structure of files to organise the corpus. This corpus is created to be used in future work on the quantification of the sense of research texts. One of the goal of publishing the data is to make it available for further analysis and use in Natural Language Processing projects.LSC is a collection of abstracts of articles and proceeding papers published in 2014, and indexed by the Web of Science (WoS) database [1]. Each document contains title, list of authors, list of categories, list of research areas, and times cited. The corpus contains only documents in English.The corpus was collected in July 2018 online and contains the number of citations from publication date to July 2018.Each document in the corpus contains the following parts:1. Authors: The list of authors of the paper2. Title: The title of the paper3. Abstract: The abstract of the paper4. Categories: One or more category from the list of categories [2]. Full list of categories is presented in file ‘List_of _Categories.txt’.5. Research Areas: One or more research area from the list of research areas [3]. Full list of research areas is presented in file ‘List_of_Research_Areas.txt’.6. Total Times cited: The number of times the paper was cited by other items from all databases within Web of Science platform [4]7. Times cited in Core Collection: The total number of times the paper was cited by other papers within the WoS Core Collection [4]We describe a document as the collection of information (about a paper) listed above. The total number of documents in LSC is 1,673,824.All documents in LSC have nonempty abstract, title, categories, research areas and times cited in WoS databases. There are 119 documents with empty authors list, we did not exclude these documents.Data ProcessingThis section describes all steps in order for the LSC to be collected, clean and available to researchers. Processing the data consists of six main steps:Step 1: Downloading of the Data OnlineThis is the step of collecting the dataset online. This is done manually by exporting documents as Tab-delimitated files. All downloaded documents are available online.Step 2: Importing the Dataset to RThis is the process of converting the collection to RData format for processing the data. The LSC was collected as TXT files. All documents are extracted to R.Step 3: Cleaning the Data from Documents with Empty Abstract or without CategoryNot all papers have abstract and categories in the collection. As our research is based on the analysis of abstracts and categories, preliminary detecting and removing inaccurate documents were performed. All documents with empty abstracts and documents without categories are removed.Step 4: Identification and Correction of Concatenate Words in AbstractsTraditionally, abstracts are written in a format of executive summary with one paragraph of continuous writing, which is known as ‘unstructured abstract’. However, especially medicine-related publications use ‘structured abstracts’. Such type of abstracts are divided into sections with distinct headings such as introduction, aim, objective, method, result, conclusion etc.Used tool for extracting abstracts leads concatenate words of section headings with the first word of the section. As a result, some of structured abstracts in the LSC require additional process of correction to split such concatenate words. For instance, we observe words such as ConclusionHigher and ConclusionsRT etc. in the corpus. The detection and identification of concatenate words cannot be totally automated. Human intervention is needed in the identification of possible headings of sections. We note that we only consider concatenate words in headings of sections as it is not possible to detect all concatenate words without deep knowledge of research areas. Identification of such words is done by sampling of medicine-related publications. The section headings in such abstracts are listed in the List 1.List 1 Headings of sections identified in structured abstractsBackground Method(s) DesignTheoretical Measurement(s) LocationAim(s) Methodology ProcessAbstract Population ApproachObjective(s) Purpose(s) Subject(s)Introduction Implication(s) Patient(s)Procedure(s) Hypothesis Measure(s)Setting(s) Limitation(s) DiscussionConclusion(s) Result(s) Finding(s)Material (s) Rationale(s)Implications for health and nursing policyAll words including headings in the List 1 are detected in entire corpus, and then words are split into two words. For instance, the word ‘ConclusionHigher’ is split into ‘Conclusion’ and ‘Higher’.Step 5: Extracting (Sub-setting) the Data Based on Lengths of AbstractsAfter correction of concatenate words is completed, the lengths of abstracts are calculated. ‘Length’ indicates the totalnumber of words in the text, calculated by the same rule as for Microsoft Word ‘word count’ [5].According to APA style manual [6], an abstract should contain between 150 to 250 words. However, word limits vary from journal to journal. For instance, Journal of Vascular Surgery recommends that ‘Clinical and basic research studies must include a structured abstract of 400 words or less’[7].In LSC, the length of abstracts varies from 1 to 3805. We decided to limit length of abstracts from 30 to 500 words in order to study documents with abstracts of typical length ranges and to avoid the effect of the length to the analysis. Documents containing less than 30 and more than 500 words in abstracts are removed.Step 6: Saving the Dataset into CSV FormatCorrected and extracted documents are saved into 36 CSV files. The structure of files are described in the following section.The Structure of Fields in CSV FilesIn CSV files, the information is organised with one record on each line and parts of abstract, title, list of authors, list of categories, list of research areas, and times cited is recorded in separated fields.To access the LSC for research purposes, please email to ns433@le.ac.uk.References[1]Web of Science. (15 July). Available: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/[2]WoS Subject Categories. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS56B5/help/WOS/hp_subject_category_terms_tasca.html[3]Research Areas in WoS. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/hp_research_areas_easca.html[4]Times Cited in WoS Core Collection. (15 July). Available: https://support.clarivate.com/ScientificandAcademicResearch/s/article/Web-of-Science-Times-Cited-accessibility-and-variation?language=en_US[5]Word Count. Available: https://support.office.com/en-us/article/show-word-count-3c9e6a11-a04d-43b4-977c-563a0e0d5da3[6]A. P. Association, Publication manual. American Psychological Association Washington, DC, 1983.[7]P. Gloviczki and P. F. Lawrence, "Information for authors," Journal of Vascular Surgery, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. A16-A22, 2017.

For any questions about this data please email me at jacob@crimedatatool.com. If you use this data, please cite it.Version 4 release notes:Adds data for 2018Version 3 release notes:Adds data in the following formats: Excel.Changes project name to avoid confusing this data for the ones done by NACJD.Version 2 release notes:Adds data for 2017.Adds a "number_of_months_reported" variable which says how many months of the year the agency reported data.Property Stolen and Recovered is a Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program data set with information on the number of offenses (crimes included are murder, rape, robbery, burglary, theft/larceny, and motor vehicle theft), the value of the offense, and subcategories of the offense (e.g. for robbery it is broken down into subcategories including highway robbery, bank robbery, gas station robbery). The majority of the data relates to theft. Theft is divided into subcategories of theft such as shoplifting, theft of bicycle, theft from building, and purse snatching. For a number of items stolen (e.g. money, jewelry and previous metals, guns), the value of property stolen and and the value for property recovered is provided. This data set is also referred to as the Supplement to Return A (Offenses Known and Reported). All the data was received directly from the FBI as text or .DTA files. I created a setup file based on the documentation provided by the FBI and read the data into R using the package asciiSetupReader. All work to clean the data and save it in various file formats was also done in R. For the R code used to clean this data, see here: https://github.com/jacobkap/crime_data. The Word document file available for download is the guidebook the FBI provided with the raw data which I used to create the setup file to read in data.There may be inaccuracies in the data, particularly in the group of columns starting with "auto." To reduce (but certainly not eliminate) data errors, I replaced the following values with NA for the group of columns beginning with "offenses" or "auto" as they are common data entry error values (e.g. are larger than the agency's population, are much larger than other crimes or months in same agency): 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, 8000, 9000, 10000, 20000, 30000, 40000, 50000, 60000, 70000, 80000, 90000, 100000, 99942. This cleaning was NOT done on the columns starting with "value."For every numeric column I replaced negative indicator values (e.g. "j" for -1) with the negative number they are supposed to be. These negative number indicators are not included in the FBI's codebook for this data but are present in the data. I used the values in the FBI's codebook for the Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest data.To make it easier to merge with other data, I merged this data with the Law Enforcement Agency Identifiers Crosswalk (LEAIC) data. The data from the LEAIC add FIPS (state, county, and place) and agency type/subtype. If an agency has used a different FIPS code in the past, check to make sure the FIPS code is the same as in this data.

AI in Data Cleaning Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global AI in Data Cleaning market size reached USD 1.82 billion in 2024, demonstrating remarkable momentum driven by the exponential growth of data-driven enterprises. The market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 28.1% from 2025 to 2033, reaching an estimated USD 17.73 billion by 2033. This exceptional growth trajectory is primarily fueled by increasing data volumes, the urgent need for high-quality datasets, and the adoption of artificial intelligence technologies across diverse industries.

The surging demand for automated data management solutions remains a key growth driver for the AI in Data Cleaning market. As organizations generate and collect massive volumes of structured and unstructured data, manual data cleaning processes have become insufficient, error-prone, and costly. AI-powered data cleaning tools address these challenges by leveraging machine learning algorithms, natural language processing, and pattern recognition to efficiently identify, correct, and eliminate inconsistencies, duplicates, and inaccuracies. This automation not only enhances data quality but also significantly reduces operational costs and improves decision-making capabilities, making AI-based solutions indispensable for enterprises aiming to achieve digital transformation and maintain a competitive edge.

Another crucial factor propelling market expansion is the growing emphasis on regulatory compliance and data governance. Sectors such as BFSI, healthcare, and government are subject to stringent data privacy and accuracy regulations, including GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA. AI in data cleaning enables these industries to ensure data integrity, minimize compliance risks, and maintain audit trails, thereby safeguarding sensitive information and building stakeholder trust. Furthermore, the proliferation of cloud computing and advanced analytics platforms has made AI-powered data cleaning solutions more accessible, scalable, and cost-effective, further accelerating adoption across small, medium, and large enterprises.

The increasing integration of AI in data cleaning with other emerging technologies such as big data analytics, IoT, and robotic process automation (RPA) is unlocking new avenues for market growth. By embedding AI-driven data cleaning processes into end-to-end data pipelines, organizations can streamline data preparation, enable real-time analytics, and support advanced use cases like predictive modeling and personalized customer experiences. Strategic partnerships, investments in R&D, and the rise of specialized AI startups are also catalyzing innovation in this space, making AI in data cleaning a cornerstone of the broader data management ecosystem.

From a regional perspective, North America continues to lead the global AI in Data Cleaning market, accounting for the largest revenue share in 2024, followed closely by Europe and Asia Pacific. The region’s dominance is attributed to the presence of major technology vendors, robust digital infrastructure, and high adoption rates of AI and cloud technologies. Meanwhile, Asia Pacific is witnessing the fastest growth, propelled by rapid digitalization, expanding IT sectors, and increasing investments in AI-driven solutions by enterprises in China, India, and Southeast Asia. Europe remains a significant market, supported by strict data protection regulations and a mature enterprise landscape. Latin America and the Middle East & Africa are emerging as promising markets, albeit at a relatively nascent stage, with growing awareness and gradual adoption of AI-powered data cleaning solutions.

Component Analysis

The AI in Data Cleaning market is broadly segmented by component into software and services, with each segment playing a pivotal role in shaping the industry’s evolution. The software segment dominates the market, driven by the rapid adoption of advanced AI-based data cleaning platforms that automate complex data preparation tasks. These platforms leverage sophisticated algorithms to detect anomalies, standardize formats, and enrich datasets, thereby enabling organizations to maintain high-quality data repositories. The increasing demand for self-service data cleaning software, which empowers business users to cleanse data without extensive IT intervention, is further fueling growth in this segment. Vendors are continuously enhancing their offerings with intuitive interfaces, integration capabilities, and support for diverse data sources to cater to a wide r

Objective: To develop a clinical informatics pipeline designed to capture large-scale structured EHR data for a national patient registry.

Materials and Methods: The EHR-R-REDCap pipeline is implemented using R-statistical software to remap and import structured EHR data into the REDCap-based multi-institutional Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) Patient Registry using an adaptable data dictionary.

Results: Clinical laboratory data were extracted from EPIC Clarity across several participating institutions. Labs were transformed, remapped and imported into the MCC registry using the EHR labs abstraction (eLAB) pipeline. Forty-nine clinical tests encompassing 482,450 results were imported into the registry for 1,109 enrolled MCC patients. Data-quality assessment revealed highly accurate, valid labs. Univariate modeling was performed for labs at baseline on overall survival (N=176) using this clinical informatics pipeline.

Conclusion: We demonstrate feasibility of the facile eLAB workflow. EHR data is successfully transformed, and bulk-loaded/imported into a REDCap-based national registry to execute real-world data analysis and interoperability.

Methods eLAB Development and Source Code (R statistical software):

eLAB is written in R (version 4.0.3), and utilizes the following packages for processing: DescTools, REDCapR, reshape2, splitstackshape, readxl, survival, survminer, and tidyverse. Source code for eLAB can be downloaded directly (https://github.com/TheMillerLab/eLAB).

eLAB reformats EHR data abstracted for an identified population of patients (e.g. medical record numbers (MRN)/name list) under an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved protocol. The MCCPR does not host MRNs/names and eLAB converts these to MCCPR assigned record identification numbers (record_id) before import for de-identification.

Functions were written to remap EHR bulk lab data pulls/queries from several sources including Clarity/Crystal reports or institutional EDW including Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR) at MGB. The input, a csv/delimited file of labs for user-defined patients, may vary. Thus, users may need to adapt the initial data wrangling script based on the data input format. However, the downstream transformation, code-lab lookup tables, outcomes analysis, and LOINC remapping are standard for use with the provided REDCap Data Dictionary, DataDictionary_eLAB.csv. The available R-markdown ((https://github.com/TheMillerLab/eLAB) provides suggestions and instructions on where or when upfront script modifications may be necessary to accommodate input variability.

The eLAB pipeline takes several inputs. For example, the input for use with the ‘ehr_format(dt)’ single-line command is non-tabular data assigned as R object ‘dt’ with 4 columns: 1) Patient Name (MRN), 2) Collection Date, 3) Collection Time, and 4) Lab Results wherein several lab panels are in one data frame cell. A mock dataset in this ‘untidy-format’ is provided for demonstration purposes (https://github.com/TheMillerLab/eLAB).

Bulk lab data pulls often result in subtypes of the same lab. For example, potassium labs are reported as “Potassium,” “Potassium-External,” “Potassium(POC),” “Potassium,whole-bld,” “Potassium-Level-External,” “Potassium,venous,” and “Potassium-whole-bld/plasma.” eLAB utilizes a key-value lookup table with ~300 lab subtypes for remapping labs to the Data Dictionary (DD) code. eLAB reformats/accepts only those lab units pre-defined by the registry DD. The lab lookup table is provided for direct use or may be re-configured/updated to meet end-user specifications. eLAB is designed to remap, transform, and filter/adjust value units of semi-structured/structured bulk laboratory values data pulls from the EHR to align with the pre-defined code of the DD.

Data Dictionary (DD)

EHR clinical laboratory data is captured in REDCap using the ‘Labs’ repeating instrument (Supplemental Figures 1-2). The DD is provided for use by researchers at REDCap-participating institutions and is optimized to accommodate the same lab-type captured more than once on the same day for the same patient. The instrument captures 35 clinical lab types. The DD serves several major purposes in the eLAB pipeline. First, it defines every lab type of interest and associated lab unit of interest with a set field/variable name. It also restricts/defines the type of data allowed for entry for each data field, such as a string or numerics. The DD is uploaded into REDCap by every participating site/collaborator and ensures each site collects and codes the data the same way. Automation pipelines, such as eLAB, are designed to remap/clean and reformat data/units utilizing key-value look-up tables that filter and select only the labs/units of interest. eLAB ensures the data pulled from the EHR contains the correct unit and format pre-configured by the DD. The use of the same DD at every participating site ensures that the data field code, format, and relationships in the database are uniform across each site to allow for the simple aggregation of the multi-site data. For example, since every site in the MCCPR uses the same DD, aggregation is efficient and different site csv files are simply combined.

Study Cohort

This study was approved by the MGB IRB. Search of the EHR was performed to identify patients diagnosed with MCC between 1975-2021 (N=1,109) for inclusion in the MCCPR. Subjects diagnosed with primary cutaneous MCC between 2016-2019 (N= 176) were included in the test cohort for exploratory studies of lab result associations with overall survival (OS) using eLAB.

Statistical Analysis

OS is defined as the time from date of MCC diagnosis to date of death. Data was censored at the date of the last follow-up visit if no death event occurred. Univariable Cox proportional hazard modeling was performed among all lab predictors. Due to the hypothesis-generating nature of the work, p-values were exploratory and Bonferroni corrections were not applied.