Annual Resident Population Estimates by Age Group, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2018 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // The contents of this file are released on a rolling basis from December through June. // Note: 'In combination' means in combination with one or more other races. The sum of the five race-in-combination groups adds to more than the total population because individuals may report more than one race. Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. Hispanics may be of any race. Responses of 'Some Other Race' from the 2010 Census are modified. This results in differences between the population for specific race categories shown for the 2010 Census population in this file versus those in the original 2010 Census data. For more information, see https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/methodology/modified-race-summary-file-method/mrsf2010.pdf. // The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // For detailed information about the methods used to create the population estimates, see https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/methodology.html. // Each year, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program (PEP) utilizes current data on births, deaths, and migration to calculate population change since the most recent decennial census, and produces a time series of estimates of population. The annual time series of estimates begins with the most recent decennial census data and extends to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., V2017) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the Census Bureau revises estimates for years back to the last census. As each vintage of estimates includes all years since the most recent decennial census, the latest vintage of data available supersedes all previously produced estimates for those dates. The Population Estimates Program provides additional information including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, and research papers on its website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html.

Demographic data are important to wildlife managers to gauge population health, to allow populations to be utilised sustainably, and to inform conservation efforts. We analysed published demographic data on the world’s wildfowl to examine taxonomic and geographic biases in study, and to identify gaps in knowledge. Wildfowl (order: Anseriformes) are a comparatively well studied bird group which includes 169 species of duck, goose and swan. In all, 1,586 wildfowl research papers published between 1911 and 2010 were found using Web of Knowledge (WoK) and Google Scholar. Over half of the research output involved just 15 species from seven genera. Research output was strongly biased towards ‘high income’ countries, common wildfowl species, and measures of productivity, rather than survival and movement patterns. There were significantly fewer demographic data for the world’s 31 threatened wildfowl species than for non-threatened species. Since 1994, the volume of demographic work on threatened species has increased more than for non-threatened species, but still makes up only 2.7% of total research output. As an aid to research prioritisation, a metric was created to reflect demographic knowledge gaps for each species related to research output for the species, its threat status, and availability of potentially useful surrogate data from congeneric species. According to the metric, the 25 highest priority species include thirteen threatened taxa and nine species each from Asia and South America, and six from Africa.

Abstract

The 2002 Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey (VNDHS 2002) is a nationally representative sample survey of 5,665 ever-married women age 15-49 selected from 205 sample points (clusters) throughout Vietnam. It provides information on levels of fertility, family planning knowledge and use, infant and child mortality, and indicators of maternal and child health. The survey included a Community/ Health Facility Questionnaire that was implemented in each of the sample clusters.

The survey was designed to measure change in reproductive health indicators over the five years since the VNDHS 1997, especially in the 18 provinces that were targeted in the Population and Family Health Project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children. Consequently, all provinces were separated into “project” and “nonproject” groups to permit separate estimates for each. Data collection for the survey took place from 1 October to 21 December 2002.

The Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey 2002 (VNDHS 2002) was the third DHS in Vietnam, with prior surveys implemented in 1988 and 1997. The VNDHS 2002 was carried out in the framework of the activities of the Population and Family Health Project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children (previously the National Committee for Population and Family Planning).

The main objectives of the VNDHS 2002 were to collect up-to-date information on family planning, childhood mortality, and health issues such as breastfeeding practices, pregnancy care, vaccination of children, treatment of common childhood illnesses, and HIV/AIDS, as well as utilization of health and family planning services. The primary objectives of the survey were to estimate changes in family planning use in comparison with the results of the VNDHS 1997, especially on issues in the scope of the project of the Committee for Population, Family and Children.

VNDHS 2002 data confirm the pattern of rapidly declining fertility that was observed in the VNDHS 1997. It also shows a sharp decline in child mortality, as well as a modest increase in contraceptive use. Differences between project and non-project provinces are generally small.

Geographic coverage

The 2002 Vietnam Demographic and Health Survey (VNDHS 2002) is a nationally representative sample survey. The VNDHS 1997 was designed to provide separate estimates for the whole country, urban and rural areas, for 18 project provinces and the remaining nonproject provinces as well. Project provinces refer to 18 focus provinces targeted for the strengthening of their primary health care systems by the Government's Population and Family Health Project to be implemented over a period of seven years, from 1996 to 2002 (At the outset of this project there were 15 focus provinces, which became 18 by the creation of 3 new provinces from the initial set of 15). These provinces were selected according to criteria based on relatively low health and family planning status, no substantial family planning donor presence, and regional spread. These criteria resulted in the selection of the country's poorer provinces. Nine of these provinces have significant proportions of ethnic minorities among their population.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 2002 VNDHS is defined as the universe of all women age 15-49 in Vietnam.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the VNDHS 2002 was based on that used in the VNDHS 1997, which in turn was a subsample of the 1996 Multi-Round Demographic Survey (MRS), a semi-annual survey of about 243,000 households undertaken regularly by GSO. The MRS sample consisted of 1,590 sample areas known as enumeration areas (EAs) spread throughout the 53 provinces/cities of Vietnam, with 30 EAs in each province. On average, an EA comprises about 150 households. For the VNDHS 1997, a subsample of 205 EAs was selected, with 26 households in each urban EA and 39 households for each rural EA. A total of 7,150 households was selected for the survey. The VNDHS 1997 was designed to provide separate estimates for the whole country, urban and rural areas, for 18 project provinces and the remaining nonproject provinces as well. Because the main objective of the VNDHS 2002 was to measure change in reproductive health indicators over the five years since the VNDHS 1997, the sample design for the VNDHS 2002 was as similar as possible to that of the VNDHS 1997.

Although it would have been ideal to have returned to the same households or at least the same sample points as were selected for the VNDHS 1997, several factors made this undesirable. Revisiting the same households would have held the sample artificially rigid over time and would not allow for newly formed households. This would have conflicted with the other major survey objective, which was to provide up-to-date, representative data for the whole of Vietnam. Revisiting the same sample points that were covered in 1997 was complicated by the fact that the country had conducted a population census in 1999, which allowed for a more representative sample frame.

In order to balance the two main objectives of measuring change and providing representative data, it was decided to select enumeration areas from the 1999 Population Census, but to cover the same communes that were sampled in the VNDHS 1997 and attempt to obtain a sample point as close as possible to that selected in 1997. Consequently, the VNDHS 2002 sample also consisted of 205 sample points and reflects the oversampling in the 20 provinces that fall in the World Bank-supported Population and Family Health Project. The sample was designed to produce about 7,000 completed household interviews and 5,600 completed interviews with ever-married women age 15-49.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

As in the VNDHS 1997, three types of questionnaires were used in the 2002 survey: the Household Questionnaire, the Individual Woman's Questionnaire, and the Community/Health Facility Questionnaire. The first two questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, with additions and modifications made during an ORC Macro staff visit in July 2002. The questionnaires were pretested in two clusters in Hanoi (one in a rural area and another in an urban area). After the pretest and consultation with ORC Macro, the drafts were revised for use in the main survey.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in selected households and to collect information on age, sex, education, marital status, and relationship to the head of household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify persons who were eligible for individual interview (i.e. ever-married women age 15-49). In addition, the Household Questionnaire collected information on characteristics of the household such as water source, type of toilet facilities, material used for the floor and roof, and ownership of various durable goods.

b) The Individual Questionnaire was used to collect information on ever-married women aged 15-49 in surveyed households. These women were interviewed on the following topics:
- Respondent's background characteristics (education, residential history, etc.); - Reproductive history; - Contraceptive knowledge and use;
- Antenatal and delivery care; - Infant feeding practices; - Child immunization; - Fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning; - Husband's background characteristics; - Women's work information; and - Knowledge of AIDS.

c) The Community/Health Facility Questionnaire was used to collect information on all communes in which the interviewed women lived and on services offered at the nearest health stations. The Community/Health Facility Questionnaire consisted of four sections. The first two sections collected information from community informants on some characteristics such as the major economic activities of residents, distance from people's residence to civic services and the location of the nearest sources of health care. The last two sections involved visiting the nearest commune health centers and intercommune health centers, if these centers were located within 30 kilometers from the surveyed cluster. For each visited health center, information was collected on the type of health services offered and the number of days services were offered per week; the number of assigned staff and their training; medical equipment and medicines available at the time of the visit.

Cleaning operations

The first stage of data editing was implemented by the field editors soon after each interview. Field editors and team leaders checked the completeness and consistency of all items in the questionnaires. The completed questionnaires were sent to the GSO headquarters in Hanoi by post for data processing. The editing staff of the GSO first checked the questionnaires for completeness. The data were then entered into microcomputers and edited using a software program specially developed for the DHS program, the Census and Survey Processing System, or CSPro. Data were verified on a 100 percent basis, i.e., the data were entered separately twice and the two results were compared and corrected. The data processing and editing staff of the GSO were trained and supervised for two weeks by a data processing specialist from ORC Macro. Office editing and processing activities were initiated immediately after the beginning of the fieldwork and were completed in late December 2002.

Response rate

The results of the household and individual

The demographic structure is an important factor influencing the development of the services industry. As the country with the world’s most serious aging problem, China’s service industry structure is likely to undergo profound changes in response to the rapid demographic transition. Therefore, this paper examines the effect of population aging on the development of the service industry in the context of China’s accelerating population aging. The study found that: (1) Population aging has a significant "inverted U" effect on the development of the services industry. (2) The impact of population aging on the development of the service industry has obvious regional and industry heterogeneity. The study of regional heterogeneity found that population aging in economically developed regions has a more obvious effect on the development of the service industry than in economically less developed regions. Industry heterogeneity studies found that population aging has an obvious promotional effect on the development of medical and other rigid demand industries, while the effect on other non-rigid demand industries is not significant. (3) The threshold effect test found that when the degree of population aging exceeds the threshold, the stimulating effect of population aging on the development of the services industry is no longer significant. The research in this paper provides useful insights into the likely response to changes in the industrial structure of the services industry, and offers some implications for countries with similar demographic profiles to China.

This dataset, titled "Global College Statistics Dataset", is a synthetic dataset designed to provide a comprehensive overview of academic and demographic data across 50,000 records. It includes key features such as college IDs (e.g., "College 1" to "College 100"), countries, total students, male and female student counts, CGPA, annual family income, academic branches, sports participation, research papers published, placement rates, and faculty counts. The dataset reflects simulated correlations, such as higher family income influencing CGPA and research output impacting placement rates. Created for analytical purposes, this synthetic dataset offers valuable insights into global education trends, student demographics, and institutional performance in a controlled and reproducible environment.

Abstract

The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOHSW) initiated the 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey (LDHS) to collect population-based data to inform the Health Sector Reform Programme (2000-2009). The 2004 LDHS will assist in monitoring and evaluating the performance of the Health Sector Reform Programme since 2000 by providing data to be compared with data from the first baseline survey, which was conducted when the reform programme began. The LDHS survey will also provide crucial information to help define the targets for Phase II of the Health Sector Reform Programme (2005-2008). Additionally, the 2004 LDHS results will serve as the main source of key demographic indicators in Lesotho until the 2006 population census results are available.

The LDHS was conducted using a representative sample of women and men of reproductive age.

The specific objectives were to: - Provide data at national and district levels that allow the determination of demographic indicators, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; - Measure changes in fertility and contraceptive use and at the same time analyse the factors that affect these changes, such as marriage patterns, desire for children, availability of contraception, breastfeeding patterns, and important social and economic factors; - Examine the basic indicators of maternal and child health in Lesotho, including nutritional status, use of antenatal and maternity services, treatment of recent episodes of childhood illness, and immunisation coverage for children; - Describe the patterns of knowledge and behaviour related to the transmission of HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis; - Estimate adult and maternal mortality ratios at the national level; - Estimate the prevalence of anaemia among children, women and men, and the prevalence of HIV among women and men at the national and district levels.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 2004 LDHS covered the household population. A representative probability sample of more than 9,000 households was selected for the 2004 LDHS sample. This sample was constructed to allow for separate estimates for key indicators in each of the ten districts in Lesotho, as well as for urban and rural areas separately.

The survey utilized a two-stage sample design. In the first stage, 405 clusters (109 in the urban and 296 in the rural areas) were selected from a list of enumeration areas from the 1996 Population Census frame. In the second stage, a complete listing of households was carried out in each selected cluster. Households were then systematically selected for participation in the survey.

All women age 15-49 who were either permanent household residents in the 2004 LDHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. In addition, in every second household selected for the survey, all men age 15-59 years were eligible to be interviewed if they were either permanent residents or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey. In the households selected for the men's survey, height and weight measurements were taken for eligible women and children under five years of age. Additionally, eligible women, men, and children under age five were tested in the field for anaemia, and eligible women and men were asked for an additional blood sample for anonymous testing for HIV.

Note: See detailed sample implementation in the APPENDIX A of the final 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey Final Report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used for the 2004 LDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. To reflect relevant issues in population and health in Lesotho, the questionnaires were adapted during a series of technical meetings with various stakeholders from government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organizations and international donors. The final draft of the questionnaire was discussed at a large meeting of the LDHS Technical Committee organized by the MOHSW and BOS. The adapted questionnaires were translated from English into Sesotho and pretested during June 2004.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all of the usual members and visitors in the selected households. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Some basic information was also collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, education, residence and emigration status, and relationship to the head of the household. For children under 18, survival status of the parents was determined. The Household Questionnaire also collected information on characteristics of the household’s dwelling unit, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used for the floor of the house, ownership of various durable goods, and access to health facilities. For households selected for the male survey subsample, the questionnaire was used to record height, weight, and haemoglobin measurements of women, men and children, and the respondents’ decision about whether to volunteer to give blood samples for HIV.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49. The women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (education, residential history, media exposure, etc.) - Birth history and childhood mortality - Knowledge and use of family planning methods - Fertility preferences - Antenatal and delivery care - Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices - Vaccinations and childhood illnesses - Marriage and sexual activity - Woman’s work and husband’s background characteristics - Awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and tuberculosis (TB) - Maternal mortality

The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-59 living in every other household in the 2004-05 LDHS sample. The Men’s Questionnaire collected much of the same information found in the Women’s Questionnaire, but was shorter because it did not contain a detailed reproductive history or questions on maternal and child health, nutrition, and maternal mortality.

Geographic coordinates were collected for each EA in the 2004 LDHS.

Cleaning operations

The processing of the 2004 LDHS results began shortly after the fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to BOS headquarters, where they were entered and edited by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. The data processing personnel included two supervisors, two questionnaire administrators/office editors-who ensured that the expected number of questionnaires from each cluster was received-16 data entry operators, and two secondary editors. The concurrent processing of the data was an advantage because BOS was able to advise field teams of problems detected during the data entry. In particular, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters. As a result, specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in May 2005.

Response rate

Response rates are important because high non-response may affect the reliability of the results. A total of 9,903 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,025 were found to be occupied during data collection. Of the 9,025 existing households, 8,592 were successfully interviewed, yielding a household response rate of 95 percent.

In these households, 7,522 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview. Interviews were completed with 94 percent of these women. Of the 3,305 eligible men identified, 85 percent were successfully interviewed. The response rate for urban women and men is somewhat higher than for rural respondents (96 percent compared with 94 percent for women and 88 percent compared with 84 percent for men). The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was the failure to find individuals at home despite repeated visits to the household. The lower response rate for men reflects the more frequent and longer absences of men from the household, principally because of employment and life style.

Response rates for the HIV testing component were lower than those for the interviews.

See summarized response rates in Table 1.2 of the Final Report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) 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 2004 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey (LSDHS) 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 2004 LSDHS 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

Annual Resident Population Estimates by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin; for the United States, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // The contents of this file are released on a rolling basis from December through June. // Note: 'In combination' means in combination with one or more other races. The sum of the five race-in-combination groups adds to more than the total population because individuals may report more than one race. Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. Hispanics may be of any race. Responses of 'Some Other Race' from the 2010 Census are modified. This results in differences between the population for specific race categories shown for the 2010 Census population in this file versus those in the original 2010 Census data. The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // Current data on births, deaths, and migration are used to calculate population change since the 2010 Census. An annual time series of estimates is produced, beginning with the census and extending to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., Vintage 2019) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the entire estimates series is revised. Additional information, including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, research papers, and methodology is available on website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html.

*Pre-pubertal = Tanner stage 1; Pubertal = Tanner stages 2, 3 and 4; Post-pubertal = Tanner 5.

Annual Resident Population Estimates, Estimated Components of Resident Population Change, and Rates of the Components of Resident Population Change for States and Counties: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2013 // File: 7/1/2013 County Population Estimates // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // Release Date: March 2014 // Note: Total population change includes a residual. This residual represents the change in population that cannot be attributed to any specific demographic component. See Population Estimates Terms and Definitions at http://www.census.gov/popest/about/terms.html. // Net international migration in the United States includes the international migration of both native and foreign-born populations. Specifically, it includes: (a) the net international migration of the foreign born, (b) the net migration between the United States and Puerto Rico, (c) the net migration of natives to and from the United States, and (d) the net movement of the Armed Forces population between the United States and overseas. // The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. See Geographic Terms and Definitions at http://www.census.gov/popest/about/geo/terms.html for a list of the states that are included in each region and division. All geographic boundaries for these population estimates are as of January 1, 2013. // For detailed information about the methods used to create the population estimates, see http://www.census.gov/popest/methodology/index.html. // Each year, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program (PEP) utilizes current data on births, deaths, and migration to calculate population change since the most recent decennial census, and produces a time series of estimates of population. The annual time series of estimates begins with the most recent decennial census data and extends to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., V2013) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the Census Bureau revises estimates for years back to the last census. As each vintage of estimates includes all years since the most recent decennial census, the latest vintage of data available supersedes all previously produced estimates for those dates. The Population Estimates Program provides additional information including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, and research papers on its website: http://www.census.gov/popest/index.html.

The U.S. Constitution mandates that the federal government count all persons living in the United States every ten years. The census is critical to states because its results are used to reapportion seats in the U.S. House of Representatives; guide redistricting; and form the basis for allocating federal funds, such as those used for schools, health services, child care, highways, and emergency services.In response to long-standing concerns about the accuracy of census data and about a possible undercount, a group of researchers conducted the California Neighborhoods Count (CNC) — the first-ever independent, survey-based enumeration to directly evaluate the accuracy of the U.S. Census Bureau's population totals for a subset of California census blocks.This 2020 research was intended to produce parallel estimates of the 2020 Census population and housing unit totals at the census block level, employing the same items as the census and using enhanced data collection strategies and exploration of imputation methods. Although the CNC was intended to largely replicate census data collection processes, there were a few methodological differences: For example, much of the address canvassing for the 2020 Census was done in-office, whereas the CNC team undertook a complete in-person address-listing operation that included interviews with residents and door-to-door verification of each structure.In this report, the researchers detail their methodology and present the enumeration results. They compare the 2020 Census counts with the CNC estimates, describe limitations of their data collection effort, and offer considerations for future data collection.

The CNC survey included 26 questions: all of the questions on the 2020 Census form, five questions on neighborhood quality, and six questions provided by CCC. The CCC questions were meant to collect information that could be used to help evaluate the state’s census outreach campaign as well as to assist with planning for any Census 2030 efforts. This report includes multiple charts that summarize the CNC’s CCC-related questions and responses. They offer an overview of attitudes toward the decennial count and households’ plans to participate, or not participate, in different parts of the state and in areas posing different levels of enumeration challenges. In general, the survey results indicate high awareness of the census in California, including in the hardest-to-count areas. The RAND report is available on its website.

Annual Estimates of the Resident Population by Single Year of Age and Sex for Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2013 // File: 7/1/2013 Puerto Rico Commonwealth Population Estimates // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // Release Date: June 2014 // Note: The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // For detailed information about the methods used to create the population estimates, see http://www.census.gov/popest/methodology/index.html. // Each year, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program (PEP) utilizes current data on births, deaths, and migration to calculate population change since the most recent decennial census, and produces a time series of estimates of population. The annual time series of estimates begins with the most recent decennial census data and extends to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., V2013) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the Census Bureau revises estimates for years back to the last census. As each vintage of estimates includes all years since the most recent decennial census, the latest vintage of data available supersedes all previously produced estimates for those dates. The Population Estimates Program provides additional information including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, and research papers on its website: http://www.census.gov/popest/index.html.

Annual Housing Unit Estimates for the United States, States, and Counties // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // Note: The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 housing units due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. For the housing unit estimates methodology statement, see http://www.census.gov/popest/methodology/index.html.// Each year, the Census Bureau's Population and Housing Unit Estimates Program utilizes current data on new residential construction, placements of manufactured housing, and housing unit loss to calculate change in the housing stock since the most recent decennial census, and produces a time series of housing unit estimates.. The annual time series of estimates begins with the most recent decennial census data and extends to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., V2015) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the Census Bureau revises estimates for years back to the last census. As each vintage of estimates includes all years since the most recent decennial census, the latest vintage of data available supersedes all previously produced estimates for those dates. The Population and Housing Unit Estimates Program provides additional information including population estimates, historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, and research papers on its website: http://www.census.gov/popest/index.html.

This dataset contains the results of a systematic review of the genetics literature regarding Alzheimer's disease. It was used in the original paper to assess the demographic diversity of the studies and their underlying databases.

More than 39 million people and 14.2 million households span more than 163,000 square miles of Californian’s urban, suburban and rural communities. California has the fifth largest economy in the world and is the most populous state in the nation, with nation-leading diversity in race, ethnicity, language and socioeconomic conditions. These characteristics make California amazingly unique amongst all 50 states, but also present significant challenges to counting every person and every household, no matter the census year. A complete and accurate count of a state’s population in a decennial census is essential. The results of the 2020 Census will inform decisions about allocating hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding to communities across the country for hospitals, fire departments, school lunch programs and other critical programs and services. The data collected by the United States Census Bureau (referred hereafter as U.S. Census Bureau) also determines the number of seats each state has in the U.S. House of Representatives and will be used to redraw State Assembly and Senate boundaries. California launched a comprehensive Complete Count Census 2020 Campaign (referred to hereafter as the Campaign) to support an accurate and complete count of Californians in the 2020 Census. Due to the state’s unique diversity and with insights from past censuses, the Campaign placed special emphasis on the hardest-tocount Californians and those least likely to participate in the census. The California Complete Count – Census 2020 Office (referred to hereafter as the Census Office) coordinated the State’s operations to complement work done nationally by the U.S. Census Bureau to reach those households most likely to be missed because of barriers, operational or motivational, preventing people from filling out the census. The Campaign, which began in 2017, included key phases, titled Educate, Motivate and Activate. Each of these phases were designed to make sure all Californians knew about the census, how to respond, their information was safe and their participation would help their communities for the next 10 years.

This dataset includes files and scripts used for the paper "Genomic data provides new insights on the demographic history and the extent of recent material transfers in Norway spruce".

Population Genomics Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global population genomics market size reached USD 6.9 billion in 2024, driven by rapid advancements in sequencing technology, increasing investments in genomics research, and a growing emphasis on personalized medicine. The market demonstrated a robust growth trajectory with a CAGR of 10.7% from 2025 to 2033. By leveraging these growth drivers, the market is forecasted to reach USD 17.1 billion by 2033. As per our most recent analysis, the expansion of population genomics is fueled by the integration of genomics into clinical practice, the rise of large-scale population studies, and the proliferation of bioinformatics tools that enable the analysis of complex genomic data.

One of the most significant growth factors for the population genomics market is the accelerating adoption of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies across research and clinical settings. The cost of sequencing has decreased considerably over the past decade, making large-scale genomic studies more accessible and cost-effective. This democratization of sequencing has enabled researchers to analyze genetic variations across diverse populations, leading to critical insights into disease susceptibility, drug response, and evolutionary biology. Furthermore, the increasing availability of high-throughput sequencing platforms has allowed for the generation of vast amounts of genomic data, which, when combined with powerful bioinformatics tools, is transforming the landscape of disease research and precision medicine.

Another key driver is the growing investment from both public and private sectors in genomics infrastructure and research initiatives. Governments worldwide are launching population genomics projects to map the genetic diversity of their populations, with the aim of improving public health outcomes and advancing personalized medicine. Private companies are also investing heavily in the development of innovative genomic products and services, ranging from advanced sequencing instruments to comprehensive data analysis platforms. These investments are fostering a competitive environment that encourages technological innovation, enhances data sharing, and accelerates the translation of genomic discoveries into clinical applications. As a result, the market is witnessing the entry of new players and the consolidation of existing ones, further driving growth.

The increasing integration of genomics into healthcare systems is also propelling the market forward. Population genomics is playing a pivotal role in the development of personalized medicine by enabling the identification of genetic factors that influence individual responses to drugs and susceptibility to diseases. This knowledge is being used to develop targeted therapies, improve diagnostic accuracy, and inform preventive healthcare strategies. The growing collaboration between academic institutions, healthcare providers, and industry players is facilitating the translation of genomic research into clinical practice, thereby expanding the market’s reach and impact. Additionally, the rising awareness among healthcare professionals and patients about the benefits of genomics is contributing to the adoption of genomic testing and personalized treatment approaches.

From a regional perspective, North America continues to dominate the population genomics market, accounting for the largest share in 2024 due to its advanced healthcare infrastructure, strong research ecosystem, and substantial funding for genomics initiatives. Europe follows closely, supported by large-scale genomic projects and favorable regulatory frameworks. The Asia Pacific region is emerging as a significant growth market, driven by increasing investments in healthcare innovation, a large and genetically diverse population base, and rising awareness of precision medicine. Latin America and the Middle East & Africa are gradually catching up, with growing government support and international collaborations aimed at advancing genomics research. Regional disparities in access to technology and funding, however, remain a challenge that needs to be addressed to ensure equitable growth across all geographies.

Product & Service Analysis

The product & service segment of the population genomics market is composed of consumables, instruments, services, and software, each playing a distinct yet interconnected role in the overall ecosystem. Consumables, such as reagents, kits, and

1. Many migratory species are in decline across their geographical ranges. Single-population studies can provide important insights into drivers at a local scale, but effective conservation requires multi-population perspectives. This is challenging because relevant data are often hard to consolidate, and state-of-the-art analytical tools are typically tailored to specific datasets.
2. We capitalized on a recent data harmonization initiative (SPI-Birds) and linked it to a generalized modeling framework to identify the demographic and environmental drivers of large-scale population decline in migratory pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) breeding across Britain.
3. We implemented a generalized integrated population model (IPM) to estimate age-specific vital rates, including their dependency on environmental conditions, and total and breeding population size of pied flycatchers using long-term (34–64 years) monitoring data from seven locations representative of the British breeding range. We then quantified the relative contributions of different vital rates and population structures to changes in short- and long-term population growth rates using transient life table response experiments (LTREs).
4. Substantial covariation in population sizes across breeding locations suggested that change was the result of large-scale drivers. This was supported by LTRE analyses, which attributed past changes in short-term population growth rates and long-term population trends primarily to variation in annual survival and dispersal dynamics, which largely act during migration and/or non-breeding season. Contributions of variation in local reproductive parameters were small in comparison, despite sensitivity to local temperature and rainfall within the breeding period.
5. We show that both short- and longer-term population changes of British-breeding pied flycatchers are likely linked to factors acting during migration and in non-breeding areas, where future research should be prioritized. We illustrate the potential of multi-population analyses for informing management at (inter)national scales and highlight the importance of data standardization, generalized and accessible analytical tools, and reproducible workflows to achieve them. Methods Data collection protocols are described in the paper, and further references provided therein. Raw data were harmonised and converted to a standard format by SPI-Birds (https://spibirds.org/) and then collated into the input data provided here using code deposited on https://github.com/SPI-Birds/SPI-IPM. Details on this step of data processing will be added to https://spi-birds.github.io/SPI-IPM/. The MCMC sample data files are the outputs of the integrated population models fitted in the study. Please refer to the published article and material deposited on the associated GitHub repository for more details.

Socio-demographic and physical activity (PA) characteristics for sample total (n = 742), grouped by low, medium and high online socializing or internet surfing for weekday and weekend.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Newark population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Newark across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Newark was 304,960, a 0.13% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Newark population was 304,552, a decline of 0.92% compared to a population of 307,368 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Newark increased by 32,247. In this period, the peak population was 310,645 in the year 2020. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Newark is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Newark population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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 Newark Population by Year. You can refer the same here