This dataset provides comprehensive healthcare patient demographic records, including unique medical identifiers, insurance details, emergency contacts, and appointment histories. It enables efficient patient management, supports clinical workflows, and facilitates analytics for healthcare providers and administrators. The structured schema ensures data integrity and usability for operational and research applications.

The U.S. Census Bureau regularly collects information for many metropolitan areas in the United States, including data on number of physicians and number (and size) of hospitals. This dataset has such information for 83 different metropolitan areas.

Population Health (BRFSS: HRQOL)

Examining Trends, Disparities and Determinants of Health in the US Population

By Health [source]

About this dataset

The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) offers an expansive collection of data on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from 1993 to 2010. Over this time period, the Health-Related Quality of Life dataset consists of a comprehensive survey reflecting the health and well-being of non-institutionalized US adults aged 18 years or older. The data collected can help track and identify unmet population health needs, recognize trends, identify disparities in healthcare, determine determinants of public health, inform decision making and policy development, as well as evaluate programs within public healthcare services.

The HRQOL surveillance system has developed a compact set of HRQOL measures such as a summary measure indicating unhealthy days which have been validated for population health surveillance purposes and have been widely implemented in practice since 1993. Within this study's dataset you will be able to access information such as year recorded, location abbreviations & descriptions, category & topic overviews, questions asked in surveys and much more detailed information including types & units regarding data values retrieved from respondents along with their sample sizes & geographical locations involved!

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset tracks the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) from 1993 to 2010 using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). This dataset includes information on the year, location abbreviation, location description, type and unit of data value, sample size, category and topic of survey questions.

Using this dataset on BRFSS: HRQOL data between 1993-2010 will allow for a variety of analyses related to population health needs. The compact set of HRQOL measures can be used to identify trends in population health needs as well as determine disparities among various locations. Additionally, responses to survey questions can be used to inform decision making and program and policy development in public health initiatives.

Research Ideas

• Analyzing trends in HRQOL over the years by location to identify disparities in health outcomes between different populations and develop targeted policy interventions.
• Developing new models for predicting HRQOL indicators at a regional level, and using this information to inform medical practice and public health implementation efforts.
• Using the data to understand differences between states in terms of their HRQOL scores and establish best practices for healthcare provision based on that understanding, including areas such as access to care, preventative care services availability, etc

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

See the dataset description for more information.

Columns

File: rows.csv | Column name | Description | |:-------------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------| | Year | Year of survey. (Integer) | | LocationAbbr | Abbreviation of location. (String) | | LocationDesc | Description of location. (String) | | Category | Category of survey. (String) | | Topic | Topic of survey. (String) | | Question | Question asked in survey. (String) | | DataSource | Source of data. (String) | | Data_Value_Unit | Unit of data value. (String) | | Data_Value_Type | Type of data value. (String) | | Data_Value_Footnote_Symbol | Footnote symbol for data value. (String) | | Data_Value_Std_Err | Standard error of the data value. (Float) | | Sample_Size | Sample size used in sample. (Integer) | | Break_Out | Break out categories used. (String) | | Break_Out_Category | Type break out assessed. (String) | | **GeoLocation*...

This dataset provides comprehensive patient demographic and registration data for healthcare organizations, including unique identifiers, contact details, emergency contacts, insurance information, and race/ethnicity. Designed for master patient indexing, it supports accurate patient identification, care coordination, and regulatory reporting, making it invaluable for clinical workflows and analytics.

Context

Health care in the United States is provided by many distinct organizations. Health care facilities are largely owned and operated by private sector businesses. 58% of US community hospitals are non-profit, 21% are government owned, and 21% are for-profit. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the United States spent more on healthcare per capita ($9,403), and more on health care as percentage of its GDP (17.1%), than any other nation in 2014. Many different datasets are needed to portray different aspects of healthcare in US like disease prevalences, pharmaceuticals and drugs, Nutritional data of different food products available in US. Such data is collected by surveys (or otherwise) conducted by Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Foods and Drugs Administration, Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). These datasets can be used to properly review demographics and diseases, determining start ratings of healthcare providers, different drugs and their compositions as well as package informations for different diseases and for food quality. We often want such information and finding and scraping such data can be a huge hurdle. So, Here an attempt is made to make available all US healthcare data at one place to download from in csv files.

Content

• Nhanes Survey (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) - The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) is a program of studies designed to assess the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United States. The survey is unique in that it combines interviews and physical examinations. NHANES is a major program of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). NCHS is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and has the responsibility for producing vital and health statistics for the Nation. The NHANES interview includes demographic, socioeconomic, dietary, and health-related questions. The examination component consists of medical, dental, and physiological measurements, as well as laboratory tests administered by highly trained medical personnel. The diseases, medical conditions, and health indicators to be studied include: Anemia, Cardiovascular disease, Diabetes, Environmental exposures, Eye diseases, Hearing loss, Infectious diseases, Kidney disease, Nutrition, Obesity, Oral health, Osteoporosis, Physical fitness and physical functioning, Reproductive history and sexual behavior, Respiratory disease (asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema), Sexually transmitted diseases, Vision. 10000 individuals are surveyed to represent US statistics. Five files in this datasets represent current recent Nhanes data -
  Nhanes_2005_2006.csv
  Nhanes_2007_2008.csv
  Nhanes_2009_2010.csv
  Nhanes_2011_2012.csv
  Nhanes_2013_2014.csv
  
  • Data fields' description -
    • Nhanes_2005_2006.csv - Demographic, Dietary, Examinations, Laboratory
    • Nhanes_2007_2008.csv - Demographic, Dietary, Examinations, Laboratory
    • Nhanes_2009_2010.csv - Demographic, Dietary, Examinations, Laboratory
    • Nhanes_2011_2012.csv - Demographic, Dietary, [Examinations](http://https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/search/variab...

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 dataset contains information on California’s Medical Service Study Areas (MSSA), at the census tract level for 2000. MSSAs are sub-city and sub-county geographical units used to organize and display population, demographic and physician data. MSSA areas are a geographic analysis unit defined by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. MSSA are a good foundation for needs assessment analysis, healthcare planning, and healthcare policy development.

Introduction:

This dataset contains comprehensive information on various demographic, healthcare, and location-related attributes of individuals. The data was collected through a comprehensive survey conducted across diverse geographical locations.

Column Descriptions:

1. Location, _Location_latitude, _Location_longitude, _Location_altitude, _Location_precision: These columns provide the precise geographical coordinates and altitude of the respondents, enabling accurate spatial analysis.

2. Date and Time: This column records the date and time of the survey, providing temporal context for the dataset.

3. Age, Gender, Marital Status, How many children do you have, if any?: These columns capture essential demographic information, including age, gender, marital status, and the number of children, offering insights into the composition of the surveyed population.

4.Employment Status, Monthly Household Income: These attributes provide insights into the financial stability of the respondents, including their employment status and monthly household income. 5. Healthcare-Related Information: a) Have you ever had health insurance? If yes, which insurance cover?: This column identifies respondents with previous health insurance coverage and specifies the type of insurance they had. b) When was the last time you visited a hospital for medical treatment? (In Months): This records the duration, in months, since the respondents' last hospital visit. c) Did you have health insurance during your last hospital visit?: This column indicates whether the respondents had health insurance during their last hospital visit. d) Have you ever had a routine check-up with a doctor or healthcare provider?: This column identifies if respondents have undergone routine health check-ups. e) If you answered yes to the previous question, what time period (in years) do you stay before having your routine check-up?: This captures the time gap, in years, between routine check-ups for respondents. f) Have you ever had a cancer screening (e.g., mammogram, colonoscopy, etc.)?: This column identifies respondents who have undergone cancer screening. g) If you answered yes to the previous question, what time period (in years) do you stay before having your Cancer screening?: This records the time gap, in years, between cancer screenings for respondents.

1. Miscellaneous Information:

a) Your Picture, Your Picture_URL: These columns contain the images and corresponding URLs of the respondents. b) _id, _uuid, _submission_time, _validation_status, _notes, _status, _submitted_by, version, _tags, _index: These are internal identifiers and metadata attributes associated with the dataset.

Use Case:

This dataset can be utilized for various analyses, including demographic profiling, healthcare utilization patterns, and spatial health disparities assessment, thereby facilitating informed policy-making and targeted healthcare interventions.

In 2022, children and teens are over-represented as health center patients compared to their proportion in the population. This statistic depicts the age distribution of health center patients compared to overall U.S. population as of 2022.

This dataset includes the number of blood sugar and blood pressure screenings, cholesterol, community resource referrals, and health presentations performed by Austin Public Health's Health Equity Unit. The dataset is broken down by race/ethnicity and gender.

Abstract

The 1993 Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women less than 50 years old. The survey was designed to provide information on fertility levels and trends, infant and child mortality, family planning, and maternal and child health. The TDHS was conducted by the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies under a subcontract through an agreement between the General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. of Calverton, Maryland. Fieldwork was conducted from August to October 1993. Interviews were carried out in 8,619 households and with 6,519 women.

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of ever-married women of reproductive ages, designed to collect data on fertility, marriage patterns, family planning, early age mortality, socioeconomic characteristics, breastfeeding, immunisation of children, treatment of children during episodes of illness, and nutritional status of women and children. The TDHS, as part of the international DHS project, is also the latest survey in a series of national-level population and health surveys in Turkey, which have been conducted by the Institute of Population Studies, Haeettepe University (HIPS).

More specifically, the objectives of the TDHS are to:

Collect data at the national level that will allow the calculation of demographic rates, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; Analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality; Measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by method, region, and urban- rural residence; Collect data on mother and child health, including immunisations, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections among children under five, antenatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding; Measure the nutritional status of children under five and of their mothers using anthropometric measurements.

The TDHS information is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in evaluating existing programs and in designing new strategies for improving family planning and health services in Turkey.

MAIN RESULTS

Fertility in Turkey is continuing to decline. If Turkish women maintain current fertility rates during their reproductive years, they can expect to have all average of 2.7 children by the end of their reproductive years. The highest fertility rate is observed for the age group 20-24. There are marked regional differences in fertility rates, ranging from 4.4 children per woman in the East to 2.0 children per woman in the West. Fertility also varies widely by urban-rural residence and by education level. A woman living in rural areas will have almost one child more than a woman living in an urban area. Women who have no education have almost one child more than women who have a primary-level education and 2.5 children more than women with secondary-level education.

The first requirement of success ill family planning is the knowledge of family planning methods. Knowledge of any method is almost universal among Turkish women and almost all those who know a method also know the source of the method. Eighty percent of currently married women have used a method sometime in their life. One third of currently married women report ever using the IUD. Overall, 63 percent of currently married women are currently using a method. The majority of these women are modern method users (35 percent), but a very substantial proportion use traditional methods (28 percent). the IUD is the most commonly used modern method (I 9 percent), allowed by the condom (7 percent) and the pill (5 percent). Regional differences are substantial. The level of current use is 42 percent in tile East, 72 percent in tile West and more than 60 percent in tile other three regions. "File common complaints about tile methods are side effects and health concerns; these are especially prevalent for the pill and IUD.

One of the major child health indicators is immunisation coverage. Among children age 12-23 months, the coverage rates for BCG and the first two doses of DPT and polio were about 90 percent, with most of the children receiving those vaccines before age one. The results indicate that 65 percent of the children had received all vaccinations at some time before the survey. On a regional basis, coverage is significantly lower in the Eastern region (41 percent), followed by the Northern and Central regions (61 percent and 65 percent, respectively). Acute respiratory infections (ARI) and diarrhea are the two most prevalent diseases of children under age five in Turkey. In the two weeks preceding the survey, the prevalence of ARI was 12 percent and the prevalence of diarrhea was 25 percent for children under age five. Among children with diarrhea 56 percent were given more fluids than usual.

Breastfeeding in Turkey is widespread. Almost all Turkish children (95 percent) are breastfed for some period of time. The median duration of breastfeeding is 12 months, but supplementary foods and liquids are introduced at an early age. One-third of children are being given supplementary food as early as one month of age and by the age of 2-3 months, half of the children are already being given supplementary foods or liquids.

By age five, almost one-filth of children arc stunted (short for their age), compared to an international reference population. Stunting is more prevalent in rural areas, in the East, among children of mothers with little or no education, among children who are of higher birth order, and among those born less than 24 months after a prior birth. Overall, wasting is not a problem. Two percent of children are wasted (thin for their height), and I I percent of children under five are underweight for their age. The survey results show that obesity is d problem among mothers. According to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculations, 51 percent of mothers are overweight, of which 19 percent are obese.

Geographic coverage

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 12-49
• Children under five

Universe

The population covered by the 1993 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the TDHS was designed to provide estimates of population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates for the nation as a whole, fOr urban and rural areas, and for the five major regions of the country. A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS sample.

Sample selection was undertaken in three stages. The sampling units at the first stage were settlements that differed in population size. The frame for the selection of the primary sampling units (PSUs) was prepared using the results of the 1990 Population Census. The urban frame included provinces and district centres and settlements with populations of more than 10,000; the rural frame included subdistricts and villages with populations of less than 10,000. Adjustments were made to consider the growth in some areas right up to survey time. In addition to the rural-urban and regional stratifications, settlements were classified in seven groups according to population size.

The second stage of selection involved the list of quarters (administrative divisions of varying size) for each urban settlement, provided by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Every selected quarter was subdivided according tothe number of divisions(approximately 100 households)assigned to it. In rural areas, a selected village was taken as a single quarter, and wherever necessary, it was divided into subdivisions of approximately 100 households. In cases where the number of households in a selected village was less than 100 households, the nearest village was selected to complete the 100 households during the listing activity, which is described below.

After the selection of the secondary sampling units (SSUs), a household listing was obtained for each by the TDHS listing teams. The listing activity was carried out in May and June. From the household lists, a systematic random sample of households was chosen for the TDHS. All ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used in the main fieldwork for the TDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive age. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed in the DHS program and on the questionnaires that had been employed in previous Turkish population and health surveys. The questionnaires were adapted to obtain data needed for program planning in Turkey during consultations with population and health agencies. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Turkish.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, marital status and relationship to the head of household for each person listed as a household member

Objective: To analyze the correlation between demographic and healthcare availability indicators with COVID-19 outcome among Indonesian provinces.Methods: We employed an ecological study design to study the correlation between demographics, healthcare availability, and COVID-19 indicators. Demographic and healthcare indicators were obtained from the Indonesian Health Profile of 2019 by the Ministry of Health while COVID-19 indicators were obtained from the Indonesian COVID-19 website in August 31st 2020. Non-parametric correlation and multivariate regression analyses were conducted with IBM SPSS 23.0.Results: We found the number of confirmed cases and case growth to be significantly correlated with demographic indicators, especially with distribution of age groups. Confirmed cases and case growth was significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with population density (correlation coefficient of 0.461 and 0.491) and proportion of young people (−0.377; −0.394). Incidence and incidence growth were correlated with ratios of GPs (0.426; 0.534), hospitals (0.376; 0.431), primary care clinics (0.423; 0.424), and hospital beds (0.472; 0.599) per capita. For mortality, case fatality rate (CFR) was correlated with population density (0.390) whereas mortality rate was correlated with ratio of hospital beds (0.387). Multivariate analyses found confirmed case independently associated with population density (β of 0.638) and demographic structure (−0.289). Case growth was independently associated with density (0.763). Incidence growth was independently associated with hospital bed ratio (0.486).Conclusion: Pre-existing inequality of healthcare availability correlates with current reported incidence and mortality rate of COVID-19. Lack of healthcare availability in some provinces may have resulted in artificially low numbers of cases being diagnosed, lower demands for COVID-19 tests, and eventually lower case-findings.

This is the current Medical Service Study Area. California Medical Service Study Areas are created by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI).Check the Data Dictionary for field descriptions.Search for the Medical Service Study Area data on the CHHS Open Data Portal.Checkout the California Healthcare Atlas for more Medical Service Study Area information.This is an update to the MSSA geometries and demographics to reflect the new 2020 Census tract data. The Medical Service Study Area (MSSA) polygon layer represents the best fit mapping of all new 2020 California census tract boundaries to the original 2010 census tract boundaries used in the construction of the original 2010 MSSA file. Each of the state's new 9,129 census tracts was assigned to one of the previously established medical service study areas (excluding tracts with no land area), as identified in this data layer. The MSSA Census tract data is aggregated by HCAI, to create this MSSA data layer. This represents the final re-mapping of 2020 Census tracts to the original 2010 MSSA geometries. The 2010 MSSA were based on U.S. Census 2010 data and public meetings held throughout California.Source of update: American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 data for poverty. For source tables refer to InfoUSA update procedural documentation. The 2010 MSSA Detail layer was developed to update fields affected by population change. The American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 population data pertaining to total, in households, race, ethnicity, age, and poverty was used in the update. The 2010 MSSA Census Tract Detail map layer was developed to support geographic information systems (GIS) applications, representing 2010 census tract geography that is the foundation of 2010 medical service study area (MSSA) boundaries. ***This version is the finalized MSSA reconfiguration boundaries based on the US Census Bureau 2010 Census. In 1976 Garamendi Rural Health Services Act, required the development of a geographic framework for determining which parts of the state were rural and which were urban, and for determining which parts of counties and cities had adequate health care resources and which were "medically underserved". Thus, sub-city and sub-county geographic units called "medical service study areas [MSSAs]" were developed, using combinations of census-defined geographic units, established following General Rules promulgated by a statutory commission. After each subsequent census the MSSAs were revised. In the scheduled revisions that followed the 1990 census, community meetings of stakeholders (including county officials, and representatives of hospitals and community health centers) were held in larger metropolitan areas. The meetings were designed to develop consensus as how to draw the sub-city units so as to best display health care disparities. The importance of involving stakeholders was heightened in 1992 when the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Health and Resources Administration entered a formal agreement to recognize the state-determined MSSAs as "rational service areas" for federal recognition of "health professional shortage areas" and "medically underserved areas". After the 2000 census, two innovations transformed the process, and set the stage for GIS to emerge as a major factor in health care resource planning in California. First, the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development [OSHPD], which organizes the community stakeholder meetings and provides the staff to administer the MSSAs, entered into an Enterprise GIS contract. Second, OSHPD authorized at least one community meeting to be held in each of the 58 counties, a significant number of which were wholly rural or frontier counties. For populous Los Angeles County, 11 community meetings were held. As a result, health resource data in California are collected and organized by 541 geographic units. The boundaries of these units were established by community healthcare experts, with the objective of maximizing their usefulness for needs assessment purposes. The most dramatic consequence was introducing a data simultaneously displayed in a GIS format. A two-person team, incorporating healthcare policy and GIS expertise, conducted the series of meetings, and supervised the development of the 2000-census configuration of the MSSAs.MSSA Configuration Guidelines (General Rules):- Each MSSA is composed of one or more complete census tracts.- As a general rule, MSSAs are deemed to be "rational service areas [RSAs]" for purposes of designating health professional shortage areas [HPSAs], medically underserved areas [MUAs] or medically underserved populations [MUPs].- MSSAs will not cross county lines.- To the extent practicable, all census-defined places within the MSSA are within 30 minutes travel time to the largest population center within the MSSA, except in those circumstances where meeting this criterion would require splitting a census tract.- To the extent practicable, areas that, standing alone, would meet both the definition of an MSSA and a Rural MSSA, should not be a part of an Urban MSSA.- Any Urban MSSA whose population exceeds 200,000 shall be divided into two or more Urban MSSA Subdivisions.- Urban MSSA Subdivisions should be within a population range of 75,000 to 125,000, but may not be smaller than five square miles in area. If removing any census tract on the perimeter of the Urban MSSA Subdivision would cause the area to fall below five square miles in area, then the population of the Urban MSSA may exceed 125,000. - To the extent practicable, Urban MSSA Subdivisions should reflect recognized community and neighborhood boundaries and take into account such demographic information as income level and ethnicity. Rural Definitions: A rural MSSA is an MSSA adopted by the Commission, which has a population density of less than 250 persons per square mile, and which has no census defined place within the area with a population in excess of 50,000. Only the population that is located within the MSSA is counted in determining the population of the census defined place. A frontier MSSA is a rural MSSA adopted by the Commission which has a population density of less than 11 persons per square mile. Any MSSA which is not a rural or frontier MSSA is an urban MSSA. Last updated December 6th 2024.

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017 Indonesia Dmographic and Health Survey (IDHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. The IDHS provides a comprehensive overview of population and maternal and child health issues in Indonesia. More specifically, the IDHS was designed to: - provide data on fertility, family planning, maternal and child health, and awareness of HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) to help program managers, policy makers, and researchers to evaluate and improve existing programs; - measure trends in fertility and contraceptive prevalence rates, and analyze factors that affect such changes, such as residence, education, breastfeeding practices, and knowledge, use, and availability of contraceptive methods; - evaluate the achievement of goals previously set by national health programs, with special focus on maternal and child health; - assess married men’s knowledge of utilization of health services for their family’s health and participation in the health care of their families; - participate in creating an international database to allow cross-country comparisons in the areas of fertility, family planning, and health.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15-54

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women age 15-49 years resident in the household, and all men age 15-54 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2017 IDHS sample covered 1,970 census blocks in urban and rural areas and was expected to obtain responses from 49,250 households. The sampled households were expected to identify about 59,100 women age 15-49 and 24,625 never-married men age 15-24 eligible for individual interview. Eight households were selected in each selected census block to yield 14,193 married men age 15-54 to be interviewed with the Married Man's Questionnaire. The sample frame of the 2017 IDHS is the Master Sample of Census Blocks from the 2010 Population Census. The frame for the household sample selection is the updated list of ordinary households in the selected census blocks. This list does not include institutional households, such as orphanages, police/military barracks, and prisons, or special households (boarding houses with a minimum of 10 people).

The sampling design of the 2017 IDHS used two-stage stratified sampling: Stage 1: Several census blocks were selected with systematic sampling proportional to size, where size is the number of households listed in the 2010 Population Census. In the implicit stratification, the census blocks were stratified by urban and rural areas and ordered by wealth index category.

Stage 2: In each selected census block, 25 ordinary households were selected with systematic sampling from the updated household listing. Eight households were selected systematically to obtain a sample of married men.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2017 IDHS used four questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, Woman’s Questionnaire, Married Man’s Questionnaire, and Never Married Man’s Questionnaire. Because of the change in survey coverage from ever-married women age 15-49 in the 2007 IDHS to all women age 15-49, the Woman’s Questionnaire had questions added for never married women age 15-24. These questions were part of the 2007 Indonesia Young Adult Reproductive Survey Questionnaire. The Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire are largely based on standard DHS phase 7 questionnaires (2015 version). The model questionnaires were adapted for use in Indonesia. Not all questions in the DHS model were included in the IDHS. Response categories were modified to reflect the local situation.

Cleaning operations

All completed questionnaires, along with the control forms, were returned to the BPS central office in Jakarta for data processing. The questionnaires were logged and edited, and all open-ended questions were coded. Responses were entered in the computer twice for verification, and they were corrected for computer-identified errors. Data processing activities were carried out by a team of 34 editors, 112 data entry operators, 33 compare officers, 19 secondary data editors, and 2 data entry supervisors. The questionnaires were entered twice and the entries were compared to detect and correct keying errors. A computer package program called Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro), which was specifically designed to process DHS-type survey data, was used in the processing of the 2017 IDHS.

Response rate

Of the 49,261 eligible households, 48,216 households were found by the interviewer teams. Among these households, 47,963 households were successfully interviewed, a response rate of almost 100%.

In the interviewed households, 50,730 women were identified as eligible for individual interview and, from these, completed interviews were conducted with 49,627 women, yielding a response rate of 98%. From the selected household sample of married men, 10,440 married men were identified as eligible for interview, of which 10,009 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 96%. The lower response rate for men was due to the more frequent and longer absence of men from the household. In general, response rates in rural areas were higher than those in urban areas.

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 result from mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding 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 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (2017 IDHS) 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 IDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling error is 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.

A 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 percent 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 IDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2017 IDHS is a STATA program. This program used the Taylor linearization method for variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix C 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 year - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

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

BackgroundMental health professionals play a crucial role in promoting the physical well-being of people with mental illness. Awareness of HIV status can enable professionals in mental health services to provide more comprehensive care. However, it remains uncertain whether mental health professionals consistently document HIV status in mental health records.AimsTo investigate the extent to which mental health professionals document previously established HIV diagnoses of people with mental illness in mental health records, and to identify the clinical and demographic factors associated with documentation or lack thereof.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using an established data linkage between routinely collected clinical data from secondary mental health services in South London, UK, and national HIV surveillance data from the UK Health Security Agency. Individuals with an HIV diagnosis prior to their last mental health service contact were included. Documented HIV diagnosis in mental health records was assessed.ResultsAmong the 4,032 individuals identified as living with HIV, 1,281 (31.8%) did not have their diagnosis recorded in their mental health records. Factors associated with the absence of an HIV diagnosis included being of Asian ethnicity, having certain primary mental health diagnoses including schizophrenia, being older, being with a mental health service for longer, having more clinical mental health appointments, and living in a less deprived area.ConclusionsA significant number of individuals living with HIV who are receiving mental healthcare in secondary mental health services did not have their HIV diagnosis documented in their mental health records. Addressing this gap could allow mental healthcare providers to support those living with HIV and severe mental illness to manage the complexity of comorbidities and psychosocial impacts of HIV. Mental health services should explore strategies to increase dialogue around HIV in mental health settings.

The dataset contains information on California’s Medical Service Study Areas (MSSA). MSSAs are sub-city and sub-county geographical units used to organize and display population, demographic and physician data for 2000. Medical Service Study Areas are a geographic analysis unit defined by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. MSSA are a good foundation for needs assessment analysis, healthcare planning, and healthcare policy development.

Medical Service Study Areas (MSSAs)As defined by California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) in 2013, "MSSAs are sub-city and sub-county geographical units used to organize and display population, demographic and physician data" (Source). Each census tract in CA is assigned to a given MSSA. The most recent MSSA dataset (2014) was used. Spatial data are available via OSHPD at the California Open Data Portal. This information may be useful in studying health equity.Definitions:Race/Ethnicity: Race/ethnicity is categorized as: All races/ethnicities, Non-Hispanic (NH) White, NH Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, or Hispanic. "All races" includes all of the above, as well as other and unknown race/ethnicity and American Indian/Alaska Native. The latter two groups are not reported separately due to small numbers for many cancer sites.Racial/Ethnic Composition: Distribution of residents' race/ethnicity (e.g., % Hispanic, % non-Hispanic White, % non-Hispanic Black, % non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander). (Source: US Census, 2010.)Rural: Percent of residents who reside in blocks that are designated as rural. (Source: US Census, 2010.)Foreign Born: Percent of residents who were born outside the United States. (Source: American Community Survey, 2008-2012.)Socioeconomic Status (Neighborhood Level): A composite measure of seven indicator variables created by principal component analysis; indicators include: education, blue-collar job, unemployment, household income, poverty, rent, and house value. Quintiles based on state distribution, with quintile 1 being the lowest SES and 5 being the highest. (Source: American Community Survey, 2008-2012.)Spatial extent: CaliforniaSpatial Unit: MSSACreated: n/aUpdated: n/aSource: California Health MapsContact Email: gbacr@ucsf.eduSource Link: https://www.californiahealthmaps.org/?areatype=mssa&address=&sex=Both&site=AllSite&race=&year=05yr&overlays=none&choropleth=Obesity

Abstract

The 2016 Timor-Leste Demographic and Health Survey (TLDHS) was implemented by the General Directorate of Statistics (GDS) of the Ministry of Finance in collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MOH). Data collection took place from 16 September to 22 December, 2016.

The primary objective of the 2016 TLDHS project is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. The TLDHS provides a comprehensive overview of population, maternal, and child health issues in Timor-Leste. More specifically, the 2016 TLDHS: • Collected data at the national level, which allows the calculation of key demographic indicators, particularly fertility, and child, adult, and maternal mortality rates • Provided data to explore the direct and indirect factors that determine the levels and trends of fertility and child mortality • Measured the levels of contraceptive knowledge and practice • Obtained data on key aspects of maternal and child health, including immunization coverage, prevalence and treatment of diarrhea and other diseases among children under age 5, and maternity care, including antenatal visits and assistance at delivery • Obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and collected anthropometric measures to assess nutritional status in children, women, and men • Tested for anemia in children, women, and men • Collected data on the knowledge and attitudes of women and men about sexually-transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS, potential exposure to the risk of HIV infection (risk behaviors and condom use), and coverage of HIV testing and counseling • Measured key education indicators, including school attendance ratios, level of educational attainment, and literacy levels • Collected information on the extent of disability • Collected information on non-communicable diseases • Collected information on early childhood development • Collected information on domestic violence • The information collected through the 2016 TLDHS is intended to assist policy makers and program managers in evaluating and designing programs and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population.

Geographic coverage

National

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), 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 TLDHS 2016 survey is the 2015 Timor-Leste Population and Housing Census (TLPHC 2015), provided by the General Directorate of Statistics. The sampling frame is a complete list of 2320 non-empty Enumeration Areas (EAs) created for the 2015 population census. An EA is a geographic area made up of a convenient number of dwelling units which served as counting units for the census, with an average size of 89 households per EA. The sampling frame contains information about the administrative unit, the type of residence, the number of residential households and the number of male and female population for each of the EAs. Among the 2320 EAs, 413 are urban residence and 1907 are rural residence.

There are five geographic regions in Timor-Leste, and these are subdivided into 12 municipalities and special administrative region (SAR) of Oecussi. The 2016 TLDHS sample was designed to produce reliable estimates of indicators for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for each of the 13 municipalities. A representative probability sample of approximately 12,000 households was drawn; the sample was stratified and selected in two stages. In the first stage, 455 EAs were selected with probability proportional to EA size from the 2015 TLPHC: 129 EAs in urban areas and 326 EAs in rural areas. In the second stage, 26 households were randomly selected within each of the 455 EAs; the sampling frame for this household selection was the 2015 TLPHC household listing available from the census database.

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 2016 TLDHS: 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 the population and health issues relevant to Timor-Leste.

Cleaning operations

The data processing operation included registering and checking for inconsistencies, incompleteness, and outliers. Data editing and cleaning included structure and consistency checks to ensure completeness of work in the field. The central office also conducted secondary editing, which required resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. The data were processed by two staff who took part in the main fieldwork training. Data editing was accomplished with CSPro software. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in October 2016 and completed in February 2017.

Response rate

A total of 11,829 households were selected for the sample, of which 11,660 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 11,502 were successfully interviewed, which yielded a response rate of 99 percent.

In the interviewed households, 12,998 eligible women were identified for individual interviews. Interviews were completed with 12,607 women, yielding a response rate of 97 percent. In the subsample of households selected for the men’s interviews, 4,878 eligible men were identified and 4,622 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 95 percent. Response rates were higher in rural than in urban areas, with the difference being more pronounced among men (97 percent versus 90 percent, respectively) than among women (98 percent versus 94 percent, respectively). The lower response rates for men were likely due to their more frequent and longer absences from the household.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling errors and sampling errors. Non-sampling 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 TLDHS 2016 to minimize this type of error, non-sampling 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 TLDHS 2016 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 between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A 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 percent 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 TLDHS 2016 sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the TLDHS 2016 is a SAS program. This program used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation 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.

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 - Height and weight data completeness and quality for children - Completeness of information on siblings - Sibship size and sex ratio of siblings - Pregnancy-related mortality trends

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

In August of 2018, FSSA’s Office of Healthy Opportunities deployed a social risk assessment survey. The 10-question survey was made available to anyone applying online through FSSA for health coverage, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. The results of this survey are aggregated and presented below and can help communities better understand the social risk factors affecting the health of those applying for our services. Please read and review the following information regarding the use of this data prior to viewing the tool. This survey was made available to those individuals who applied online ONLY and does not represent anyone who applied in-person, by telephone, by mail or any other method. In 2018, online applications accounted for 79% of those who applied for SNAP, TANF or health coverage. Survey completion is voluntary and does not impact eligibility for SNAP, TANF or health coverage. Applications are filed at a household level and may represent several individuals. The application process identifies a primary contact person for the household, and that individual’s demographics are represented on the dashboard; for example, person’s gender, race and education level. An individual who completes more than one application and survey over any given time period is represented once for each instance, and the survey answers and demographic details are based on each application’s responses. For example, an applicant’s age, education level and survey answers can change over time, and the reporting reflects any such changes. All information is presented in aggregate to ensure personally identifiable information is protected. To protect the privacy of individuals, data representing 20 or less individuals in any county will not be displayed. I.e. it will show as blank