A shift in scientific publishing from paper-based to knowledge-based practices promotes reproducibility, machine actionability and knowledge discovery. This is important for disciplines like social science, as study indicators are often social constructs such as race or education; hypothesis tests are challenging to compare in demographic research due to their limited temporal and spatial coverage; and natural language in research papers is often imprecise and ambiguous. Therefore, we present the MIRA-KG, consisting of: (1) an ontology for capturing social demography research, which links hypotheses and findings to evidence, (2) annotations of papers on health inequality in terms of the ontology, gathered by (i) prompting a Large Language Model to annotate paper abstracts using the ontology, (ii) mapping concepts to terms from NCBO BioPortal ontologies and GeoNames, and (iii) refining the final graph by a set of SHACL constraints, developed according to data quality criteria. The utility of the resource lies in its use for formally representing social demography research hypotheses, discovering research biases, discovery of knowledge, and the derivation of novel questions.This dataset was generated using the code available on Github at https://w3id.org/mira/ at version v1.0. It uses the following ontology: https://w3id.org/mira/ontology/.

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 Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was a nationally representative sample survey conducted from March through June 1988 to collect data on fertility, family planning, and child and maternal health. A total of 9,045 households and 6,775 ever-married women aged 15 to 49 were interviewed. Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is carried out by the Institute of Population Studies (IPS) of Chulalongkorn University with the financial support from USAID through the Institute for Resource Development (IRD) at Westinghouse. The Institute of Population Studies was responsible for the overall implementation of the survey including sample design, preparation of field work, data collection and processing, and analysis of data. IPS has made available its personnel and office facilities to the project throughout the project duration. It serves as the headquarters for the survey.

The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was undertaken for the main purpose of providing data concerning fertility, family planning and maternal and child health to program managers and policy makers to facilitate their evaluation and planning of programs, and to population and health researchers to assist in their efforts to document and analyze the demographic and health situation. It is intended to provide information both on topics for which comparable data is not available from previous nationally representative surveys as well as to update trends with respect to a number of indicators available from previous surveys, in particular the Longitudinal Study of Social Economic and Demographic Change in 1969-73, the Survey of Fertility in Thailand in 1975, the National Survey of Family Planning Practices, Fertility and Mortality in 1979, and the three Contraceptive Prevalence Surveys in 1978/79, 1981 and 1984.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 1987 THADHS is defined as the universe of all women Ever-married women in the reproductive ages (i.e., women 15-49). This covered women in private households on the basis of a de facto coverage definition. Visitors and usual residents who were in the household the night before the first visit or before any subsequent visit during the few days the interviewing team was in the area were eligible. Excluded were the small number of married women aged under 15 and women not present in private households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE SIZE AND ALLOCATION

The objective of the survey was to provide reliable estimates for major domains of the country. This consisted of two overlapping sets of reporting domains: (a) Five regions of the country namely Bangkok, north, northeast, central region (excluding Bangkok), and south; (b) Bangkok versus all provincial urban and all rural areas of the country. These requirements could be met by defining six non-overlapping sampling domains (Bangkok, provincial urban, and rural areas of each of the remaining 4 regions), and allocating approximately equal sample sizes to them. On the basis of past experience, available budget and overall reporting requirement, the target sample size was fixed at 7,000 interviews of ever-married women aged 15-49, expected to be found in around 9,000 households. Table A.I shows the actual number of households as well as eligible women selected and interviewed, by sampling domain (see Table i.I for reporting domains).

THE FRAME AND SAMPLE SELECTION

The frame for selecting the sample for urban areas, was provided by the National Statistical Office of Thailand and by the Ministry of the Interior for rural areas. It consisted of information on population size of various levels of administrative and census units, down to blocks in urban areas and villages in rural areas. The frame also included adequate maps and descriptions to identify these units. The extent to which the data were up-to-date as well as the quality of the data varied somewhat in different parts of the frame. Basically, the multi-stage stratified sampling design involved the following procedure. A specified number of sample areas were selected systematically from geographically/administratively ordered lists with probabilities proportional to the best available measure of size (PPS). Within selected areas (blocks or villages) new lists of households were prepared and systematic samples of households were selected. In principle, the sampling interval for the selection of households from lists was determined so as to yield a self weighting sample of households within each domain. However, in the absence of good measures of population size for all areas, these sampling intervals often required adjustments in the interest of controlling the size of the resulting sample. Variations in selection probabilities introduced due to such adjustment, where required, were compensated for by appropriate weighting of sample cases at the tabulation stage.

SAMPLE OUTCOME

The final sample of households was selected from lists prepared in the sample areas. The time interval between household listing and enumeration was generally very short, except to some extent in Bangkok where the listing itself took more time. In principle, the units of listing were the same as the ultimate units of sampling, namely households. However in a small proportion of cases, the former differed from the latter in several respects, identified at the stage of final enumeration: a) Some units listed actually contained more than one household each b) Some units were "blanks", that is, were demolished or not found to contain any eligible households at the time of enumeration. c) Some units were doubtful cases in as much as the household was reported as "not found" by the interviewer, but may in fact have existed.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The DHS core questionnaires (Household, Eligible Women Respondent, and Community) were translated into Thai. A number of modifications were made largely to adapt them for use with an ever- married woman sample and to add a number of questions in areas that are of special interest to the Thai investigators but which were not covered in the standard core. Examples of such modifications included adding marital status and educational attainment to the household schedule, elaboration on questions in the individual questionnaire on educational attainment to take account of changes in the educational system during recent years, elaboration on questions on postnuptial residence, and adaptation of the questionnaire to take into account that only ever-married women are being interviewed rather than all women. More generally, attention was given to the wording of questions in Thai to ensure that the intent of the original English-language version was preserved.

a) Household questionnaire

The household questionnaire was used to list every member of the household who usually lives in the household and as well as visitors who slept in the household the night before the interviewer's visit. Information contained in the household questionnaire are age, sex, marital status, and education for each member (the last two items were asked only to members aged 13 and over). The head of the household or the spouse of the head of the household was the preferred respondent for the household questionnaire. However, if neither was available for interview, any adult member of the household was accepted as the respondent. Information from the household questionnaire was used to identify eligible women for the individual interview. To be eligible, a respondent had to be an ever-married woman aged 15-49 years old who had slept in the household 'the previous night'.

Prior evidence has indicated that when asked about current age, Thais are as likely to report age at next birthday as age at last birthday (the usual demographic definition of age). Since the birth date of each household number was not asked in the household questionnaire, it was not possible to calculate age at last birthday from the birthdate. Therefore a special procedure was followed to ensure that eligible women just under the higher boundary for eligible ages (i.e. 49 years old) were not mistakenly excluded from the eligible woman sample because of an overstated age. Ever-married women whose reported age was between 50-52 years old and who slept in the household the night before birthdate of the woman, it was discovered that these women (or any others being interviewed) were not actually within the eligible age range of 15-49, the interview was terminated and the case disqualified. This attempt recovered 69 eligible women who otherwise would have been missed because their reported age was over 50 years old or over.

b) Individual questionnaire

The questionnaire administered to eligible women was based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire for high contraceptive prevalence countries. The individual questionnaire has 8 sections: - Respondent's background - Reproduction - Contraception - Health and breastfeeding - Marriage - Fertility preference - Husband's background and woman's work - Heights and weights of children and mothers

The questionnaire was modified to suit the Thai context. As noted above, several questions were added to the standard DHS core questionnaire not only to meet the interest of IPS researchers hut also because of their relevance to the current demographic situation in Thailand. The supplemental questions are marked with an asterisk in the individual questionnaire. Questions concerning the following items were added in the individual questionnaire: - Did the respondent ever

This dataset was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.Naming conventions:Prefixes: None Countp Percentr Ratem Mediana Mean (average)t Aggregate (total)ch Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pch Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chp Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)s Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed Suffixes: _e19 Estimate from 2014-19 ACS_m19 Margin of Error from 2014-19 ACS_00_v19 Decennial 2000, re-estimated to 2019 geography_00_19 Change, 2000-19_e10_v19 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_m10_v19 Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_e10_19 Change, 2010-19The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent. The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2015-2019). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available. For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2015-2019Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the manifest: https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3d489c725bb24f52a987b302147c46ee/data

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

Abstract

The 2013 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS-2013) is a nationally representative sample survey. The primary objective of the TDHS-2013 is to provide data on socioeconomic characteristics of households and women between ages 15-49, fertility, childhood mortality, marriage patterns, family planning, maternal and child health, nutritional status of women and children, and reproductive health. The survey obtained detailed information on these issues from a sample of women of reproductive age (15-49). The TDHS-2013 was designed to produce information in the field of demography and health that to a large extent cannot be obtained from other sources.

Specifically, the objectives of the TDHS-2013 included: - Collecting data at the national level that allows the calculation of some demographic and health indicators, particularly fertility rates and childhood mortality rates, - Obtaining information on direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality, - Measuring the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by contraceptive method and some background characteristics, i.e., region and urban-rural residence, - Collecting data relative to maternal and child health, including immunizations, antenatal care, and postnatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding, - Measuring the nutritional status of children under five and women in the reproductive ages, - Collecting data on reproductive-age women about marriage, employment status, and social status

The TDHS-2013 information is intended to provide data to assist policy makers and administrators to evaluate existing programs and to design new strategies for improving demographic, social and health policies in Turkey. Another important purpose of the TDHS-2013 is to sustain the flow of information for the interested organizations in Turkey and abroad on the Turkish population structure in the absence of a reliable and sufficient vital registration system. Additionally, like the TDHS-2008, TDHS-2013 is accepted as a part of the Official Statistic Program.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49
• Children under age of five

Universe

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample design and sample size for the TDHS-2013 makes it possible to perform analyses for Turkey as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for the five demographic regions of the country (West, South, Central, North, and East). The TDHS-2013 sample is of sufficient size to allow for analysis on some of the survey topics at the level of the 12 geographical regions (NUTS 1) which were adopted at the second half of the year 2002 within the context of Turkey’s move to join the European Union.

In the selection of the TDHS-2013 sample, a weighted, multi-stage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used. Sample selection for the TDHS-2013 was undertaken in two stages. The first stage of selection included the selection of blocks as primary sampling units from each strata and this task was requested from the TURKSTAT. The frame for the block selection was prepared using information on the population sizes of settlements obtained from the 2012 Address Based Population Registration System. Settlements with a population of 10,000 and more were defined as “urban”, while settlements with populations less than 10,000 were considered “rural” for purposes of the TDHS-2013 sample design. Systematic selection was used for selecting the blocks; thus settlements were given selection probabilities proportional to their sizes. Therefore more blocks were sampled from larger settlements.

The second stage of sample selection involved the systematic selection of a fixed number of households from each block, after block lists were obtained from TURKSTAT and were updated through a field operation; namely the listing and mapping fieldwork. Twentyfive households were selected as a cluster from urban blocks, and 18 were selected as a cluster from rural blocks. The total number of households selected in TDHS-2013 is 14,490.

The total number of clusters in the TDHS-2013 was set at 642. Block level household lists, each including approximately 100 households, were provided by TURKSTAT, using the National Address Database prepared for municipalities. The block lists provided by TURKSTAT were updated during the listing and mapping activities.

All women at ages 15-49 who usually live in the selected households and/or were present in the household the night before the interview were regarded as eligible for the Women’s Questionnaire and were interviewed. All analysis in this report is based on de facto women.

Note: A more technical and detailed description of the TDHS-2013 sample design, selection and implementation is presented in Appendix B of the final report of the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Two main types of questionnaires were used to collect the TDHS-2013 data: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for all women of reproductive age. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS core questionnaire. Additions, deletions and modifications were made to the DHS model questionnaire in order to collect information particularly relevant to Turkey. Attention also was paid to ensuring the comparability of the TDHS-2013 findings with previous demographic surveys carried out by the Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies. In the process of designing the TDHS-2013 questionnaires, national and international population and health agencies were consulted for their comments.

The questionnaires were developed in Turkish and translated into English.

Cleaning operations

TDHS-2013 questionnaires were returned to the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies by the fieldwork teams for data processing as soon as interviews were completed in a province. The office editing staff checked that the questionnaires for all selected households and eligible respondents were returned from the field. A total of 29 data entry staff were trained for data entry activities of the TDHS-2013. The data entry of the TDHS-2013 began in late September 2013 and was completed at the end of January 2014.

The data were entered and edited on microcomputers using the Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) software. CSPro is designed to fulfill the census and survey data processing needs of data-producing organizations worldwide. CSPro is developed by MEASURE partners, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, ICF International’s DHS Program, and SerPro S.A. CSPro allows range, skip, and consistency errors to be detected and corrected at the data entry stage. During the data entry process, 100% verification was performed by entering each questionnaire twice using different data entry operators and comparing the entered data.

Response rate

In all, 14,490 households were selected for the TDHS-2013. At the time of the listing phase of the survey, 12,640 households were considered occupied and, thus, eligible for interview. Of the eligible households, 93 percent (11,794) households were successfully interviewed. The main reasons the field teams were unable to interview some households were because some dwelling units that had been listed were found to be vacant at the time of the interview or the household was away for an extended period.

In the interviewed 11,794 households, 10,840 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview, aged 15-49 and were present in the household on the night before the interview. Interviews were successfully completed with 9,746 of these women (90 percent). Among the eligible women not interviewed in the survey, the principal reason for nonresponse was the failure to find the women at home after repeated visits to the household.

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 TDHS-2013 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 TDHS-2013 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

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the data for the Section, AL population pyramid, which represents the Section population distribution across age and gender, using estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. It lists the male and female population for each age group, along with the total population for those age groups. Higher numbers at the bottom of the table suggest population growth, whereas higher numbers at the top indicate declining birth rates. Furthermore, the dataset can be utilized to understand the youth dependency ratio, old-age dependency ratio, total dependency ratio, and potential support ratio.

Key observations

• Youth dependency ratio, which is the number of children aged 0-14 per 100 persons aged 15-64, for Section, AL, is 46.5.
• Old-age dependency ratio, which is the number of persons aged 65 or over per 100 persons aged 15-64, for Section, AL, is 35.0.
• Total dependency ratio for Section, AL is 81.5.
• Potential support ratio, which is the number of youth (working age population) per elderly, for Section, AL is 2.9.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

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

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the Section population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the Section for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the Section for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Total Population: The total population of the Section for the selected age group is shown in the following column.

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 Section Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Abstract

The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.

The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.

The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.

The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).

The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.

The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.

Response rate

A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey 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 shortfalls 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 1998 GDHS 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 1998 GDHS 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 1998 GDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module uses the Taylor linearization method of 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.

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

Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.

Detailed county and state-level ecological or descriptive data for the United States for the years 1790 to 1970 are contained in this collection. These data files contain extensive information about the social and political character of the United States, including a breakdown of population by state, race, nationality, number of families, size of the family, births, deaths, marriages, occupation, religion, and general economic conditions. Though not complete over the full time span of this study, statistics are available on such diverse subjects as total numbers of newspapers and periodicals, total capital invested in manufacturing, total numbers of educational institutions, total number of churches, taxation by state, and land surface area in square miles.

Supporting tables for Research report on population estimates by ethnic group and religion.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Arlington population by year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population trend of Arlington.

Content

The dataset constitues the following datasets

• Arlington, TX Population Dataset: Yearly Figures, Population Change, and Percent Change Analysis

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/.

This project was designed to investigate the response of plant growth and reproduction to short- and long-term variation in biotic and abiotic environmental variables. Several perennial taxa, including tree (Juniperus monsperma and Pinus edulis), shrub (Larrea tridentata) and bunch grasses (Oryzopsis hymenoides (now Achnaterum hymenoides) and Sporobolus contractus) species, were monitored at 1-3 sites differing in elevation and topography as well as edaphic variables and annual precipitation. The sites represented optimal or marginal/transitional zones for particular species. Demographic measurements were made biannually, after the 'wet' (fall) and 'dry' (spring) seasons. For tree and shrub species, estimates of growth and reproduction were based on branch demography, with ten branch tips from 10-20 individuals per species per site repeatedly measured from 1989-1993. For J. monsperma, P. edulis and L. tridentata, vegetative growth (i.e., branch growth) as well as reproduction were monitored. Additional measurements included needle length for P. edulis and leaf production, leaf size and branchlet production for L. tridentata. For grasses, basal diameter, leaf length and reproduction were monitored for 100 individuals per species per site. This project, SEV006, contains only data on pinon branch demography. Data on other variables and species is contained in SEV024, SEV025, SEV026, SEV027, and SEV028.

Abstract

The 2005-2006 Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey (2005-06 ZDHS) is one of a series of surveys undertaken by the Central Statistical Office (CSO) as part of the Zimbabwe National Household Survey Capability Programme (ZNHSCP) and the worldwide MEASURE DHS programme. The Ministry of Health and Child Welfare (MOH&CW), Zimbabwe National Family Planning Council (ZNFPC), and the Musasa Project contributed significantly to the design, implementation, and analysis of the 2005-06 ZDHS results. Financial support for the 2005-06 ZDHS was provided by the government of Zimbabwe, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Demographic and Health Research Division of Macro International Inc. (Macro) provided technical assistance during all phases of the survey.

While significantly expanded in content, the 2005-06 ZDHS is a follow-on to the 1988, 1994, and 1999 ZDHS and provides updated estimates of basic demographic and health indicators covered in the earlier surveys. In addition, data on malaria prevention and treatment, domestic violence, anaemia, and HIV/AIDS were also collected in the 2005-06 ZDHS. The primary objectives of the 2005-06 ZDHS project are to provide up-to-date information on fertility levels; nuptiality; sexual activity; fertility preferences; awareness and use of family planning methods; breastfeeding practices; nutritional status of mothers and young children; early childhood mortality and maternal mortality; maternal and child health; and awareness, behaviour, and prevalence regarding HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-54

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 2005-06 ZDHS was designed to provide population and health indicator estimates at the national and provincial levels. The sample design allowed for specific indicators, such as contraceptive use, to be calculated for each of the 10 provinces (Manicaland, Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland East, Mashonaland West, Matabeleland North, Matabeleland South, Midlands, Masvingo, Harare, and Bulawayo). The sampling frame used for the 2005-06 ZDHS was the 2002 Zimbabwe Master Sample (ZMS02) developed by CSO after the 2002 population census. With the exception of Harare and Bulawayo, each of the other eight provinces was stratified into four strata according to land use: communal lands, large-scale commercial farming areas (LSCFA), urban and semi-urban areas, smallscale commercial farming areas (SSCFA), and resettlement areas. Only one urban stratum was formed each for Harare and Bulawayo, providing a total of 34 strata.

A representative probability sample of 10,800 households was selected for the 2005-06 ZDHS. The sample was selected in two stages with enumeration areas (EAs) as the first stage and households as the second stage sampling units. In total 1,200 EAs were selected with probability proportional to size (PPS), the size being the number of households enumerated in the 2002 census. The selection of the EAs was a systematic, one-stage operation carried out independently for each of the 34 strata. The 1,200 ZMS02 EAs were divided into three replicates of 400 EAs each. One of the replicates consisting of 400 EAs was used for the 2005-06 ZDHS. In the second stage, a complete listing of households and mapping exercise was carried out for each cluster in January 2005. The list of households obtained was used as the frame for the second stage random selection of households. The listing excluded people living in institutional households (army barracks, hospitals, police camps, boarding schools, etc.). CSO provincial supervisors also trained provincial CSO officers to use global positioning system (GPS) receivers to take the coordinates of the 2005-06 ZDHS sample clusters.

All women age 15-49 and all men age 15-54 who were either permanent residents of the households in the 2005-06 ZDHS sample or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Anaemia and HIV testing was performed in each household among eligible women and men who consented to either or both tests. With the parent's or guardian's consent, children age 6-59 months were tested for anaemia in each household. In addition, a sub-sample of one eligible woman in each household was randomly selected to be asked additional questions about domestic violence.

Note: See detailed sample implementation summary tables in Appendix A of the Final Report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]F

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used for the 2005-06 ZDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women’s Questionnaire, and a Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Zimbabwe at a series of meetings with various stakeholders from government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and international donors. Three language versions of the questionnaires were produced: Shona, Ndebele, and English.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors of selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his or her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. For children under age 18, survival status of the parents was determined. If a child in the household had a parent who was sick for more than three consecutive months in the 12 months preceding the survey or a parent who had died, additional questions related to support for orphans and vulnerable children were asked. Additionally, if an adult in the household was sick for more than three consecutive months in the 12 months preceding the survey or an adult in the household died, questions were asked related to support for sick people or people who have died. The Household Questionnaire was also used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Additionally, the Household Questionnaire 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 ownership and use of mosquito nets. The Household Questionnaire was also used to record height, weight, and haemoglobin measurements for children age 6-59 months.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49. These 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, delivery and postnatal care - Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices - Vaccinations and childhood illnesses - Marriage and sexual activity - Women’s work and husband’s background characteristics - Women’s and children’s nutritional status - Domestic violence - Awareness and behaviour regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) - Adult mortality including maternal mortality.

As in the 1999 ZDHS, a “calendar” was used in the 2005-06 ZDHS to collect information on the respondent’s reproductive history since January 2000 concerning contraceptive method use, sources of contraception, reasons for contraceptive discontinuation, and marital unions. In addition, interviewing teams measured the height and weight of all children under the age of five years and of all women age 15-49.

The Men’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-54 in each household in the 2005-06 ZDHS 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 or nutrition.

Response rate

A total of 10,752 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,778 were currently occupied. The shortfall was largely due to some households no longer existing in the sampled clusters at the time of the interview. Of the 9,778 existing households, 9,285 were successfully interviewed, yielding a household response rate of 95 percent.

In the interviewed households, 9,870 eligible women were identified and, of these, 8,907 were interviewed, yielding a response rate of 90 percent. Of the 8,761 eligible men identified, 7,175 were successfully interviewed (82 percent response rate). The principal reason for nonresponse among both eligible men and women was the failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the households. The lower response rate among men than among women was due to the more frequent and longer absences of men from the households.

Note: See summarized response rates in Table 1.3 of the Final Report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) 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

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002

2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)

4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

Geographic coverage

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

Response rate

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households

This table summarizes the observed patterns of sex-specific differences in demographic parameters reported in a number of recent studies. The first column lists the location of the sampled populations, or indicates whether the study is conducted at a global scale. The second column gives the markers used, and the third column indicates the statistical methods employed. The fourth column provides indications on social organization, available a priori for the populations under study. In the fifth and sixth columns, the authors' interpretations of sex-specific differences in demographic parameters are given, with respect to skewed gene flow and/or effective numbers.aIndications on social organization, marriage rules, etc., as provided by the authors.bThe differences in demographic parameters between males and females, as inferred by the authors, are given in terms of sex-biased gene flow, and skewed effective numbers; the authors' interpretation to the observed pattern is given in parentheses, when available.cSingle nucleotide polymorphisms.dAnalysis of molecular variance [69].eNot available (no detailed information given by the authors concerning social organization, marriage rules, etc.).fShort tandem repeats.gTime to the most recent common ancestor.hmtDNA and NRY were not sampled in the same individuals or populations.iThe authors discussed a possible difference in demographic parameters between males and females, but considered it as negligible.jThe authors did not consider this pattern.kFood-producer populations.lHunter-gatherer populations.mMonte Carlo Markov chain method to estimate population sizes and migration rates [70].nVariance in Reproductive Success.opopulation-mutation parameter.

The study was a demographic analysis of Gaultheria procumbens conducted on the Montague Sand Plain. It compared the demographic parameters of above-ground stems between plowed and unplowed areas within scrub oak and hardwood sites. Past land use can have long-term effects on plant species distributional patterns if alterations in resources and environmental conditions have persistent effects on population demography ("environmental change") and/or if plants are intrinsically limited in their colonisation ability ("historical factors"). We evaluated the role of environmental alteration versus historical factors in controlling distributional patterns in Gaultheria procumbens (L.), a woody, clonal, understorey species with a pronounced restriction to areas that have never been ploughed and near absence from adjoining areas that were ploughed in the 19th century. The demographic study was conducted in scrub oak and hardwood plant communities on an extensive sand plain where it was possible to control for the effect of variation in environment prior to land use.

Figures, data and facts on demographic developments and the impact on the Federal Service.

Demographic characteristics of study population.

Common Noddies (Anous stolidus) were first recorded on Lancelin Island off south-western Australia in January 1992. A study of the population dynamics of this colony began in the 1994-95 breeding season and was continued for over 10 years, until 2011. The demography of the colony was modelled using information on adult survivorship, age of first breeding and natal recruitment from the analysis of banding-recapture data and annual colony census data.

Abstract

The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) is the first of this kind of study conducted in Bangladesh. It provides rapid feedback on key demographic and programmatic indicators to monitor the strength and weaknesses of the national family planning/MCH program. The wealth of information collected through the 1993-94 BDHS will be of immense value to the policymakers and program managers in order to strengthen future program policies and strategies.

The BDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. In general, the objectives of the BDHS are to: - asses the overall demographic situation in Bangladesh, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programs in Bangladesh, and - advance survey methodology.

More specifically, the BDHS was designed to: - provide data on the family planning and fertility behavior of the Bangladesh population to evaluate the national family planning programs, - measure changes in fertility and contraceptive prevalence and, at the same time, study the factors which affect these changes, such as marriage patterns, urban/rural residence, availability of contraception, breastfeeding patterns, and other socioeconomic factors, and - examine the basic indicators of maternal and child health in Bangladesh.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 10-49
• Men

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

Bangladesh is divided into five administrative divisions, 64 districts (zillas), and 489 thanas. In rural areas, thanas are divided into unions and then mauzas, an administrative land unit. Urban areas are divided into wards and then mahallas. The 1993-94 BDHS employed a nationally-representative, two-stage sample. It was selected from the Integrated Multi-Purpose Master Sample (IMPS), newly created by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. The IMPS is based on 1991 census data. Each of the five divisions was stratified into three groups: 1) statistical metropolitan areas (SMAs) 2) municipalities (other urban areas), and 3) rural areas. In rural areas, the primary sampling unit was the mauza, while in urban areas, it was the mahalla. Because the primary sampling units in the IMPS were selected with probability proportional to size from the 1991 census frame, the units for the BDHS were sub-selected from the IMPS with equal probability to make the BDHS selection equivalent to selection with probability proportional to size. A total of 304 primary sampling units were selected for the BDHS (30 in SMAs, 40 in municipalities, and 234 in rural areas), out of the 372 in the IMPS. Fieldwork in three sample points was not possible, so a total of 301 points were covered in the survey.

Since one objective of the BDHS is to provide separate survey estimates for each division as well as for urban and rural areas separately, it was necessary to increase the sampling rate for Barisal Division und for municipalities relative to the other divisions, SMAs, and rural areas. Thus, the BDHS sample is not self-weighting and weighting factors have been applied to the data in this report.

After the selection of the BDHS sample points, field staffs were trained by Mitra and Associates and conducted a household listing operation in September and October 1993. A systematic sample of households was then selected from these lists, with an average "take" of 25 households in the urban clusters and 37 households in rural clusters. Every second household was identified as selected for the husband's survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all ever-married women age 10-49, interviewers also interviewed the husband of any woman who was successfully interviewed. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 10,000 ever-married women age 10-49 and 4,200 of their husbands.

Note: See detailed in APPENDIX A of the survey final report.

Sampling deviation

Data collected for women 10-49, indicators calculated for women 15-49. A total of 304 primary sampling units were selected, but fieldwork in 3 sample points was not possible.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the BDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women's Questionnaire, a Husbands' Questionnaire, and a Service Availability Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with relatively high levels of contraceptive use. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaires were made during a series of meetings with representatives of various organizations, including the Asia Foundation, the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, the Cambridge Consulting Corporation, the Family Planning Association of Bangladesh, GTZ, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research (ICDDR,B), Pathfinder International, Population Communications Services, the Population Council, the Social Marketing Company, UNFPA, UNICEF, University Research Corporation/Bangladesh, and the World Bank. The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors of selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his/her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for individual interview. In addition, information was collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, and ownership of various consumer goods.

The Women's Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 10-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc.), - Reproductive history, - Knowledge and use of family planning methods, - Antenatal and delivery care, - Breastfeeding and weaning practices, - Vaccinations and health of children under age three, - Marriage, - Fertility preferences, and - Husband's background and respondent's work.

The Husbands' Questionnaire was used to interview the husbands of a subsample of women who were interviewed. The questionnaire included many of the same questions as the Women's Questionnaire, except that it omitted the detailed birth history, as well as the sections on maternal care, breastfeeding and child health.

The Service Availability Questionnaire was used to collect information on the family planning and health services available in and near the sampled areas. It consisted of a set of three questionnaires: one to collect data on characteristics of the community, one for interviewing family welfare visitors and one for interviewing family planning field workers, whether government or non-governent supported. One set of service availability questionnaires was to be completed in each cluster (sample point).

Cleaning operations

All questionnaires for the BDHS were returned to Dhaka for data processing at Mitra and Associates. The processing operation consisted of office editing, coding of open-ended questions, data entry, and editing inconsistencies found by the computer programs. One senior staff member, 1 data processing supervisor, questionnaire administrator, 2 office editors, and 5 data entry operators were responsible for the data processing operation. The data were processed on five microcomputers. The DHS data entry and editing programs were written in ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis). Data processing commenced in early February and was completed by late April 1994.

Response rate

A total of 9,681 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,174 were successfully interviewed. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant, or in which the inhabitants had left for an extended period at the time they were visited by the interviewing teams. Of the 9,255 households that were occupied, 99 percent were successfully interviewed. In these households, 9,900 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview and interviews were completed for 9,640 or 97 percent of these. In one-half of the households that were selected for inclusion in the husbands' survey, 3,874 eligible husbands were identified, of which 3,284 or 85 percent were interviewed.

The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The refusal rate was very low (less than one-tenth of one percent among women and husbands). Since the main reason for interviewing husbands was to match the information with that from their wives, survey procedures called for interviewers not to interview husbands of women who were not interviewed. Such cases account for about one-third of the non-response among husbands. Where husbands and wives were both interviewed, they were interviewed simultaneously but separately.

Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the survey final report.

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