Background: Clean water is an essential part of human healthy life and wellbeing. More recently, rapid population growth, high illiteracy rate, lack of sustainable development, and climate change; faces a global challenge in developing countries. The discontinuity of drinking water supply forces households either to use unsafe water storage materials or to use water from unsafe sources. The present study aimed to identify the determinants of water source types, use, quality of water, and sanitation perception of physical parameters among urban households in North-West Ethiopia.

Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among households from February to March 2019. An interview-based a pretested and structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. Data collection samples were selected randomly and proportional to each of the kebeles' households. MS Excel and R Version 3.6.2 were used to enter and analyze the data; respectively. Descriptive statistics using frequencies and percentages were used to explain the sample data concerning the predictor variable. Both bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess the association between independent and response variables.

Results: Four hundred eighteen (418) households have participated. Based on the study undertaken,78.95% of households used improved and 21.05% of households used unimproved drinking water sources. Households drinking water sources were significantly associated with the age of the participant (x2 = 20.392, df=3), educational status(x2 = 19.358, df=4), source of income (x2 = 21.777, df=3), monthly income (x2 = 13.322, df=3), availability of additional facilities (x2 = 98.144, df=7), cleanness status (x2 =42.979, df=4), scarcity of water (x2 = 5.1388, df=1) and family size (x2 = 9.934, df=2). The logistic regression analysis also indicated that those factors are significantly determining the water source types used by the households. Factors such as availability of toilet facility, household member type, and sex of the head of the household were not significantly associated with drinking water sources.

Conclusion: The uses of drinking water from improved sources were determined by different demographic, socio-economic, sanitation, and hygiene-related factors. Therefore, ; the local, regional, and national governments and other supporting organizations shall improve the accessibility and adequacy of drinking water from improved sources in the area.

Descriptive statistics for sample demographic variables.

Note. Sample size for Study 1 at T1 = 294. Sample size for Study 1 at T2 = 135. Sample size for Study 2 at T1 = 304. Sample size for Study 2 at T2 = 194. Some percentages did not add up to 100% because of missing data. Long-term relationship included married couples and couples in a committed relationship.Descriptive Statistics for Demographics for Study 1 (U.S. Data) and Study 2 (Polish Data).

Abstract

The principal objective of the Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behavior, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, the utilization of maternal and child health services, and knowledge of HIV/AIDS. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning, monitoring, and evaluation of programs on health in general and reproductive health in particular at both the national and regional levels. A long-term objective of the survey is to strengthen the technical capacity of the Central Statistical Authority to plan, conduct, process, and analyze data from complex national population and health surveys. Moreover, the 2000 Ethiopia DHS is the first survey of its kind in the country to provide national and regional estimates on population and health that are comparable to data collected in similar surveys in other developing countries. As part of the worldwide DHS project, the Ethiopia DHS data add to the vast and growing international database on demographic and health variables. The Ethiopia DHS collected demographic and health information from a nationally representative sample of women and men in the reproductive age groups 15-49 and 15-59, respectively.

The Ethiopia DHS was carried out under the aegis of the Ministry of Health and was implemented by the Central Statistical Authority. ORC Macro provided technical assistance through its MEASURE DHS+ project. The survey was principally funded by the Essential Services for Health in Ethiopia (ESHE) project through a bilateral agreement between the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Funding was also provided by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

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 Ethiopia DHS used the sampling frame provided by the list of census enumeration areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1994 Population and Housing Census. A proportional sample allocation was discarded because this procedure yielded a distribution in which 80 percent of the sample came from three regions, 16 percent from four regions and 4 percent from five regions. To avoid such an uneven sample allocation among regions, it was decided that the sample should be allocated by region in proportion to the square root of the region's population size. Additional adjustments were made to ensure that the sample size for each region included at least 700 households, in order to yield estimates with reasonable statistical precision.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The Ethiopia DHS used three questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire, which were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ project. The questionnaires were specifically geared toward obtaining the kind of information needed by health and family planning program managers and policymakers. The model questionnaires were then adapted to local conditions and a number of additional questions specific to on-going health and family planning programs in Ethiopia were added. These questionnaires were developed in the English language and translated into the five principal languages in use in the country: Amarigna, Oromigna, Tigrigna, Somaligna, and Afarigna. They were then independently translated back to English and appropriate changes were made in the translation of questions in which the back-translated version did not compare well with the original English version. A pretest of all three questionnaires was conducted in the five local languages in November 1999.

All usual members in a selected household and visitors who stayed there the previous night were enumerated using the Household Questionnaire. Specifically, the Household Questionnaire obtained information on the relationship to the head of the household, residence, sex, age, marital status, parental survivorship, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. Women age 15-49 in all selected households and all men age 15-59 in every fifth selected household, whether usual residents or visitors, were deemed eligible, and were interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also obtained information on some basic socioeconomic indicators such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water, the type of toilet facilities, and the ownership of a variety of durable items. Information was also obtained on the use of impregnated bednets, and the salt used in each household was tested for its iodine content. All eligible women and all children born since Meskerem 1987 in the Ethiopian Calendar, which roughly corresponds to September 1994 in the Gregorian Calendar, were weighed and measured.

The Women’s Questionnaire collected information on female respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunization and health, marriage, fertility preferences, and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics and women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

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

Response rate

A total of 14,642 households were selected for the Ethiopia DHS, of which 14,167 were found to be occupied. Household interviews were completed for 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 15,716 eligible women from these households and 2,771 eligible men from every fifth household were identified for the individual interviews. The response rate for eligible women is slightly higher than for eligible men (98 percent compared with 94 percent, respectively). Interviews were successfully completed for 15,367 women and 2,607 men.

There is no difference by urban-rural residence in the overall response rate for eligible women; however, rural men are slightly more likely than urban men to have completed an interview (94 percent and 92 percent, respectively). The overall response rate among women by region is relatively high and ranges from 93 percent in the Affar Region to 99 percent in the Oromiya Region. The response rate among men ranges from 83 percent in the Affar Region to 98 percent in the Tigray and Benishangul-Gumuz regions.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table A.1.1 and Table A.1.2 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 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 Ethiopia DHS to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the Ethiopia DHS 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 Ethiopia DHS 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 Ethiopia DHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (SAMPERR). This module used the Taylor linearisation 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.

Note: See detailed estimate of sampling error calculation in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age

Key Table Information.Table Title.Information: Summary Statistics for the U.S., States, and Selected Geographies: 2022.Table ID.ECNBASIC2022.EC2251BASIC.Survey/Program.Economic Census.Year.2022.Dataset.ECN Core Statistics Summary Statistics for the U.S., States, and Selected Geographies: 2022.Source.U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census, Core Statistics.Release Date.2024-12-05.Dataset Universe.The dataset universe consists of all establishments that are in operation for at least some part of 2022, are located in one of the 50 U.S. states, associated offshore areas, or the District of Columbia, have paid employees, and are classified in one of nineteen in-scope sectors defined by the 2022 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)..Methodology.Data Items and Other Identifying Records.Number of firmsNumber of establishmentsSales, value of shipments, or revenue ($1,000)Annual payroll ($1,000)First-quarter payroll ($1,000)Number of employeesRange indicating imputed percentage of total sales, value of shipments, or revenueRange indicating imputed percentage of total annual payrollRange indicating imputed percentage of total employeesDefinitions can be found by clicking on the column header in the table or by accessing the Economic Census Glossary..Unit(s) of Observation.The reporting units for the economic census are employer establishments. An establishment is generally a single physical location where business is conducted or where services or industrial operations are performed. A company or firm is comprised of one or more in-scope establishments that operate under the ownership or control of a single organization. For some industries, the reporting units are instead groups of all establishments in the same industry belonging to the same firm..Geography Coverage.The data are shown for the U.S., State, Combined Statistical Area, Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area, Metropolitan Division, Consolidated City, County (and equivalent), and Economic Place (and equivalent; incorporated and unincorporated) levels that vary by industry. For information about economic census geographies, including changes for 2022, see Geographies..Industry Coverage.The data are shown at the 2- through 6-digit 2022 NAICS code levels and selected 7-digit 2022 NAICS-based code levels. For information about NAICS, see Economic Census Code Lists..Sampling.The 2022 Economic Census sample includes all active operating establishments of multi-establishment firms and approximately 1.7 million single-establishment firms, stratified by industry and state. Establishments selected to the sample receive a questionnaire. For all data on this table, establishments not selected into the sample are represented with administrative data. For more information about the sample design, see 2022 Economic Census Methodology..Confidentiality.The Census Bureau has reviewed this data product to ensure appropriate access, use, and disclosure avoidance protection of the confidential source data (Project No. 7504609, Disclosure Review Board (DRB) approval number: CBDRB-FY23-099).To protect confidentiality, the U.S. Census Bureau suppresses cell values to minimize the risk of identifying a particular business’ data or identity.To comply with disclosure avoidance guidelines, data rows with fewer than three contributing firms or three contributing establishments are not presented. Additionally, establishment counts are suppressed when other select statistics in the same row are suppressed. More information on disclosure avoidance is available in the 2022 Economic Census Methodology..Technical Documentation/Methodology.For detailed information about the methods used to collect data and produce statistics, survey questionnaires, Primary Business Activity/NAICS codes, NAPCS codes, and more, see Economic Census Technical Documentation..Weights.No weighting applied as establishments not sampled are represented with administrative data..Table Information.FTP Download.https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census/data/2022/.API Information.Economic census data are housed in the Census Bureau Application Programming Interface (API)..Symbols.D - Withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual companies; data are included in higher level totalsN - Not available or not comparableS - Estimate does not meet publication standards because of high sampling variability, poor response quality, or other concerns about the estimate quality. Unpublished estimates derived from this table by subtraction are subject to these same limitations and should not be attributed to the U.S. Census Bureau. For a description of publication standards and the total quantity response rate, see link to program methodology page.X - Not applicableA - Relative standard error of 100% or morer - Reviseds - Relative standard error exceeds 40%For a complete list of symbols, see Economic Census Data Dictionary..Data-Specific Notes.Data users who create their own estimates us...

Descriptive statistics of the analytical sample by geographic macro-area (all countries (9); sample size (n) = 37,864).

Key Table Information.Table Title.Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics series (NES-D): Statistics for Employer and Nonemployer Firms by Industry and Veteran Status for the U.S., States, Metro Areas, Counties, and Places: 2023.Table ID.ABSNESD2023.AB00MYNESD01D.Survey/Program.Economic Surveys.Year.2023.Dataset.ECNSVY Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics Company Summary.Source.U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 Economic Surveys, Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics.Release Date.2025-11-20.Release Schedule.The Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics (NES-D) is released yearly, beginning in 2017..Sponsor.National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, U.S. National Science Foundation.Table Universe.Data in this table combines estimates from the Annual Business Survey (employer firms) and the Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics (nonemployer firms).Includes U.S. firms with no paid employment or payroll, annual receipts of $1,000 or more ($1 or more in the construction industries) and filing Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax forms for sole proprietorships (Form 1040, Schedule C), partnerships (Form 1065), or corporations (the Form 1120 series).Includes U.S. employer firms estimates of business ownership by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status from the 2024 Annual Business Survey (ABS) collection. The employer business dataset universe consists of employer firms that are in operation for at least some part of the reference year, are located in one of the 50 U.S. states, associated offshore areas, or the District of Columbia, have paid employees and annual receipts of $1,000 or more, and are classified in one of nineteen in-scope sectors defined by the 2022 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered.Data are also obtained from administrative records, the 2022 Economic Census, and other economic surveys. Note: For employer data only, the collection year is the year in which the data are collected. A reference year is the year that is referenced in the questions on the survey and in which the statistics are tabulated. For example, the 2024 ABS collection year produces statistics for the 2023 reference year. The "Year" column in the table is the reference year..Methodology.Data Items and Other Identifying Records.Total number of employer and nonemployer firmsTotal sales, value of shipments, or revenue of employer and nonemployer firms ($1,000)Number of nonemployer firmsSales, value of shipments, or revenue of nonemployer firms ($1,000)Number of employer firmsSales, value of shipments, or revenue of employer firms ($1,000)Number of employeesAnnual payroll ($1,000)These data are aggregated by the following demographic classifications of firm for:All firms Classifiable (firms classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status) Veteran Status (defined as having served in any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces) Veteran Equally veteran/nonveteran Nonveteran Unclassifiable (firms not classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status) Definitions can be found by clicking on the column header in the table or by accessing the Economic Census Glossary..Unit(s) of Observation.The reporting units for the NES-D and the ABS are companies or firms rather than establishments. A company or firm is comprised of one or more in-scope establishments that operate under the ownership or control of a single organization..Geography Coverage.The 2023 data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2- to 6-digit NAICS code levels for:United StatesStates and the District of ColumbiaIn addition, the total of all sectors (00) NAICS and the 2-digit NAICS code levels for:Metropolitan Statistical AreasMicropolitan Statistical AreasMetropolitan DivisionsCombined Statistical AreasCountiesEconomic PlacesFor information about geographies, see Geographies..Industry Coverage.The data are shown for the total of all sectors ("00"), and at the 2- through 6-digit NAICS code levels depending on geography. Sector "00" is not an official NAICS sector but is rather a way to indicate a total for multiple sectors. Note: Other programs outside of ABS may use sector 00 to indicate when multiple NAICS sectors are being displayed within the same table and/or dataset.The following are excluded from the total of all sectors:Crop and Animal Production (NAICS 111 and 112)Rail Transportation (NAICS 482)Postal Service (NAICS 491)Monetary Authorities-Central Bank (NAICS 521)Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 525)Office of Notaries (NAICS 541120)Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations (NAICS 813)Private Households (NAICS 814)Public Administration (NAICS 92)For information about NAICS, see North American Industry Classification System..Sampling.NES-D nonemployer data are not conducted through sampling. Nonemployer Statistics (NES) data originate from statistical information obtained through business inco...

Descriptive statistics of sample demographic characteristics.

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2014 LDHS project is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the LDHS collected information on fertility levels, marriage, sexual activity, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutrition, childhood and maternal mortality, maternal and child health, awareness and behaviour regarding HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other health issues such as smoking, knowledge of breast cancer, and male circumcision. In addition, the 2014 LDHS provides estimates of anaemia prevalence among children age 6-59 months and adults, and gives estimates of hypertension, HIV prevalence and HIV incidence among adults. The 2014 LDHS is a follow-up to the 2004 and 2009 LDHS surveys.

The information collected through the LDHS is intended to assist policy makers and programme managers in evaluating and designing programmes and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

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

Universe

Target population for 2014 Lesotho DHS was women (age 15-49) and men (age 15-59) of reproductive age and their young children living in households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample Design The sampling frame used for the 2014 LDHS is an updated frame from the 2006 Lesotho Population and Housing Census (PHC) provided by the Lesotho Bureau of Statistics (BOS). The sampling frame excluded nomadic and institutional populations such as persons in hotels, barracks, and prisons.

The 2014 LDHS followed a two-stage sample design and was intended to allow estimates of key indicators at the national level as well as in urban and rural areas, four ecological zones, and each of Lesotho's 10 districts. The first stage involved selecting sample points (clusters) consisting of enumeration areas (EAs) delineated for the 2006 PHC. A total of 400 clusters were selected, 118 in urban areas and 282 in rural areas.

The second stage involved systematic sampling of households. A household listing operation was undertaken in all of the selected EAs in July 2014, and households to be included in the survey were randomly selected from these lists. About 25 households were selected from each sample point, for a total sample size of 9,942 households. Because of the approximately equal sample sizes in each district, the sample is not self-weighting at the national level, and weighting factors have been added to the data file so that the results will be proportional at the national level.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Three questionnaires were used for the 2014 LDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, and the Man’s 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 Lesotho. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organisations, and international donors. After the preparation of the definitive questionnaires in English, the questionnaires were translated into Sesotho.

Cleaning operations

In this survey, instead of using paper questionnaires, interviewers used personal digital assistants (PDAs) to record responses during interviews, and team supervisors managed the data using tablet computers. The PDAs and tablets were equipped with Bluetooth technology to enable remote electronic transfer of files (e.g., transfer of assignment sheets from team supervisors to interviewers and transfer of completed questionnaires from interviewers to supervisors). The computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) data collection system employed in the 2014 LDHS was developed by The DHS Program using the mobile version of CSPro.

The data processing operation included secondary editing, which involved resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. The data were processed by one person who took part in the main fieldwork training. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in October 2014 and completed in February 2015.

Response rate

A total of 9,942 households were selected for the sample, of which 9,543 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 9,402 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 99%. This compares favourably to the 2009 LDHS response rate (98%).

In the interviewed households, 6,818 eligible women were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 6,621 women, yielding a response rate of 97%. In the subsample of households selected for the male survey, 3,133 eligible men were identified and 2,931 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 94%. The lower response rate for men was 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: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2014 Lesotho Demographic and Health Survey (2014 LDHS) 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 2014 LDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2014 LDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed by SAS programs developed by ICF International. These programs use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

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

Note: A more detailed description of estimate of sampling error is presented in APPENDIX B of the survey 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 - Sibship size and sex ratio of siblings

Note: See detailed data quality tables in APPENDIX D of the report.

The COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the global health challenges in the current context. In Nepal, the first confirmed case was reported on 23 January 2020, and since then, it has resulted in several negative impacts, including economic disruption and deterioration of physical and mental health. In such a pandemic, it is indispensable to understand the knowledge and behavioral patterns of the general population regarding COVID-19. Therefore, our study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes and practices on COVID-19 among the general population in most affected districts and its relationship with socio-demographic conditions. The cross-sectional study was conducted among the general population above the age of 18 years from eight districts of Nepal including Kathmandu, Bhaktapur, Lalitpur, Morang, Sunsari, Rupandehi, Chitwan, and Kaski. A convenient non-probability sampling method was considered with total sample size of 702. The questionnaire survey was conducted to collect data. Descriptive statistics, non-parametric statistical tests, and a logistic regression model were used for analysis. The study showed that 93.3% of respondents had knowledge of overall preventive practices, whereas only 32% had knowledge of overall symptoms of COVID-19. Regarding attitudes, only 14.3% strongly believed that the COVID-19 pandemic would end soon. The preventive practice was reduced after the lockdown compared to that of during the lockdown. The respondents with white-collar occupations, high-income, and unmarried were good at KAP. Similarly, highly educated and those residing in urban areas had good knowledge and practice. The study findings will help in the development of targeted programs to improve the general population’s knowledge, attitudes and practices on COVID-19, which is paramount to dealing with the existing pandemic and also such possible future waves of the pandemic.

Abstract

The 1997 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is a national sample survey carried out by the Department of Statistics (DOS) as part of its National Household Surveys Program (NHSP). The JPFHS was specifically aimed at providing information on fertility, family planning, and infant and child mortality. Information was also gathered on breastfeeding, on maternal and child health care and nutritional status, and on the characteristics of households and household members. The survey will provide policymakers and planners with important information for use in formulating informed programs and policies on reproductive behavior and health.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

The 1997 JPFHS sample was designed to produce reliable estimates of major survey variables for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, for the three regions (each composed of a group of governorates), and for the three major governorates, Amman, Irbid, and Zarqa.

The 1997 JPFHS sample is a subsample of the master sample that was designed using the frame obtained from the 1994 Population and Housing Census. A two-stage sampling procedure was employed. First, primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected with probability proportional to the number of housing units in the PSU. A total of 300 PSUs were selected at this stage. In the second stage, in each selected PSU, occupied housing units were selected with probability inversely proportional to the number of housing units in the PSU. This design maintains a self-weighted sampling fraction within each governorate.

UPDATING OF SAMPLING FRAME

Prior to the main fieldwork, mapping operations were carried out and the sample units/blocks were selected and then identified and located in the field. The selected blocks were delineated and the outer boundaries were demarcated with special signs. During this process, the numbers on buildings and housing units were updated, listed and documented, along with the name of the owner/tenant of the unit or household and the name of the household head. These activities took place between January 7 and February 28, 1997.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The 1997 JPFHS used two questionnaires, one for the household interview and the other for eligible women. Both questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into Arabic. The household questionnaire was used to list all members of the sampled households, including usual residents as well as visitors. For each member of the household, basic demographic and social characteristics were recorded and women eligible for the individual interview were identified. The individual questionnaire was developed utilizing the experience gained from previous surveys, in particular the 1983 and 1990 Jordan Fertility and Family Health Surveys (JFFHS).

The 1997 JPFHS individual questionnaire consists of 10 sections: - Respondent’s background - Marriage - Reproduction (birth history) - Contraception - Pregnancy, breastfeeding, health and immunization - Fertility preferences - Husband’s background, woman’s work and residence - Knowledge of AIDS - Maternal mortality - Height and weight of children and mothers.

Cleaning operations

Fieldwork and data processing activities overlapped. After a week of data collection, and after field editing of questionnaires for completeness and consistency, the questionnaires for each cluster were packaged together and sent to the central office in Amman where they were registered and stored. Special teams were formed to carry out office editing and coding.

Data entry started after a week of office data processing. The process of data entry, editing, and cleaning was done by means of the ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis) program DHS has developed especially for such surveys. The ISSA program allows data to be edited while being entered. Data entry was completed on November 14, 1997. A data processing specialist from Macro made a trip to Jordan in November and December 1997 to identify problems in data entry, editing, and cleaning, and to work on tabulations for both the preliminary and final report.

Response rate

A total of 7,924 occupied housing units were selected for the survey; from among those, 7,592 households were found. Of the occupied households, 7,335 (97 percent) were successfully interviewed. In those households, 5,765 eligible women were identified, and complete interviews were obtained with 5,548 of them (96 percent of all eligible women). Thus, the overall response rate of the 1997 JPFHS was 93 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among the women 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 subject to two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing (such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding questions either by the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors). Although during the implementation of the 1997 JPFHS numerous efforts were made to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are not only impossible to avoid but also difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The respondents selected in the 1997 JPFHS constitute only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, given the same design and expected size. Each of those samples would have yielded results differing somewhat from the results of the sample actually selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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, since the 1997 JDHS-II sample resulted from a multistage stratified design, formulae of higher complexity had to be used. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1997 JDHS-II was the ISSA Sampling Error Module, which 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.

Note: See detailed estimate of sampling error calculation in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - 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.

Abstract

The Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) Complete Count Data include more than 650 million individual-level and 7.5 million household-level records. The IPUMS microdata are the result of collaboration between IPUMS and the nation’s two largest genealogical organizations—Ancestry.com and FamilySearch—and provides the largest and richest source of individual level and household data.

Before Manuscript Submission

All manuscripts (and other items you'd like to publish) must be submitted to

phsdatacore@stanford.edu for approval prior to journal submission.

We will check your cell sizes and citations.

For more information about how to cite PHS and PHS datasets, please visit:

https:/phsdocs.developerhub.io/need-help/citing-phs-data-core

Documentation

Historic data are scarce and often only exists in aggregate tables. The key advantage of historic US census data is the availability of individual and household level characteristics that researchers can tabulate in ways that benefits their specific research questions. The data contain demographic variables, economic variables, migration variables and family variables. Within households, it is possible to create relational data as all relations between household members are known. For example, having data on the mother and her children in a household enables researchers to calculate the mother’s age at birth. Another advantage of the Complete Count data is the possibility to follow individuals over time using a historical identifier.

In sum: the historic US census data are a unique source for research on social and economic change and can provide population health researchers with information about social and economic determinants.Historic data are scarce and often only exists in aggregate tables. The key advantage of historic US census data is the availability of individual and household level characteristics that researchers can tabulate in ways that benefits their specific research questions. The data contain demographic variables, economic variables, migration variables and family variables. Within households, it is possible to create relational data as all relations between household members are known. For example, having data on the mother and her children in a household enables researchers to calculate the mother’s age at birth. Another advantage of the Complete Count data is the possibility to follow individuals over time using a historical identifier. In sum: the historic US census data are a unique source for research on social and economic change and can provide population health researchers with information about social and economic determinants.

The historic US 1940 census data was collected in April 1940. Enumerators collected data traveling to households and counting the residents who regularly slept at the household. Individuals lacking permanent housing were counted as residents of the place where they were when the data was collected. Household members absent on the day of data collected were either listed to the household with the help of other household members or were scheduled for the last census subdivision.

Notes

• We provide IPUMS household and person data separately so that it is convenient to explore the descriptive statistics on each level. In order to obtain a full dataset, merge the household and person on the variables SERIAL and SERIALP. In order to create a longitudinal dataset, merge datasets on the variable HISTID.
• Households with more than 60 people in the original data were broken up for processing purposes. Every person in the large households are considered to be in their own household. The original large households can be identified using the variable SPLIT40, reconstructed using the variable SERIAL40, and the original count is found in the variable NUMPREC40.
• Some variables are missing from this data set for specific enumeration districts. The enumeration districts with missing data can be identified using the variable EDMISS. These variables will be added in a future release.
• Coded variables derived from string variables are still in progress. These variables include: occupation, industry and migration status.
• Missing observations have been allocated and some inconsistencies have been edited for the following variables: Missing observations have been allocated and some inconsistencies have been edited for the following variables: SURSIM, SEX, SCHOOL, RELATE, RACE, OCC1950, MTONGUE, MBPL, FBPL, BPL, MARST, EMPSTAT, CITIZEN, OWNERSHP. The flag variables indicating an allocated observation for the associated variables can be included in your extract by clicking the ‘Select data quality flags’ box on the extract summary page.
• Most inconsistent information was not edited for this release, thus there are observations outside of the universe for many variables. In particular, the variables GQ, and GQTYPE have known inconsistencies and will be improved with the next r

Greek Household Energy Consumption

Socio-Economic, Demographic, and Housing Characteristics, 2004-2020

By [source]

About this dataset

This dataset provides a valuable insight into the energy consumption patterns of Greek households from 2004 to 2020. This comprehensive dataset covers an array of dimensions ranging from basic socio-economic and demographic characteristics of households, to housing characteristics and energy source data. It provides invaluable information about types of heating systems employed in homes, primary energy sources used for electricity and hot water provision, as well as average cost for these services over long periods. An analysis of this dataset can provide much needed understanding into changes in energy consumption practices over time and differences between socio-economic groups, allowing informed decisions regarding policy related to best practices with regard to energy efficiency. Do not miss out on the opportunity to understand how the current trends in household energy consumption in Greece came into existence by studying this powerful dataset!

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset contains important information on the energy consumption patterns of households in Greece from 2004 to 2020. By exploring this data, we can gain insight into how energy consumption practices have changed over the period and how factors such as socio-economic and demographic characteristics, housing characteristics, and cost data have had an impact on these changes.

Here are some tips for making the best use of this dataset:

• Begin by familiarizing yourself with all the variables included in this dataset — from basic socio-economic and demographic details of households, to housing characteristics and energy source data. This understanding will ensure that you are able to make better sense of the insights received when analyzing the data.

• Use descriptive statistics such as groupby and pivot tables to analyze different trends within a variable or between variables — for example grouping by household income level or region or examining changes over time through comparison with previous years' values.

• Experiment with visualizing your findings using graphs or charts — including line graphs, histograms, scatter plots,heatmaps etc., which can help bring out more trends than just text alone could do so easily!

• Analyze cost related variables such as electricity consumption totals combined with other statistics such as average winter temperature or number of people living in a household - which may help identify key drivers impacting total energy costs for particular households over time or others alike thematically!

• Compare insights across various demographics - for example compare data about rural vs urban areas; northern vs southern regions; higher income vs lower income groups etc.; to learn broader conclusions about overall energy use among Greek households at large throughout given years/timeframes!

6Using sophisticated algorithms like linear regression models can further enhance your research results by allowing you fine tune predictions based on various inputs (such as types of fuel/ sources & annual temperatures etc), ensuring actionable results derived due to predictive decision making highly influence policy decisions related to efficiency & conservation efforts needed!

Research Ideas

• Modeling Energy Consumption Based on Socio-Economic, Demographic, and Housing Characteristics: This dataset can be used to identify the factors that influence energy consumption in Greek households. By analyzing the various demographic and housing characteristics of a given household, it may be possible to create predictive models that accurately predict energy usage for similar households in the future.
• Evaluating Changes in Energy Consumption Over Time: This dataset can also be used to observe how energy consumption patterns have changed over time. A comparison between 2004 and 2020 could provide insight into who is using more or less energy now than before and what types of changes were responsible for this shift in energy consumption habits.
• Identifying Correlations between Cost of Energy Use and Different Factors: Lastly, this dataset could help identify connections between things like cost of homes' primary sources of power, type of heating systems used, geographical region etc., and the resulting cost incurred by households when they use different kinds of energies. Coupled with further analysis such as segment...

Release Date: 2021-12-16.The Census Bureau has reviewed this data product for unauthorized disclosure of confidential information and has approved the disclosure avoidance practices applied (2018 NES-D Approval ID - CBDRB-FY22-032, 2019 ABS Approval ID - CBDRB-FY20-424)...Key Table Information:.Data in this table combines estimates from the Annual Business Survey (employer firms) and the Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics (nonemployer firms)...Includes U.S. firms with no paid employment or payroll, annual receipts of $1,000 or more ($1 or more in the construction industries) and filing Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax forms for sole proprietorships (Form 1040, Schedule C), partnerships (Form 1065), or corporations (the Form 1120 series)...Includes U.S. employer firms estimates of business ownership by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status from the 2019 Annual Business Survey (ABS) collection. Data are also obtained from administrative records, the 2017 Economic Census, and other economic surveys...Note: For employer data only, the collection year is the year in which the data are collected. A reference year is the year that is referenced in the questions on the survey and in which the statistics are tabulated. For example, the 2019 ABS collection year produces statistics for the 2018 reference year. The "Year" column in the table is the reference year...Data Items and Other Identifying Records:.Data include estimates on:.Total number of employer and nonemployer firms. Total sales and receipts of employer and nonemployer firms (reported in $1,000 of dollars). Number of employer firms (firms with paid employees). Sales and receipts of employer firms (reported in $1,000s of dollars). Number of employees (during the March 12 pay period). Annual payroll of employer firms (reported in $1,000s of dollars). Number of nonemployer firms (firms without paid employees). Sales and receipts of nonemployer firms (reported in $1,000s of dollars)...These data are aggregated by the following demographic classifications of firm for:.All firms. Classifiable (firms classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status). . Sex. Female. Male. Equally male/female. . Ethnicity. Hispanic. Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. . Race. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Minority (Firms classified as any race and ethnicity combination other than non-Hispanic and White). Equally minority/nonminority. Nonminority (Firms classified as non-Hispanic and White). . Veteran Status (defined as having served in any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces). Veteran. Equally veteran/nonveteran. Nonveteran. . . . Unclassifiable (firms not classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status). ...Data Notes:.. Business ownership is defined as having 51 percent or more of the stock or equity in the business. Data are provided for firms owned equally (50% / 50%) by men and women, by Hispanics and non-Hispanics, by minorities and nonminorities, and by veterans and nonveterans. Firms not classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status are counted and tabulated separately.. The detail may not add to the total or subtotal because a Hispanic firm may be of any race; because a firm could be tabulated in more than one racial group; or because the number of nonemployer firm's data are rounded....Industry and Geography Coverage:.Data are shown for the total for all sectors (00) and the 2-digit NAICS levels for the U.S., states and District of Columbia, and metro areas. Nonemployer data are excluded for the following NAICS industries:.Crop and Animal Production (NAICS 111 and 112). Rail Transportation (NAICS 482). Postal Service (NAICS 491). Monetary Authorities-Central Bank (NAICS 521). Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 525). Management of Companies and Enterprises (NAICS 55). Private Households (NAICS 814). Public Administration (NAICS 92). Industries Not Classified (NAICS 99)...For more information about NAICS, see NAICS Codes & Understanding Industry Classification Systems. For information about geographies used by economic programs at the Census Bureau, see Economic Census: Economic Geographies...Employer Data Footnotes:.Footnote 660 - Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting (Sector 11): Crop and Animal Production (NAICS 111 and 112) are out of scope..Footnote 661 - Transportation and warehousing (Sector 48-49): Rail Transportation (NAICS 482) and the Postal Service (NAICS 491) are out of scope..Footnote 662 - Finance and insurance (Sector 52): Monetary Authorities-Central Banks (NAICS 521) and Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 525...

U.S. Census 1990 pop, housing, economic, education, ethnic origin, and employment information by town, tract, and block group level as derived from U.S. Census STF3a. Intended for use in statistical analysis of demographic data tract.

Since December 2019 when COVID-19 was detected, it took the world by surprise in terms of spread and morbidity/mortality. The high rate of spread and casualties recorded from COVID-19 called for research in all directions to find ways to contain and reverse the incidences. It is against this background that this paper sought to measure the association of the socio-demographic factors in the hard-hit districts in Greater Accra and Ashanti to analyze its relationship with the novel COVID-19 virus. Data on COVID-19 cases from 35 Districts in both Greater Accra and Ashanti Regions were collected from the Ghana Health Service and population data from Ghana Statistical Service. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis were generated using R. We found that some socio-demographic variables have an association with COVID-19 infections. For example, age and religion especially Christianity and Islam pose risk to COVID-19. The population aged 15–64 was particularly at high risk of infections due to the high level of movement of this age group. We, therefore, recommend that places of congregation such as Churches and Mosques be targeted for vigorous sensitization on COVID-19 protocols and prevention. Also, districts with a high population between the ages of 15–64 should step sensitization efforts to educate their inhabitants on the need to reduce travel and related activities to curb the spread of the virus.

Dataset Description: Worldometer Data Introduction This dataset contains detailed information on the population statistics of various countries, compiled from Worldometer. It includes demographic data such as yearly population changes, migration numbers, fertility rates, and urbanization metrics over multiple years.

Dataset Overview Total Entries: 4,104 Total Columns: 14 Columns Description country (object):

The name of the country. Example: 'India', 'China'. year (float64):

The year for which the data is recorded. Example: 2024, 2023. population (object):

The total population for the given year. Example: '1,441,719,852', '1,428,627,663'. yearly_change_pct (object):

The percentage change in population from the previous year. Example: '0.92%', '0.81%'. yearly_change (object):

The absolute change in population from the previous year. Example: '13,092,189', '11,454,490'. migrants (object):

The net number of migrants for the given year. Example: '-486,784', '-486,136'. median_age (object):

The median age of the population. Example: '28.6', '28.2'. fertility_rate (object):

The fertility rate for the given year. Example: '1.98', '2.00'. density_p_km2 (object):

The population density per square kilometer. Example: '485', '481'. urban_pop_pct (object):

The percentage of the population living in urban areas. Example: '36.8%', '36.3%'. urban_pop (object):

The total urban population for the given year. Example: '530,387,142', '518,239,122'. share_of_world_pop_pct (object):

The country's share of the world's population as a percentage. Example: '17.76%', '17.77%'. world_pop (object):

The total world population for the given year. Example: '8,118,835,999', '8,045,311,447'. global_rank (float64):

The global population rank of the country for the given year. Example: '1.0', '2.0'. Data Quality Missing Values:

Some columns have missing values which need to be handled before analysis. Columns with significant missing data: year, population, yearly_change_pct, yearly_change, migrants, median_age, fertility_rate, density_p_km2, urban_pop_pct, urban_pop, share_of_world_pop_pct, world_pop, global_rank. Data Types:

Most columns are of type object due to the presence of commas and percentage signs. Conversion to appropriate numeric types (e.g., integers, floats) is required for analysis. Potential Uses Demographic Analysis: Study population growth trends, migration patterns, and changes in fertility rates. Urbanization Studies: Analyze urban population growth and density changes over time. Global Ranking: Evaluate and compare the population statistics of different countries. Conclusion This dataset provides a comprehensive view of the world population trends over the years. Cleaning and preprocessing steps, including handling missing values and converting data types, will be necessary to prepare the data for analysis. This dataset can be valuable for researchers, demographers, and data scientists interested in population studies and demographic trends.

File Details Filename: worldometer_data.csv Size: 4104 rows x 14 columns Format: CSV Source Website: Worldometer Scraped Using: Scrapy

Key Table Information.Table Title.Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics series (NES-D): Statistics for Employer and Nonemployer Firms by Industry and Race for the U.S., States, Metro Areas, Counties, and Places: 2023.Table ID.ABSNESD2023.AB00MYNESD01C.Survey/Program.Economic Surveys.Year.2023.Dataset.ECNSVY Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics Company Summary.Source.U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 Economic Surveys, Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics.Release Date.2025-11-20.Release Schedule.The Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics (NES-D) is released yearly, beginning in 2017..Sponsor.National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, U.S. National Science Foundation.Table Universe.Data in this table combines estimates from the Annual Business Survey (employer firms) and the Nonemployer Statistics by Demographics (nonemployer firms).Includes U.S. firms with no paid employment or payroll, annual receipts of $1,000 or more ($1 or more in the construction industries) and filing Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax forms for sole proprietorships (Form 1040, Schedule C), partnerships (Form 1065), or corporations (the Form 1120 series).Includes U.S. employer firms estimates of business ownership by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status from the 2024 Annual Business Survey (ABS) collection. The employer business dataset universe consists of employer firms that are in operation for at least some part of the reference year, are located in one of the 50 U.S. states, associated offshore areas, or the District of Columbia, have paid employees and annual receipts of $1,000 or more, and are classified in one of nineteen in-scope sectors defined by the 2022 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered.Data are also obtained from administrative records, the 2022 Economic Census, and other economic surveys. Note: For employer data only, the collection year is the year in which the data are collected. A reference year is the year that is referenced in the questions on the survey and in which the statistics are tabulated. For example, the 2024 ABS collection year produces statistics for the 2023 reference year. The "Year" column in the table is the reference year..Methodology.Data Items and Other Identifying Records.Total number of employer and nonemployer firmsTotal sales, value of shipments, or revenue of employer and nonemployer firms ($1,000)Number of nonemployer firmsSales, value of shipments, or revenue of nonemployer firms ($1,000)Number of employer firmsSales, value of shipments, or revenue of employer firms ($1,000)Number of employeesAnnual payroll ($1,000)These data are aggregated by the following demographic classifications of firm for:All firms Classifiable (firms classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status) Race White Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Minority (Firms classified as any race and ethnicity combination other than non-Hispanic and White) Equally minority/nonminority Nonminority (Firms classified as non-Hispanic and White) Unclassifiable (firms not classifiable by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status) Definitions can be found by clicking on the column header in the table or by accessing the Economic Census Glossary..Unit(s) of Observation.The reporting units for the NES-D and the ABS are companies or firms rather than establishments. A company or firm is comprised of one or more in-scope establishments that operate under the ownership or control of a single organization..Geography Coverage.The 2023 data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2- to 6-digit NAICS code levels for:United StatesStates and the District of ColumbiaIn addition, the total of all sectors (00) NAICS and the 2-digit NAICS code levels for:Metropolitan Statistical AreasMicropolitan Statistical AreasMetropolitan DivisionsCombined Statistical AreasCountiesEconomic PlacesFor information about geographies, see Geographies..Industry Coverage.The data are shown for the total of all sectors ("00"), and at the 2- through 6-digit NAICS code levels depending on geography. Sector "00" is not an official NAICS sector but is rather a way to indicate a total for multiple sectors. Note: Other programs outside of ABS may use sector 00 to indicate when multiple NAICS sectors are being displayed within the same table and/or dataset.The following are excluded from the total of all sectors:Crop and Animal Production (NAICS 111 and 112)Rail Transportation (NAICS 482)Postal Service (NAICS 491)Monetary Authorities-Central Bank (NAICS 521)Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 525)Office of Notaries (NAICS 541120)Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations (NAICS 813)Private Households (NAICS 814)Public Administration (NAICS 92)For information about NAICS, see North American Industry Classification System..Sa...

As bisexual individuals in the United States (U.S.) face significant health disparities, researchers have posited that these differences may be fueled, at least in part, by negative attitudes, prejudice, stigma, and discrimination toward bisexual individuals from heterosexual and gay/lesbian individuals. Previous studies of individual and social attitudes toward bisexual men and women have been conducted almost exclusively with convenience samples, with limited generalizability to the broader U.S. population. Our study provides an assessment of attitudes toward bisexual men and women among a nationally representative sample of heterosexual, gay, lesbian, and “other”-identified adults in the U.S. Data were collected from the 2015 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior (NSSHB), via an online questionnaire with a probability sample of adults (18 and over) from throughout the U.S. We included two modified 5-item versions of the Bisexualities: Indiana Attitudes Scale (BIAS), validated sub-scales that were developed to measure attitudes toward bisexual men and women. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, gamma regression, and paired t-tests. Gender, sexual identity, age, race/ethnicity, income, and educational attainment were all significantly associated with participants' attitudes toward bisexual individuals. In terms of responses to individual scale items, participants were most likely to “neither agree nor disagree” with attitudinal statements. Across sexual identities, self-identified "other" participants reported the most positive attitudes, while heterosexual male participants reported the least positive attitudes. Overall, attitudes toward bisexual men were significantly less positive than toward bisexual women across identities. As in previous research on convenience samples, we found a wide range of demographic characteristics were related with attitudes toward bisexual individuals in our nationally-representative study of heterosexual, gay/lesbian, and "other"-identified adults in the U.S. Additionally, as in previous studies, gender emerged as a significant characteristic; female participants’ attitudes were more positive than male participants’ attitudes, and all participants’ attitudes were generally more positive toward bisexual women than bisexual men. While population data suggest a marked shift in more positive attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women in the general population of the U.S., the largest proportions of participants in our study reported a relative lack of agreement or disagreement with the affective-evaluative statements in the BIAS scales. Findings document the absence of positive attitudes toward bisexual individuals among the general population of adults in the U.S. Our findings highlight the need for developing intervention approaches to promote more positive attitudes toward bisexual individuals, targeted toward not only heterosexual and but also gay/lesbian individuals and communities.

This data collection is a component of Summary Tape File (STF) 3, which consists of four sets of data containing detailed tabulations of the nation's population and housing characteristics produced from the 1980 Census. The STF 3 files contain sample data inflated to represent the total United States population. The files also contain 100-percent counts and unweighted sample counts of persons and housing units. All files in the STF 3 series are identical, containing 321 substantive data variables organized in the form of 150 "tables," as well as standard geographic identification variables. Population items tabulated for each person include demographic data and information on schooling, ethnicity, labor force status, and children, as well as details on occupation and income. Housing items include size and condition of the housing unit as well as information on value, age, water, sewage and heating, vehicles, and monthly owner costs. Each dataset provides different geographic coverage. STF 3C consists of one nationwide data file containing information about all states. It contains summaries for the United States, census regions, census divisions, states, standard consolidated statistical areas (SCSAs), standard metropolitan statistical areas (SMSAs), urbanized areas, counties, places of 10,000 or more, congressional districts, and minor civil divisions (MCDs) of 10,000 or more in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. The Census Bureau's machine-readable data dictionary for STF 3 is also available through CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 1980 [UNITED STATES]: CENSUS SOFTWARE PACKAGE (CENSPAC) VERSION 3.2 WITH STF4 DATA DICTIONARIES (ICPSR 7789), the software package designed specifically by the Census Bureau for use with the 1980 Census data files.