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.

China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data was reported at 0.105 % in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.102 % for 2022. China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data is updated yearly, averaging 0.100 % from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2023, with 37 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 100.000 % in 2020 and a record low of 0.063 % in 1994. China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: Level of Education.

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units and the group quarters population for states and counties..Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.ACS data generally reflect the geographic boundaries of legal and statistical areas as of January 1 of the estimate year. For more information, see Geography Boundaries by Year..Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..Users must consider potential differences in geographic boundaries, questionnaire content or coding, or other methodological issues when comparing ACS data from different years. Statistically significant differences shown in ACS Comparison Profiles, or in data users' own analysis, may be the result of these differences and thus might not necessarily reflect changes to the social, economic, housing, or demographic characteristics being compared. For more information, see Comparing ACS Data..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

Abstract (en): The Urban Household Sample of the 1860 United States Census was designed to supplement the Bateman-Foust rural sample with observations from urban areas. The sample covers both northern and southern towns and cities and permits examination of female occupations and labor force participation rates. Information on individuals includes occupation, city of residence, age, sex, race, dollar value of real and personal property owned, whether American or foreign born, and literacy. The second release of this collection adds nine constructed variables, including several weight variables, collapsed occupation, ICPSR state code, region, and unique internal family and household identifier numbers. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Created variable labels and/or value labels.. All individuals living in towns with populations of 3,000 or more who were enumerated in the 1860 Census of Population Manuscript Schedules. Stratified random sample. 2009-07-24 SAS, SPSS, and Stata setups have been added to this data collection. Funding insitution(s): University of Chicago. Booth School of Business. Center for Population Economics. Nathanial T. Wilcox of the University of Chicago collaborated with Jon Moen for the second release of the data collection.

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

Population: County data was reported at 502.967 Person th in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 527.827 Person th for 2021. Population: County data is updated yearly, averaging 753.829 Person th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2022, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 797,604.783 Person th in 1982 and a record low of 430.197 Person th in 2019. Population: County data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey.

Abstract This paper contributes to the existing literature by reviewing the research methodology and the literature review with the focus on potential applications for the novelty technology of the single platform E-payment. These included, but were not restricted to the subjects, population, sample size requirement, data collection method and measurement of variables, pilot study and statistical techniques for data analysis. The reviews will shed some light and potential applications for future researchers, students and others to conceptualize, operationalize and analyze the underlying research methodology to assist in the development of their research methodology.

Population: Jiangsu data was reported at 89.776 Person th in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 87.223 Person th for 2022. Population: Jiangsu data is updated yearly, averaging 72.533 Person th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2023, with 29 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 84,748.016 Person th in 2020 and a record low of 62.652 Person th in 2019. Population: Jiangsu data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: By Region.

Population: City: Age 65 and Above: Liaoning data was reported at 4.966 Person th in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 4.635 Person th for 2022. Population: City: Age 65 and Above: Liaoning data is updated yearly, averaging 2.423 Person th from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2023, with 27 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3,965.014 Person th in 2020 and a record low of 1.670 Person th in 1998. Population: City: Age 65 and Above: Liaoning data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: By Age and Region: City.

'Dataset2' associated with: Who Tweets with Their Location? Understanding the Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and the Use of Geoservices and Geotagging on Twitter

Luke Sloan and Jeffrey Morgan.

I explore the sample size in qualitative research that is required to reach theoretical saturation. I conceptualize a population as consisting of sub-populations that contain different types of information sources that hold a number of codes. Theoretical saturation is reached after all the codes in the population have been observed once in the sample. I delineate three different scenarios to sample information sources: “random chance,” which is based on probability sampling, “minimal information,” which yields at least one new code per sampling step, and “maximum information,” which yields the largest number of new codes per sampling step. Next, I use simulations to assess the minimum sample size for each scenario for systematically varying hypothetical populations. I show that theoretical saturation is more dependent on the mean probability of observing codes than on the number of codes in a population. Moreover, the minimal and maximal information scenarios are significantly more efficient than random chance, but yield fewer repetitions per code to validate the findings. I formulate guidelines for purposive sampling and recommend that researchers follow a minimum information scenario.

This collection contains individual-level and 1-percent national sample data from the 1960 Census of Population and Housing conducted by the Census Bureau. It consists of a representative sample of the records from the 1960 sample questionnaires. The data are stored in 30 separate files, containing in total over two million records, organized by state. Some files contain the sampled records of several states while other files contain all or part of the sample for a single state. There are two types of records stored in the data files: one for households and one for persons. Each household record is followed by a variable number of person records, one for each of the household members. Data items in this collection include the individual responses to the basic social, demographic, and economic questions asked of the population in the 1960 Census of Population and Housing. Data are provided on household characteristics and features such as the number of persons in household, number of rooms and bedrooms, and the availability of hot and cold piped water, flush toilet, bathtub or shower, sewage disposal, and plumbing facilities. Additional information is provided on tenure, gross rent, year the housing structure was built, and value and location of the structure, as well as the presence of air conditioners, radio, telephone, and television in the house, and ownership of an automobile. Other demographic variables provide information on age, sex, marital status, race, place of birth, nationality, education, occupation, employment status, income, and veteran status. The data files were obtained by ICPSR from the Center for Social Analysis, Columbia University. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at ICPSR at https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR07756.v1. We highly recommend using the ICPSR version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

In the context of COVID-19, RAND and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation partnered again to build from the National Survey of Health Attitudes to implement a longitudinal survey to understand how health views and values have been affected by the experience of the pandemic, with particular focus on populations deemed vulnerable or underserved, including people of color and those from low- to moderate-income backgrounds. The study is a longitudinal study, collecting data in four waves. The study also included 2 populations: A sample of populations at greater risk, and a general population sample. This study includes the results for Wave 2 for populations at greater risk. One previous wave and two future waves were conducted. The questions in the surveys were largely similar across all four waves. All respondents who participated in Wave 1 were invited to participate in the future waves. Demographic info includes sex, marital status, household size, race and ethnicity, family income, employment status, age, and census region.

Population: No of Household: Guangxi data was reported at 16.686 Unit th in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 16.283 Unit th for 2022. Population: No of Household: Guangxi data is updated yearly, averaging 12.345 Unit th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2023, with 36 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 16,865.333 Unit th in 2020 and a record low of 8.472 Unit th in 1993. Population: No of Household: Guangxi data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: No of Household.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

households/individuals

Kind of data

survey

Frequency of data collection

Quarterly

Sampling procedure

Sample size:

This data collection provides a preliminary subsample of the 1880 Public Use Sample drawn from census enumeration forms. The file contains two types of records: family and person. Each household record is followed by a record for each person in the family. This collection contains information about size of family, number of persons and families in dwelling, and geographic location of each household. Information on individuals includes demographic characteristics, civil condition, occupation, health, education, and nativity.

Population designation, location, altitude, latitude, longitude, habitat and sample size per population in each sampling site.

Abstract

The Afrobarometer is a comparative series of public attitude surveys that assess African citizen's attitudes to democracy and governance, markets, and civil society, among other topics. The surveys have been undertaken at periodic intervals since 1999. The Afrobarometer's coverage has increased over time. Round 1 (1999-2001) initially covered 7 countries and was later extended to 12 countries. Round 2 (2002-2004) surveyed citizens in 16 countries. Round 3 (2005-2006) 18 countries, Round 4 (2008) 20 countries, Round 5 (2011-2013) 34 countries, Round 6 (2014-2015) 36 countries, and Round 7 (2016-2018) 34 countries. The survey covered 34 countries in Round 8 (2019-2021).

Geographic coverage

National coverage.

Analysis unit

Individual

Universe

Citizens who are 18 years and older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Afrobarometer Sampling Procedure

Afrobarometer uses national probability samples designed to meet the following criteria. Samples are designed to generate a sample that is a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of being selected for an interview. They achieve this by:

• using random selection methods at every stage of sampling; • sampling at all stages with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible to ensure that larger (i.e., more populated) geographic units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample.

The sampling universe normally includes all citizens age 18 and older. As a standard practice, we exclude people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories, patients in hospitals, and persons in prisons or nursing homes. Occasionally, we must also exclude people living in areas determined to be inaccessible due to conflict or insecurity. Any such exclusion is noted in the technical information report (TIR) that accompanies each data set.

Sample size and design Samples usually include either 1,200 or 2,400 cases. A randomly selected sample of n=1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than +/-2.8% with a confidence level of 95 percent. With a sample size of n=2400, the margin of error decreases to +/-2.0% at 95 percent confidence level.

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample. Specifically, we first stratify the sample according to the main sub-national unit of government (state, province, region, etc.) and by urban or rural location.

Area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. Afrobarometer occasionally purposely oversamples certain populations that are politically significant within a country to ensure that the size of the sub-sample is large enough to be analysed. Any oversamples is noted in the TIR.

Sample stages Samples are drawn in either four or five stages:

Stage 1: In rural areas only, the first stage is to draw secondary sampling units (SSUs). SSUs are not used in urban areas, and in some countries they are not used in rural areas. See the TIR that accompanies each data set for specific details on the sample in any given country. Stage 2: We randomly select primary sampling units (PSU). Stage 3: We then randomly select sampling start points. Stage 4: Interviewers then randomly select households. Stage 5: Within the household, the interviewer randomly selects an individual respondent. Each interviewer alternates in each household between interviewing a man and interviewing a woman to ensure gender balance in the sample.

To keep the costs and logistics of fieldwork within manageable limits, eight interviews are clustered within each selected PSU.

Burkina Faso - Sample size: 1,200 - Sampling Frame: Recensement Général de la Population et de l'Habitation 2006 - Sample design: Nationally representative, random, clustered, stratified, multi-stage area probability sample - Stratification: Region and urban-rural location - PSU selection: Probability Proportionate to Population Size (PPPS) - Cluster size: 8 households per PSU - Household selection: Randomly selected start points, followed by walk pattern using 5/10 interval - Respondent selection: Gender quota filled by alternating interviews between men and women; respondents of appropriate gender listed, after which household member draws a numbered card to select individual.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Round 8 questionnaire has been developed by the Questionnaire Committee after reviewing the findings and feedback obtained in previous Rounds, and securing input on preferred new topics from a host of donors, analysts, and users of the data.

The questionnaire consists of three parts: 1. Part 1 captures the steps for selecting households and respondents, and includes the introduction to the respondent and (pp.1-4). This section should be filled in by the Fieldworker. 2. Part 2 covers the core attitudinal and demographic questions that are asked by the Fieldworker and answered by the Respondent (Q1 – Q100). 3. Part 3 includes contextual questions about the setting and atmosphere of the interview, and collects information on the Fieldworker. This section is completed by the Fieldworker (Q101 – Q123).

Response rate

Outcome rates: - Contact rate: 90% - Cooperation rate: 88% - Refusal rate: 3% - Response rate: 79%

Sampling error estimates

+/- 3 % with 95% confidence level

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, for 2020, the 2020 Census provides the official counts of the population and housing units for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns. For 2016 to 2019, the Population Estimates Program provides estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and intercensal housing unit estimates for the nation, states, and counties..Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..The 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the September 2018 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2017-18 JPFHS: - Collected data at the national level that allowed calculation of key demographic indicators - Explored the direct and indirect factors that determine levels of and trends in fertility and childhood mortality - Measured levels of contraceptive knowledge and practice - Collected data on key aspects of family health, including immunisation coverage among children, the prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea and other diseases among children under age 5, and maternity care indicators such as antenatal visits and assistance at delivery among ever-married women - Obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and ever-married women age 15-49 - Conducted haemoglobin testing on children age 6-59 months and ever-married women age 15-49 to provide information on the prevalence of anaemia among these groups - Collected data on knowledge and attitudes of ever-married women and men about sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV/AIDS - Obtained data on ever-married women’s experience of emotional, physical, and sexual violence - Obtained data on household health expenditures

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

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

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), children age 0-5 years, women age 15-49 years and men age 15-59 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used for the 2017-18 JPFHS is based on Jordan's Population and Housing Census (JPHC) frame for 2015. The current survey is designed to produce results representative of the country as a whole, of urban and rural areas separately, of three regions, of 12 administrative governorates, and of three national groups: Jordanians, Syrians, and a group combined from various other nationalities.

The sample for the 2017-18 JPFHS is a stratified sample selected in two stages from the 2015 census frame. Stratification was achieved by separating each governorate into urban and rural areas. Each of the Syrian camps in the governorates of Zarqa and Mafraq formed its own sampling stratum. In total, 26 sampling strata were constructed. Samples were selected independently in each sampling stratum, through a two-stage selection process, according to the sample allocation. Before the sample selection, the sampling frame was sorted by district and sub-district within each sampling stratum. By using a probability-proportional-to-size selection for the first stage of selection, an implicit stratification and proportional allocation were achieved at each of the lower administrative levels.

In the first stage, 970 clusters were selected with probability proportional to cluster size, with the cluster size being the number of residential households enumerated in the 2015 JPHC. The sample allocation took into account the precision consideration at the governorate level and at the level of each of the three special domains. After selection of PSUs and clusters, a household listing operation was carried out in all selected clusters. The resulting household lists served as the sampling frame for selecting households in the second stage. A fixed number of 20 households per cluster were selected with an equal probability systematic selection from the newly created household listing.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Four questionnaires were used for the 2017-18 JPFHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, and the Biomarker Questionnaire. These questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey questionnaires, were adapted to reflect population and health issues relevant to Jordan. After all questionnaires were finalised in English, they were translated into Arabic.

Cleaning operations

All electronic data files for the 2017-18 JPFHS were transferred via IFSS to the DOS central office in Amman, where they were stored on a password-protected computer. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the duration of fieldwork, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in October 2017 and completed in February 2018.

Response rate

A total of 19,384 households were selected for the sample, of which 19,136 were found to be occupied at the time of the fieldwork. Of the occupied households, 18,802 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98%.

In the interviewed households, 14,870 women were identified as eligible for an individual interview; interviews were completed with 14,689 women, yielding a response rate of 99%. A total of 6,640 eligible men were identified in the sampled households and 6,429 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. Response rates for both women and men were similar across urban and rural areas.

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 2017-18 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) 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 2017-18 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and sample 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 by simple random sampling, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2017-18 JPFHS sample was the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed using SAS programmes developed by ICF International. These programmes 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.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey final report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

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