Excel spreadsheets by species (4 letter code is abbreviation for genus and species used in study, year 2010 or 2011 is year data collected, SH indicates data for Science Hub, date is date of file preparation). The data in a file are described in a read me file which is the first worksheet in each file. Each row in a species spreadsheet is for one plot (plant). The data themselves are in the data worksheet. One file includes a read me description of the column in the date set for chemical analysis. In this file one row is an herbicide treatment and sample for chemical analysis (if taken). This dataset is associated with the following publication: Olszyk , D., T. Pfleeger, T. Shiroyama, M. Blakely-Smith, E. Lee , and M. Plocher. Plant reproduction is altered by simulated herbicide drift toconstructed plant communities. ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL, USA, 36(10): 2799-2813, (2017).

Dataset

This dataset was created by Pinky Verma

Contents

Sample data for exercises in Further Adventures in Data Cleaning.

Download Employee Travel Excel SheetThis dataset contains information about the employee travel expenses for the year 2020. Details are provided on the employee (name, title, department), the travel (dates, location, purpose) and the cost (expenses, recoveries). Expenses are broken down in separate tabs by Quarter (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4). Updated quarterly when expenses are prepared. Expenses for other years are available in separate datasets.

The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) recently established SCINet , which consists of a shared high performance computing resource, Ceres, and the dedicated high-speed Internet2 network used to access Ceres. Current and potential SCINet users are using and generating very large datasets so SCINet needs to be provisioned with adequate data storage for their active computing. It is not designed to hold data beyond active research phases. At the same time, the National Agricultural Library has been developing the Ag Data Commons, a research data catalog and repository designed for public data release and professional data curation. Ag Data Commons needs to anticipate the size and nature of data it will be tasked with handling. The ARS Web-enabled Databases Working Group, organized under the SCINet initiative, conducted a study to establish baseline data storage needs and practices, and to make projections that could inform future infrastructure design, purchases, and policies. The SCINet Web-enabled Databases Working Group helped develop the survey which is the basis for an internal report. While the report was for internal use, the survey and resulting data may be generally useful and are being released publicly. From October 24 to November 8, 2016 we administered a 17-question survey (Appendix A) by emailing a Survey Monkey link to all ARS Research Leaders, intending to cover data storage needs of all 1,675 SY (Category 1 and Category 4) scientists. We designed the survey to accommodate either individual researcher responses or group responses. Research Leaders could decide, based on their unit's practices or their management preferences, whether to delegate response to a data management expert in their unit, to all members of their unit, or to themselves collate responses from their unit before reporting in the survey. Larger storage ranges cover vastly different amounts of data so the implications here could be significant depending on whether the true amount is at the lower or higher end of the range. Therefore, we requested more detail from "Big Data users," those 47 respondents who indicated they had more than 10 to 100 TB or over 100 TB total current data (Q5). All other respondents are called "Small Data users." Because not all of these follow-up requests were successful, we used actual follow-up responses to estimate likely responses for those who did not respond. We defined active data as data that would be used within the next six months. All other data would be considered inactive, or archival. To calculate per person storage needs we used the high end of the reported range divided by 1 for an individual response, or by G, the number of individuals in a group response. For Big Data users we used the actual reported values or estimated likely values. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Appendix A: ARS data storage survey questions. File Name: Appendix A.pdfResource Description: The full list of questions asked with the possible responses. The survey was not administered using this PDF but the PDF was generated directly from the administered survey using the Print option under Design Survey. Asterisked questions were required. A list of Research Units and their associated codes was provided in a drop down not shown here. Resource Software Recommended: Adobe Acrobat,url: https://get.adobe.com/reader/ Resource Title: CSV of Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Machine-readable survey response data.csvResource Description: CSV file includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed. This information is that same data as in the Excel spreadsheet (also provided).Resource Title: Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Data Storage Survey Data for public release.xlsxResource Description: MS Excel worksheet that Includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel

Dataset

This dataset was created by Aziza Afrin

Contents

Example of how I use MS Excel's VLOOKUP() function to filter my data.

This cross-sectional study aimed to determine the prevalence of obesity and perceived barriers to weight loss in 1453 Bahraini adults who had used any intervention to lose weight in the past year. We found a high prevalence (78.2%) of overweight and obesity. Females were more likely to have obesity compared to males (81.4% vs. 66.7%). Older individuals aged 36-45 were 3.37 times, and 45 or older were 3.56 times more likely to have obesity. Married participants had higher odds of obesity compared to single participants (OR=1.79). Participants with obesity were more likely to be unemployed compared to students (OR=1.49). The most common contributing factors to weight gain were lack of physical activity (29.5%) and unhealthy diet (29.2%). Participants with obesity were more likely to have relied on dieting (OR=2.53) or exercise (OR=1.47) for weight loss and used medication (OR=5.23). This study highlights the complex relationship between sociodemographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, and obesity and sustaining weight loss.

The dataset includes customer id,Martial Status,Gender,Income,Children,Education,Occupation,Home Owner,Cars,Commute Distance,Region,Age,Purchased Bike. Blog

The link for the Excel project to download can be found on GitHub here. It includes the raw data, Pivot Tables, and an interactive dashboard with Pivot Charts and Slicers. The project also includes business questions and the formulas I used to answer. The image below is included for ease. https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F12904052%2F61e460b5f6a1fa73cfaaa33aa8107bd5%2FBusinessQuestions.png?generation=1686190703261971&alt=media" alt=""> The link for the Tableau adjusted dashboard can be found here.

A screenshot of the interactive Excel dashboard is also included below for ease. https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F12904052%2Fe581f1fce8afc732f7823904da9e4cce%2FScooter%20Dashboard%20Image.png?generation=1686190815608343&alt=media" alt="">

Abstract

The documentation covers Enterprise Survey panel datasets that were collected in Slovenia in 2009, 2013 and 2019.

The Slovenia ES 2009 was conducted between 2008 and 2009. The Slovenia ES 2013 was conducted between March 2013 and September 2013. Finally, the Slovenia ES 2019 was conducted between December 2018 and November 2019. The objective of the Enterprise Survey is to gain an understanding of what firms experience in the private sector.

As part of its strategic goal of building a climate for investment, job creation, and sustainable growth, the World Bank has promoted improving the business environment as a key strategy for development, which has led to a systematic effort in collecting enterprise data across countries. The Enterprise Surveys (ES) are an ongoing World Bank project in collecting both objective data based on firms' experiences and enterprises' perception of the environment in which they operate.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must take its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

As it is standard for the ES, the Slovenia ES was based on the following size stratification: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (100 or more employees).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for Slovenia ES 2009, 2013, 2019 were selected using stratified random sampling, following the methodology explained in the Sampling Manual for Slovenia 2009 ES and for Slovenia 2013 ES, and in the Sampling Note for 2019 Slovenia ES.

Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region). The original sample designs with specific information of the industries and regions chosen are included in the attached Excel file (Sampling Report.xls.) for Slovenia 2009 ES. For Slovenia 2013 and 2019 ES, specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in the "The Slovenia 2013 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" and "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" reports respectively, Appendix E.

For the Slovenia 2009 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into manufacturing industries, services industries, and one residual (core) sector as defined in the sampling manual. Each industry had a target of 90 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 17% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel. For the other industries (residuals) sample sizes were inflated by about 12% to account for under sampling in firms in service industries.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into one manufacturing industry, and two service industries (retail, and other services).

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region. The original sample design with specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" report, Appendix C. Industry stratification was done as follows: Manufacturing – combining all the relevant activities (ISIC Rev. 4.0 codes 10-33), Retail (ISIC 47), and Other Services (ISIC 41-43, 45, 46, 49-53, 55, 56, 58, 61, 62, 79, 95).

For Slovenia 2009 and 2013 ES, size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

For Slovenia 2009 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions. These regions are Vzhodna Slovenija and Zahodna Slovenija. The Slovenia sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel “Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Slovenia” consisted of 223 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 57 establishments have been re-interviewed in the 2008 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions (city and the surrounding business area) throughout Slovenia.

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, regional stratification was done across two regions: Eastern Slovenia (NUTS code SI03) and Western Slovenia (SI04).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Questionnaires have common questions (core module) and respectfully additional manufacturing- and services-specific questions. The eligible manufacturing industries have been surveyed using the Manufacturing questionnaire (includes the core module, plus manufacturing specific questions). Retail firms have been interviewed using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module plus retail specific questions) and the residual eligible services have been covered using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module). Each variation of the questionnaire is identified by the index variable, a0.

Response rate

Survey non-response must be differentiated from item non-response. The former refers to refusals to participate in the survey altogether whereas the latter refers to the refusals to answer some specific questions. Enterprise Surveys suffer from both problems and different strategies were used to address these issues.

Item non-response was addressed by two strategies: a- For sensitive questions that may generate negative reactions from the respondent, such as corruption or tax evasion, enumerators were instructed to collect the refusal to respond as (-8). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary. However, there were clear cases of low response.

For 2009 and 2013 Slovenia ES, the survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. Up to 4 attempts were made to contact the establishment for interview at different times/days of the week before a replacement establishment (with similar strata characteristics) was suggested for interview. Survey non-response did occur but substitutions were made in order to potentially achieve strata-specific goals. Further research is needed on survey non-response in the Enterprise Surveys regarding potential introduction of bias.

For 2009, the number of contacted establishments per realized interview was 6.18. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The relatively low ratio of contacted establishments per realized interview (6.18) suggests that the main source of error in estimates in the Slovenia may be selection bias and not frame inaccuracy.

For 2013, the number of realized interviews per contacted establishment was 25%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The number of rejections per contact was 44%.

Finally, for 2019, the number of interviews per contacted establishments was 9.7%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The share of rejections per contact was 75.2%.

Download Employee Vehicle Personal Use Excel SheetThis dataset lists the employee name and taxable benefit for personal use of City of Greater Sudbury Vehicle as travel expenses for the year 2020. Expenses are broken down in separate tabs by Quarter (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4). Data for other years is available in separate datasets. Updated quarterly when expenses are prepared.

To create the dataset, the top 10 countries leading in the incidence of COVID-19 in the world were selected as of October 22, 2020 (on the eve of the second full of pandemics), which are presented in the Global 500 ranking for 2020: USA, India, Brazil, Russia, Spain, France and Mexico. For each of these countries, no more than 10 of the largest transnational corporations included in the Global 500 rating for 2020 and 2019 were selected separately. The arithmetic averages were calculated and the change (increase) in indicators such as profitability and profitability of enterprises, their ranking position (competitiveness), asset value and number of employees. The arithmetic mean values of these indicators for all countries of the sample were found, characterizing the situation in international entrepreneurship as a whole in the context of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020 on the eve of the second wave of the pandemic. The data is collected in a general Microsoft Excel table. Dataset is a unique database that combines COVID-19 statistics and entrepreneurship statistics. The dataset is flexible data that can be supplemented with data from other countries and newer statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the fact that the data in the dataset are not ready-made numbers, but formulas, when adding and / or changing the values in the original table at the beginning of the dataset, most of the subsequent tables will be automatically recalculated and the graphs will be updated. This allows the dataset to be used not just as an array of data, but as an analytical tool for automating scientific research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship. The dataset includes not only tabular data, but also charts that provide data visualization. The dataset contains not only actual, but also forecast data on morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 for the period of the second wave of the pandemic in 2020. The forecasts are presented in the form of a normal distribution of predicted values and the probability of their occurrence in practice. This allows for a broad scenario analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship, substituting various predicted morbidity and mortality rates in risk assessment tables and obtaining automatically calculated consequences (changes) on the characteristics of international entrepreneurship. It is also possible to substitute the actual values identified in the process and following the results of the second wave of the pandemic to check the reliability of pre-made forecasts and conduct a plan-fact analysis. The dataset contains not only the numerical values of the initial and predicted values of the set of studied indicators, but also their qualitative interpretation, reflecting the presence and level of risks of a pandemic and COVID-19 crisis for international entrepreneurship.

This is a dataset downloaded off excelbianalytics.com created off of random VBA logic. I recently performed an extensive exploratory data analysis on it and I included new columns to it, namely: Unit margin, Order year, Order month, Order weekday and Order_Ship_Days which I think can help with analysis on the data. I shared it because I thought it was a great dataset to practice analytical processes on for newbies like myself.

Warning: Large file size (over 1GB). Each monthly data set is large (over 4 million rows), but can be viewed in standard software such as Microsoft WordPad (save by right-clicking on the file name and selecting 'Save Target As', or equivalent on Mac OSX). It is then possible to select the required rows of data and copy and paste the information into another software application, such as a spreadsheet. Alternatively, add-ons to existing software, such as the Microsoft PowerPivot add-on for Excel, to handle larger data sets, can be used. The Microsoft PowerPivot add-on for Excel is available from Microsoft http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/excel/download-power-pivot-HA101959985.aspx Once PowerPivot has been installed, to load the large files, please follow the instructions below. Note that it may take at least 20 to 30 minutes to load one monthly file. 1. Start Excel as normal 2. Click on the PowerPivot tab 3. Click on the PowerPivot Window icon (top left) 4. In the PowerPivot Window, click on the "From Other Sources" icon 5. In the Table Import Wizard e.g. scroll to the bottom and select Text File 6. Browse to the file you want to open and choose the file extension you require e.g. CSV Once the data has been imported you can view it in a spreadsheet. What does the data cover? General practice prescribing data is a list of all medicines, dressings and appliances that are prescribed and dispensed each month. A record will only be produced when this has occurred and there is no record for a zero total. For each practice in England, the following information is presented at presentation level for each medicine, dressing and appliance, (by presentation name): - the total number of items prescribed and dispensed - the total net ingredient cost - the total actual cost - the total quantity The data covers NHS prescriptions written in England and dispensed in the community in the UK. Prescriptions written in England but dispensed outside England are included. The data includes prescriptions written by GPs and other non-medical prescribers (such as nurses and pharmacists) who are attached to GP practices. GP practices are identified only by their national code, so an additional data file - linked to the first by the practice code - provides further detail in relation to the practice. Presentations are identified only by their BNF code, so an additional data file - linked to the first by the BNF code - provides the chemical name for that presentation.

This is a spreadsheet of 1 of 10 companies in the shoe industry. Highlighting COGS, Total Revenue, Market share and Industry share.

This data set is perfect for practicing your analytical skills for Power BI, Tableau, Excel, or transform it into a CSV to practice SQL.

This use case mimics transactions for a fictional eCommerce website named EverMart Online. The 3 tables in this data set are all logically connected together with IDs.

My Power BI Use Case Explanation - Using Microsoft Power BI, I made dynamic data visualizations for revenue reporting and customer behavior reporting.

Revenue Reporting Visuals - Data Card Visual that dynamically shows Total Products Listed, Total Unique Customers, Total Transactions, and Total Revenue by Total Sales, Product Sales, or Categorical Sales. - Line Graph Visual that shows Total Revenue by Month of the entire year. This graph also changes to calculate Total Revenue by Month for the Total Sales by Product and Total Sales by Category if selected. - Bar Graph Visual showcasing Total Sales by Product. - Donut Chart Visual showcasing Total Sales by Category of Product.

Customer Behavior Reporting Visuals - Data Card Visual that dynamically shows Total Products Listed, Total Unique Customers, Total Transactions, and Total Revenue by Total or by continent selected on the map. - Interactive Map Visual showing key statistics for the continent selected. - The key statistics are presented on the tool tip when you select a continent, and the following statistics show for that continent: - Continent Name - Customer Total - Percentage of Products Sold - Percentage of Total Customers - Percentage of Total Transactions - Percentage of Total Revenue

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a silent pandemic that has claimed millions of lives, and resulted in long-term disabilities, limited treatment options, and high economic costs associated with the healthcare burden. Given the rising prevalence of AMR, which is expected to pose a challenge to current empirical antibiotic treatment strategies, we sought to summarize the available data on knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding AMR in Ethiopia. Articles were searched in international electronic databases. Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and STATA software version 16 were used for data extraction and analysis, respectively. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020 checklist was followed. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed by the Joana Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists. The random-effect meta-analysis model was used to estimate Der Simonian-Laird’s pooled effect. Statistical heterogeneity of the meta-analysis was checked through Higgins and Thompson’s I2 statistics and Cochran’s Q test. Publication bias was investigated by funnel plots, and the regression-based test of Egger for small study effects with a P value < 0.05 was considered to indicate potential reporting bias. In addition, sensitivity and subgroup meta-analyses were performed. Fourteen studies with a total of 4476 participants met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the pooled prevalence of good AMR knowledge was 51.53% [(95% confidence interval (CI): 37.85, 65.21), I2 = 99.0%, P

Sensitivity analysis of pooled prevalence with each study removed one by one.

Level of knowledge, attitude, and practice towards COVID-19 infection prevention among pregnant women in Ethiopia.