The world population surpassed eight billion people in 2022, having doubled from its figure less than 50 years previously. Looking forward, it is projected that the world population will reach nine billion in 2038, and 10 billion in 2060, but it will peak around 10.3 billion in the 2080s before it then goes into decline. Regional variations The global population has seen rapid growth since the early 1800s, due to advances in areas such as food production, healthcare, water safety, education, and infrastructure, however, these changes did not occur at a uniform time or pace across the world. Broadly speaking, the first regions to undergo their demographic transitions were Europe, North America, and Oceania, followed by Latin America and Asia (although Asia's development saw the greatest variation due to its size), while Africa was the last continent to undergo this transformation. Because of these differences, many so-called "advanced" countries are now experiencing population decline, particularly in Europe and East Asia, while the fastest population growth rates are found in Sub-Saharan Africa. In fact, the roughly two billion difference in population between now and the 2080s' peak will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, which will rise from 1.2 billion to 3.2 billion in this time (although populations in other continents will also fluctuate). Changing projections The United Nations releases their World Population Prospects report every 1-2 years, and this is widely considered the foremost demographic dataset in the world. However, recent years have seen a notable decline in projections when the global population will peak, and at what number. Previous reports in the 2010s had suggested a peak of over 11 billion people, and that population growth would continue into the 2100s, however a sooner and shorter peak is now projected. Reasons for this include a more rapid population decline in East Asia and Europe, particularly China, as well as a prolongued development arc in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Effective September 27, 2023, this dataset will no longer be updated. Similar data are accessible from wonder.cdc.gov.

Provisional counts of deaths by the month the death occurred and by select causes of death for 2020-2023.

Updates

• Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.

The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.

This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.

The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Queries

Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic

• Filter cases by state here

• Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac

• Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true

• Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.

• Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here

• Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• Caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

The Public Health Research Database (PHRD) is a linked asset which currently includes Census 2011 data; Mortality Data; Hospital Episode Statistics (HES); GP Extraction Service (GPES) Data for Pandemic Planning and Research data. Researchers may apply for these datasets individually or any combination of the current 4 datasets.

The purpose of this dataset is to enable analysis of deaths involving COVID-19 by multiple factors such as ethnicity, religion, disability and known comorbidities as well as age, sex, socioeconomic and marital status at subnational levels. 2011 Census data for usual residents of England and Wales, who were not known to have died by 1 January 2020, linked to death registrations for deaths registered between 1 January 2020 and 8 March 2021 on NHS number. The data exclude individuals who entered the UK in the year before the Census took place (due to their high propensity to have left the UK prior to the study period), and those over 100 years of age at the time of the Census, even if their death was not linked. The dataset contains all individuals who died (any cause) during the study period, and a 5% simple random sample of those still alive at the end of the study period. For usual residents of England, the dataset also contains comorbidity flags derived from linked Hospital Episode Statistics data from April 2017 to December 2019 and GP Extraction Service Data from 2015-2019.

A collaborative project between SPC, the World Fish Centre and the University of Wollongong has produced the first detailed population estimates of people living close to the coast in the 22 Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs). These estimates are stratified into 1, 5, and 10km zones. More information about this dataset: https://sdd.spc.int/mapping-coastal

All cities with a population > 1000 or seats of adm div (ca 80.000)Sources and ContributionsSources : GeoNames is aggregating over hundred different data sources. Ambassadors : GeoNames Ambassadors help in many countries. Wiki : A wiki allows to view the data and quickly fix error and add missing places. Donations and Sponsoring : Costs for running GeoNames are covered by donations and sponsoring.Enrichment:add country name

Effective September 27, 2023, this dataset will no longer be updated. Similar data are accessible from wonder.cdc.gov.

Deaths involving COVID-19, pneumonia, and influenza reported to NCHS by sex, age group, and jurisdiction of occurrence.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Willet town population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Willet town. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Willet town by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Willet town.

Key observations

The largest age group in Willet, New York was for the group of age 10 to 14 years years with a population of 110 (13.02%), according to the ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Willet, New York was the 85 years and over years with a population of 3 (0.36%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

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

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Willet town is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Willet town total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Willet town Population by Age. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Long Lake town population by gender and age. The dataset can be utilized to understand the gender distribution and demographics of Long Lake town.

Content

The dataset constitues the following two datasets across these two themes

• Long Lake, New York Population Breakdown by Gender
• Long Lake, New York Population Breakdown by Gender and Age

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Note: DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve.

The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj.

The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 .

The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 .

The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed.

Count of COVID-19-associated deaths by date of death. Deaths reported to either the OCME or DPH are included in the COVID-19 data. COVID-19-associated deaths include persons who tested positive for COVID-19 around the time of death and persons who were not tested for COVID-19 whose death certificate lists COVID-19 disease as a cause of death or a significant condition contributing to death.

Data on Connecticut deaths were obtained from the Connecticut Deaths Registry maintained by the DPH Office of Vital Records. Cause of death was determined by a death certifier (e.g., physician, APRN, medical examiner) using their best clinical judgment. Additionally, all COVID-19 deaths, including suspected or related, are required to be reported to OCME. On April 4, 2020, CT DPH and OCME released a joint memo to providers and facilities within Connecticut providing guidelines for certifying deaths due to COVID-19 that were consistent with the CDC’s guidelines and a reminder of the required reporting to OCME.25,26 As of July 1, 2021, OCME had reviewed every case reported and performed additional investigation on about one-third of reported deaths to better ascertain if COVID-19 did or did not cause or contribute to the death. Some of these investigations resulted in the OCME performing postmortem swabs for PCR testing on individuals whose deaths were suspected to be due to COVID-19, but antemortem diagnosis was unable to be made.31 The OCME issued or re-issued about 10% of COVID-19 death certificates and, when appropriate, removed COVID-19 from the death certificate. For standardization and tabulation of mortality statistics, written cause of death statements made by the certifiers on death certificates are sent to the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) at the CDC which assigns cause of death codes according to the International Causes of Disease 10th Revision (ICD-10) classification system.25,26 COVID-19 deaths in this report are defined as those for which the death certificate has an ICD-10 code of U07.1 as either a primary (underlying) or a contributing cause of death. More information on COVID-19 mortality can be found at the following link: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Health-Information-Systems--Reporting/Mortality/Mortality-Statistics

Note the counts in this dataset may vary from the death counts in the other COVID-19-related datasets published on data.ct.gov, where deaths are counted on the date reported rather than the date of death.

Starting in July 2020, this dataset will be updated every weekday. Data are subject to future revision as reporting changes.

Description:

👉 Download the dataset here

Welcome to the Oceanic_Life-Dataset, an extraordinary collection of 7,990 high-resolution images that reveal the vast and diverse beauty of the ocean’s inhabitants. This meticulously curated dataset highlights the vibrant and intricate life forms thriving beneath the waves, from vibrant corals to swift fish, stealthy octopuses, and apex predators like sharks. The Oceanic_Life-Dataset offers a comprehensive visual resource that allows researchers, educators, and enthusiasts to dive deep into the ocean’s mysterious ecosystems.

Download Dataset

Key Features:

Expansive Image Database: With a vast array of 7,990 professionally curated images, this dataset presents a detailed exploration of marine life, providing a broad perspective on the species populating our oceans.

Diverse Marine Species: This dataset captures an impressive variety of aquatic creatures, from the delicate corals forming vibrant underwater landscapes to graceful fish, majestic sharks, intricate cephalopods, and other remarkable ocean inhabitants. It encapsulates the stunning biodiversity of marine ecosystems in unprecedented detail.

Exceptional Image Quality: Each image has been selected with care to ensure optimal clarity and high-definition visual accuracy. Whether you’re studying marine biology or conducting research on marine habitats, these visuals provide the intricate details necessary for an in-depth analysis of marine species.

Broad Taxonomic Coverage: Spanning a wide range of oceanic life, the dataset includes images of various marine species, from tropical coral reefs to deep-sea organisms. It serves as a critical resource for biodiversity research, enabling the study of species interactions, population dynamics, and ecological roles.

Ideal for Research, Education, and Conservation:

This dataset is designed to be a powerful tool for scientific research, educational purposes, and conservation efforts. Researchers can leverage this data for machine learning models aimed at identifying species, while educators can use the images to engage students in marine biology lessons. Conservationists can also use the dataset to bring awareness to the rich diversity found in our oceans and the importance of protecting it.

Enhanced Conservation Efforts: By visually capturing the beauty and complexity of marine life, the Oceanic_Life-Dataset encourages a deeper appreciation of the underwater world. It can serve as a strong foundation for campaigns that promote marine conservation, sustainability, and environmental stewardship.

Enriched Ecological Insights: Researchers can use this dataset to explore ecological relationships, study the impact of human activity on oceanic species, and develop data-driven solutions to preserve fragile marine ecosystems. The diversity within the dataset makes it suitable for AI-based research, image classification, and the development of conservation strategies.

Applications:

Marine Biology & Ecology: This dataset supports the study of ocean ecosystems, species distribution, and habitat interactions.

Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning: Ideal for training computer vision models to recognize and categorize marine species.

Environmental Monitoring: A valuable resource for assessing the health of marine ecosystems and identifying changes in biodiversity due to climate change or pollution.

Education & Outreach: Engages audiences of all ages by providing captivating visuals that highlight the need for ocean conservation.

This dataset is sourced from Kaggle.

The National Child Development Study (NCDS) is a continuing longitudinal study that seeks to follow the lives of all those living in Great Britain who were born in one particular week in 1958. The aim of the study is to improve understanding of the factors affecting human development over the whole lifespan.

The NCDS has its origins in the Perinatal Mortality Survey (PMS) (the original PMS study is held at the UK Data Archive under SN 2137). This study was sponsored by the National Birthday Trust Fund and designed to examine the social and obstetric factors associated with stillbirth and death in early infancy among the 17,000 children born in England, Scotland and Wales in that one week. Selected data from the PMS form NCDS sweep 0, held alongside NCDS sweeps 1-3, under SN 5565.

Survey and Biomeasures Data (GN 33004):
To date there have been nine attempts to trace all members of the birth cohort in order to monitor their physical, educational and social development. The first three sweeps were carried out by the National Children's Bureau, in 1965, when respondents were aged 7, in 1969, aged 11, and in 1974, aged 16 (these sweeps form NCDS1-3, held together with NCDS0 under SN 5565). The fourth sweep, also carried out by the National Children's Bureau, was conducted in 1981, when respondents were aged 23 (held under SN 5566). In 1985 the NCDS moved to the Social Statistics Research Unit (SSRU) - now known as the Centre for Longitudinal Studies (CLS). The fifth sweep was carried out in 1991, when respondents were aged 33 (held under SN 5567). For the sixth sweep, conducted in 1999-2000, when respondents were aged 42 (NCDS6, held under SN 5578), fieldwork was combined with the 1999-2000 wave of the 1970 Birth Cohort Study (BCS70), which was also conducted by CLS (and held under GN 33229). The seventh sweep was conducted in 2004-2005 when the respondents were aged 46 (held under SN 5579), the eighth sweep was conducted in 2008-2009 when respondents were aged 50 (held under SN 6137) and the ninth sweep was conducted in 2013 when respondents were aged 55 (held under SN 7669).

Four separate datasets covering responses to NCDS over all sweeps are available. National Child Development Deaths Dataset: Special Licence Access (SN 7717) covers deaths; National Child Development Study Response and Outcomes Dataset (SN 5560) covers all other responses and outcomes; National Child Development Study: Partnership Histories (SN 6940) includes data on live-in relationships; and National Child Development Study: Activity Histories (SN 6942) covers work and non-work activities. Users are advised to order these studies alongside the other waves of NCDS.

From 2002-2004, a Biomedical Survey was completed and is available under End User Licence (EUL) (SN 8731) and Special Licence (SL) (SN 5594). Proteomics analyses of blood samples are available under SL SN 9254.

Linked Geographical Data (GN 33497):
A number of geographical variables are available, under more restrictive access conditions, which can be linked to the NCDS EUL and SL access studies.

Linked Administrative Data (GN 33396):
A number of linked administrative datasets are available, under more restrictive access conditions, which can be linked to the NCDS EUL and SL access studies. These include a Deaths dataset (SN 7717) available under SL and the Linked Health Administrative Datasets (SN 8697) available under Secure Access.

Additional Sub-Studies (GN 33562):
In addition to the main NCDS sweeps, further studies have also been conducted on a range of subjects such as parent migration, unemployment, behavioural studies and respondent essays. The full list of NCDS studies available from the UK Data Service can be found on the NCDS series access data webpage.

How to access genetic and/or bio-medical sample data from a range of longitudinal surveys:
For information on how to access biomedical data from NCDS that are not held at the UKDS, see the CLS Genetic data and biological samples webpage.

Further information about the full NCDS series can be found on the Centre for Longitudinal Studies website.
The National Child Development Deaths Dataset, 1958-2014: Special Licence Access contains data on known deaths among members of the NCDS birth cohort from 1958 to 2013. Information on deaths has been taken from the records maintained by the organisations responsible for the study over the life time of the study: the National Birthday Trust Fund, the National Children’s Bureau (NCB), the Social Statistics Research Unit (SSRU) and the CLS. The information has been gleaned from a variety of sources, including death certificates and other information from the National Health Service Central Register (NHSCR), and from relatives and friends during survey activities and cohort maintenance work by telephone, letter and e-mail. It includes all deaths up to 31st December 2013. In only 6 cases are the date of death unknown. By the end of December 8.7 per cent of the cohort were known to have died.

The National Child Development Study Response and Outcomes Dataset, 1958-2013 (SN 5560) covers other responses and outcomes of the cohort members and should be used alongside this dataset.

For the 3rd edition (July 2018) an updated version of the data was deposited. The new edition includes data on known deaths among members of the National Child Development Study (NCDS) birth cohort up to 2016. The user guide has also been updated.

Georeferenced Population Datasets of Mexico (GEO-MEX): Urban Place Time-Series Population of Mexico contains population counts for more than 700 urban centers every 10 years from 1921 through 1990. The urban centers include metropolitan, conurbation, and city areas with more than 5,000 inhabitants as of 1980. This dataset is produced by the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

A 250 metre population grid using the Estimated Resident Populations (ERP) published annually, dated as at 30 June. Population estimates by Statistical Area 1s (SA1s) are used as an input to derive population grids. These estimates are not official statistics. They are derived as a customised dataset used to produce the population grids. This is one of three resolutions of the national statistical grid; 1 kilometre, 500 metres and 250 metres, where the distance is the length of one side of the square grid cell. The Estimated Resident Population (ERP) by Statistical Area 1 (SA1), rounded to the nearest 10, was proportionally divided between private and some non-private dwelling point locations from the Stats NZ Statistical Location Register. The dwellings were spatially joined to the SA1 to calculate the number of dwellings within each SA1. The SA1 ERP divided by the number of dwellings gave the number of people per dwelling for each SA1. The people per dwelling was spatially joined back to the dwelling dataset then spatially joined to the grid with the option chosen to sum the dwelling population within each grid cell. The estimated resident population of an area in New Zealand is an estimate of all people who usually live in that area at a given date. It includes all residents present in New Zealand and counted by the census, residents who are temporarily elsewhere in New Zealand and counted by the census, residents who are temporarily overseas (who are not included in the census), and an adjustment for residents missed or counted more than once by the census (net census undercount). Visitors from elsewhere in New Zealand and from overseas are excluded. Population estimates by SA1s are used as an input to derive population grids. These estimates are not official statistics. They’re derived as a customised dataset used to produce the population grids. Population estimates from 2022 and 2023 use 2018 Census data and will be revised in 2025, after 2023 Census data is available. Changes to the ERP figures for a grid cell between years, are due to either: estimated change to the residential population for an area or the following methodological factors may also increase or decrease the population estimate assigned to each grid cell; five yearly changes to the SA1 boundaries to which the ERP figures are assigned. Between 2022 and 2023, non populated areas were separated from some SA1s, resulting in fewer grid cells being populated. Changes to SA1 boundaries are designed to ensure they incorporate areas of new development, maintain the urban-rural delineation, and meet population criteria. changes to the dwelling dataset. This is the production version of a new dataset published in November 2023. The prototype version was released in October 2022 for feedback. Since the November 2023 release, population estimate field names have been updated to remove acronyms and population estimates have been reduced to two decimal places.

This table contains the cohort survival tables (by birth cohort of 1 year) by gender and age for the population of the Netherlands. The table shows how many boys or girls from a group of 100 thousand newborns have reached the year in which they are 1, 2, 3, etc. years old. It can also be seen how old these children will be on average.

The table can be broken down by mortality, the number of people living (table population), the number of deceased (table population) and the (cohort) life expectancy per generation by gender and age.

The (cohort) life expectancy, calculated from a cohort survival table, indicates the actual lifespan (or is expected to be, when the observed mortality rates are complemented by mortality from the forecast period). See section 4 for an explanation of the difference between the period survival table and a cohort survival table.

It is possible to choose from figures in which only observed numbers are calculated or a series in which the observed numbers are supplemented by future expectations of numbers of deceased for the birth generations that are still alive.

Data available: from birth generation 1850

Status of the figures: The figures based on the number of deaths observed up to and including the year 2020 are definitive. Figures supplemented by future expectations of the number of deceased are from the CBS Core Forecast 2021-2070. This forecast shall be reviewed once a year.

Changes as of 16 December 2021: — The figures relating to mortality observations for 2020 are included in the table; — The figures relating to the projections have been replaced by those from the Core Forecast 2021-2070.

When are new figures coming? In December 2022, mortality observations for 2021 will be reflected in this table and future expectations will be replaced by those from the Core Forecast 2022-2070.

The "Forest Proximate People" (FPP) dataset is one of the data layers contributing to the development of indicator #13, “number of forest-dependent people in extreme poverty,” of the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) Global Core Set of forest-related indicators (GCS). The FPP dataset provides an estimate of the number of people living in or within 5 kilometers of forests (forest-proximate people) for the year 2019 with a spatial resolution of 100 meters at a global level.

For more detail, such as the theory behind this indicator and the definition of parameters, and to cite this data, see: Newton, P., Castle, S.E., Kinzer, A.T., Miller, D.C., Oldekop, J.A., Linhares-Juvenal, T., Pina, L. Madrid, M., & de Lamo, J. 2022. The number of forest- and tree-proximate people: A new methodology and global estimates. Background Paper to The State of the World’s Forests 2022 report. Rome, FAO.

Contact points:

Maintainer: Leticia Pina

Maintainer: Sarah E., Castle

Data lineage:

The FPP data are generated using Google Earth Engine. Forests are defined by the Copernicus Global Land Cover (CGLC) (Buchhorn et al. 2020) classification system’s definition of forests: tree cover ranging from 15-100%, with or without understory of shrubs and grassland, and including both open and closed forests. Any area classified as forest sized ≥ 1 ha in 2019 was included in this definition. Population density was defined by the WorldPop global population data for 2019 (WorldPop 2018). High density urban populations were excluded from the analysis. High density urban areas were defined as any contiguous area with a total population (using 2019 WorldPop data for population) of at least 50,000 people and comprised of pixels all of which met at least one of two criteria: either the pixel a) had at least 1,500 people per square km, or b) was classified as “built-up” land use by the CGLC dataset (where “built-up” was defined as land covered by buildings and other manmade structures) (Dijkstra et al. 2020). Using these datasets, any rural people living in or within 5 kilometers of forests in 2019 were classified as forest proximate people. Euclidean distance was used as the measure to create a 5-kilometer buffer zone around each forest cover pixel. The scripts for generating the forest-proximate people and the rural-urban datasets using different parameters or for different years are published and available to users. For more detail, such as the theory behind this indicator and the definition of parameters, and to cite this data, see: Newton, P., Castle, S.E., Kinzer, A.T., Miller, D.C., Oldekop, J.A., Linhares-Juvenal, T., Pina, L., Madrid, M., & de Lamo, J. 2022. The number of forest- and tree-proximate people: a new methodology and global estimates. Background Paper to The State of the World’s Forests 2022. Rome, FAO.

References:

Buchhorn, M., Smets, B., Bertels, L., De Roo, B., Lesiv, M., Tsendbazar, N.E., Herold, M., Fritz, S., 2020. Copernicus Global Land Service: Land Cover 100m: collection 3 epoch 2019. Globe.

Dijkstra, L., Florczyk, A.J., Freire, S., Kemper, T., Melchiorri, M., Pesaresi, M. and Schiavina, M., 2020. Applying the degree of urbanisation to the globe: A new harmonised definition reveals a different picture of global urbanisation. Journal of Urban Economics, p.103312.

WorldPop (www.worldpop.org - School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton; Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of Louisville; Departement de Geographie, Universite de Namur) and Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University, 2018. Global High Resolution Population Denominators Project - Funded by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1134076). https://dx.doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/WP00645

Online resources:

GEE asset for "Forest proximate people - 5km cutoff distance"

Effective June 28, 2023, this dataset will no longer be updated. Similar data are accessible from CDC WONDER (https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd-icd10-provisional.html). Cumulative deaths involving COVID-19 reported to NCHS by sex and age in years, in the United States.

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: As of 10/15/2020, this dataset is no longer being updated. Starting on 10/15/2020, these metrics will be calculated using a 14-day average rather than a 7-day average. The new dataset using 14-day averages can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/hree-nys2

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

This dataset includes a weekly count and weekly rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a weekly count of COVID-19 PCR diagnostic tests, and a weekly percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).

A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.

These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.

These data are updated weekly; the previous week period for each dataset is the previous Sunday-Saturday, known as an MMWR week (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf). The date listed is the date the dataset was last updated and corresponds to a reporting period of the previous MMWR week. For instance, the data for 8/20/2020 corresponds to a reporting period of 8/9/2020-8/15/2020.

Notes: 9/25/2020: Data for Mansfield and Middletown for the week of Sept 13-19 were unavailable at the time of reporting due to delays in lab reporting.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Cape May population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Cape May. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Cape May by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Cape May.

Key observations

The largest age group in Cape May, NJ was for the group of age 60 to 64 years years with a population of 366 (13.12%), according to the ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Cape May, NJ was the 45 to 49 years years with a population of 13 (0.47%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

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

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Cape May is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Cape May total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Cape May Population by Age. You can refer the same here

THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 8:10 PM EASTERN ON MARCH 24

OVERVIEW

2019 had the most mass killings since at least the 1970s, according to the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings Database.

In all, there were 45 mass killings, defined as when four or more people are killed excluding the perpetrator. Of those, 33 were mass shootings . This summer was especially violent, with three high-profile public mass shootings occurring in the span of just four weeks, leaving 38 killed and 66 injured.

A total of 229 people died in mass killings in 2019.

The AP's analysis found that more than 50% of the incidents were family annihilations, which is similar to prior years. Although they are far less common, the 9 public mass shootings during the year were the most deadly type of mass murder, resulting in 73 people's deaths, not including the assailants.

One-third of the offenders died at the scene of the killing or soon after, half from suicides.

About this Dataset

The Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database tracks all U.S. homicides since 2006 involving four or more people killed (not including the offender) over a short period of time (24 hours) regardless of weapon, location, victim-offender relationship or motive. The database includes information on these and other characteristics concerning the incidents, offenders, and victims.

The AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern database represents the most complete tracking of mass murders by the above definition currently available. Other efforts, such as the Gun Violence Archive or Everytown for Gun Safety may include events that do not meet our criteria, but a review of these sites and others indicates that this database contains every event that matches the definition, including some not tracked by other organizations.

This data will be updated periodically and can be used as an ongoing resource to help cover these events.

Using this Dataset

To get basic counts of incidents of mass killings and mass shootings by year nationwide, use these queries:

Mass killings by year

Mass shootings by year

To get these counts just for your state:

Filter killings by state

Definition of "mass murder"

Mass murder is defined as the intentional killing of four or more victims by any means within a 24-hour period, excluding the deaths of unborn children and the offender(s). The standard of four or more dead was initially set by the FBI.

This definition does not exclude cases based on method (e.g., shootings only), type or motivation (e.g., public only), victim-offender relationship (e.g., strangers only), or number of locations (e.g., one). The time frame of 24 hours was chosen to eliminate conflation with spree killers, who kill multiple victims in quick succession in different locations or incidents, and to satisfy the traditional requirement of occurring in a “single incident.”

Offenders who commit mass murder during a spree (before or after committing additional homicides) are included in the database, and all victims within seven days of the mass murder are included in the victim count. Negligent homicides related to driving under the influence or accidental fires are excluded due to the lack of offender intent. Only incidents occurring within the 50 states and Washington D.C. are considered.

Methodology

Project researchers first identified potential incidents using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR). Homicide incidents in the SHR were flagged as potential mass murder cases if four or more victims were reported on the same record, and the type of death was murder or non-negligent manslaughter.

Cases were subsequently verified utilizing media accounts, court documents, academic journal articles, books, and local law enforcement records obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Each data point was corroborated by multiple sources, which were compiled into a single document to assess the quality of information.

In case(s) of contradiction among sources, official law enforcement or court records were used, when available, followed by the most recent media or academic source.

Case information was subsequently compared with every other known mass murder database to ensure reliability and validity. Incidents listed in the SHR that could not be independently verified were excluded from the database.

Project researchers also conducted extensive searches for incidents not reported in the SHR during the time period, utilizing internet search engines, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspapers.com. Search terms include: [number] dead, [number] killed, [number] slain, [number] murdered, [number] homicide, mass murder, mass shooting, massacre, rampage, family killing, familicide, and arson murder. Offender, victim, and location names were also directly searched when available.

This project started at USA TODAY in 2012.

Contacts

Contact AP Data Editor Justin Myers with questions, suggestions or comments about this dataset at jmyers@ap.org. The Northeastern University researcher working with AP and USA TODAY is Professor James Alan Fox, who can be reached at j.fox@northeastern.edu or 617-416-4400.