Context

Cultural diversity in the U.S. has led to great variations in names and naming traditions and names have been used to express creativity, personality, cultural identity, and values. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naming_in_the_United_States

Content

This public dataset was created by the Social Security Administration and contains all names from Social Security card applications for births that occurred in the United States after 1879. Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in this data. For others who did apply, records may not show the place of birth, and again their names are not included in the data.

All data are from a 100% sample of records on Social Security card applications as of the end of February 2015. To safeguard privacy, the Social Security Administration restricts names to those with at least 5 occurrences.

Fork this kernel to get started with this dataset.

Acknowledgements

https://bigquery.cloud.google.com/dataset/bigquery-public-data:usa_names

https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/public-data/usa-names

Dataset Source: Data.gov. This dataset is publicly available for anyone to use under the following terms provided by the Dataset Source — http://www.data.gov/privacy-policy#data_policy — and is provided "AS IS" without any warranty, express or implied, from Google. Google disclaims all liability for any damages, direct or indirect, resulting from the use of the dataset.

Banner Photo by @dcp from Unplash.

Inspiration

What are the most common names?

What are the most common female names?

Are there more female or male names?

Female names by a wide margin?

Description

This dataset contains counts and rankings of the most common first names in the United States, sourced from comprehensive name census data. It is ideal for analyzing naming trends, demographic patterns, and cultural preferences, as well as for building statistical models to explore name popularity over time.

Dataset structure

male_first_names.csv: Male first name frequencies and rankings in the U.S.

female_first_names.csv: Female first name frequencies and rankings in the U.S.

This public dataset was created by the Social Security Administration and contains all names from Social Security card applications for births that occurred in the United States after 1879. Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in this data. For others who did apply, records may not show the place of birth, and again their names are not included in the data. All data are from a 100% sample of records on Social Security card applications as of the end of February 2015. To safeguard privacy, the Social Security Administration restricts names to those with at least 5 occurrences. This public dataset is hosted in Google BigQuery and is included in BigQuery's 1TB/mo of free tier processing. This means that each user receives 1TB of free BigQuery processing every month, which can be used to run queries on this public dataset. Watch this short video to learn how to get started quickly using BigQuery to access public datasets. What is BigQuery .

Popular Baby Names by Sex and Ethnic Group Data were collected through civil birth registration. Each record represents the ranking of a baby name in the order of frequency. Data can be used to represent the popularity of a name. Caution should be used when assessing the rank of a baby name if the frequency count is close to 10; the ranking may vary year to year.

The data (name, year of birth, sex, and number) are from a 100 percent sample of Social Security card applications for 1880 on.

Context

So I just recently finished my Google Data Analytics Certification and I want to stay fresh! I went through the public data sets and found USA names. I thought might be fun to pull some information on just my name and analyze

Content

You will find the State, Year and Count

Acknowledgements

Big Query Public Data Set USA Names

Inspiration

Need to sharpen my skills

We provide datasets that that estimate the racial distributions associated with first, middle, and last names in the United States. The datasets cover five racial categories: White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Other. The provided data are computed from the voter files of six Southern states -- Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, and South Carolina -- that collect race and ethnicity data upon registration. We include seven voter files per state, sourced between 2018 and 2021 from L2, Inc. Together, these states have approximately 36MM individuals who provide self-reported race and ethnicity. The last name datasets includes 338K surnames, while the middle name dictionaries contains 126K middle names and the first name datasets includes 136K first names. For each type of name, we provide a dataset of P(race | name) probabilities and P(name | race) probabilities. We include only names that appear at least 25 times across the 42 (= 7 voter files * 6 states) voter files in our dataset. These data are closely related to the the dataset: "Name Dictionaries for "wru" R Package", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7TRYAC. These are the probabilities used in the latest iteration of the "WRU" package (Khanna et al., 2022) to make probabilistic predictions about the race of individuals, given their names and geolocations.

This dataset includes all personal names listed in the Wikipedia category “American people by ethnic or national origin” and all subcategories fitting the pattern “American People of [ ] descent”, in total more than 25,000 individuals. Each individual is represented by a row, with columns indicating binary membership (0/1) in each ethnic/national category.

Ethnicity inference is an essential tool for identifying disparities in public health and social sciences. Existing datasets linking personal names to ethnic or national origin often neglect to recognize multi-ethnic or multi-national identities. Furthermore, existing datasets use coarse classification schemes (e.g. classifying both Indian and Japanese people as “Asian”) that may not be suitable for many research questions. This dataset remedies these problems by including both very fine-grain ethnic/national categories (e.g. Afghan-Jewish) and more broad ones (e.g. European). Users can chose the categories that are relevant to their research. Since many Americans on Wikipedia are associated with multiple overlapping or distinct ethnicities/nationalities, these multi-ethnic associations are also reflected in the data.

Data were obtained from the Wikipedia API and reviewed manually to remove stage names, pen names, mononyms, first initials (when full names are available on Wikipedia), nicknames, honorific titles, and pages that correspond to a group or event rather than an individual.

This dataset was designed for use in training classification algorithms, but may also be independently interesting inasmuch as it is a representative sample of Americans who are famous enough to have their own Wikipedia page, along with detailed information on their ethnic/national origins.

DISCLAIMER: Due to the incomplete nature of Wikipedia, data may not properly reflect all ethnic national associations for any given individual. For example, there is no guarantee that a given Cuban Jewish person will be listed in both the “American People of Cuban descent” and the “American People of Jewish descent” categories.

This dataset represents the popular last names in the United States for White.

Abstract

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

Before Manuscript Submission

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

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

We will check your cell sizes and citations.

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

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

Documentation

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

In sum: the historic US census data are a unique source for research on social and economic change and can provide population health researchers with information about social and economic determinants.

The historic US 1920 census data was collected in January 1920. Enumerators collected data traveling to households and counting the residents who regularly slept at the household. Individuals lacking permanent housing were counted as residents of the place where they were when the data was collected. Household members absent on the day of data collected were either listed to the household with the help of other household members or were scheduled for the last census subdivision.

Notes

• We provide household and person data separately so that it is convenient to explore the descriptive statistics on each level. In order to obtain a full dataset, merge the household and person on the variables SERIAL and SERIALP. In order to create a longitudinal dataset, merge datasets on the variable HISTID.

• Households with more than 60 people in the original data were broken up for processing purposes. Every person in the large households are considered to be in their own household. The original large households can be identified using the variable SPLIT, reconstructed using the variable SPLITHID, and the original count is found in the variable SPLITNUM.

• Coded variables derived from string variables are still in progress. These variables include: occupation and industry.

• Missing observations have been allocated and some inconsistencies have been edited for the following variables: SPEAKENG, YRIMMIG, CITIZEN, AGE, BPL, MBPL, FBPL, LIT, SCHOOL, OWNERSHP, MORTGAGE, FARM, CLASSWKR, OCC1950, IND1950, MARST, RACE, SEX, RELATE, MTONGUE. The flag variables indicating an allocated observation for the associated variables can be included in your extract by clicking the ‘Select data quality flags’ box on the extract summary page.

• Most inconsistent information was not edited for this release, thus there are observations outside of the universe for some variables. In particular, the variables GQ, and GQTYPE have known inconsistencies and will be improved with the next release.

%3C!-- --%3E

Section 2

This dataset was created on 2020-01-10 18:46:34.647 by merging multiple datasets together. The source datasets for this version were:

IPUMS 1920 households: This dataset includes all households from the 1920 US census.

IPUMS 1920 persons: This dataset includes all individuals from the 1920 US census.

IPUMS 1920 Lookup: This dataset includes variable names, variable labels, variable values, and corresponding variable value labels for the IPUMS 1920 datasets.

The Places dataset was published on September 22, 2025 from the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division and is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). This resource is a member of a series. The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) System (MTS). The MTS represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The TIGER/Line shapefiles include both incorporated places (legal entities) and census designated places or CDPs (statistical entities). An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division (MCD), which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always nest within a state but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place is usually a city, town, village, or borough, but can have other legal descriptions. CDPs are delineated for the decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but are not legally incorporated under the laws of the state in which they are located. The boundaries for CDPs are often defined in partnership with state, local, and/or tribal officials and usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity. CDP boundaries often change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern and development; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. The only population/housing size requirement for CDPs is that they must contain some housing and population. The boundaries of most incorporated places in this shapefile are as of January 1, 2024, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS). The boundaries of all CDPs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census, but some CDPs were added or updated through the 2024 BAS as well. A data dictionary, or other source of attribute information, is accessible at https://doi.org/10.21949/1529072

The USGS Transportation downloadable data from The National Map (TNM) is based on TIGER/Line data provided through U.S. Census Bureau and supplemented with HERE road data to create tile cache base maps. Some of the TIGER/Line data includes limited corrections done by USGS. Transportation data consists of roads, railroads, trails, airports, and other features associated with the transport of people or commerce. The data include the name or route designator, classification, and location. Transportation data support general mapping and geographic information system technology analysis for applications such as traffic safety, congestion mitigation, disaster planning, and emergency response. The National Map transportation data is commonly combined with other data themes, such as boundaries, elevation, hydrography, and structures, to produce general reference base maps. The National Map viewer allows free downloads of public domain transportation data in either Esri File Geodatabase or Shapefile formats. For additional information on the transportation data model, go to https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/national-geospatial-program/national-map.

This is a data set of individuals in the United States tha own a vehicle made by Chevrolet. The data set includes First name, Last name, email, phone number, address, make, model, Year, and VIN. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions about this data set. If interested there is also data on 20 other manufacturers.

Introduction

There are several works based on Natural Language Processing on newspaper reports. Mining opinions from headlines [ 1 ] using Standford NLP and SVM by Rameshbhaiet. Al.compared several algorithms on a small and large dataset. Rubinet. al., in their paper [ 2 ], created a mechanism to differentiate fake news from real ones by building a set of characteristics of news according to their types. The purpose was to contribute to the low resource data available for training machine learning algorithms. Doumitet. al.in [ 3 ] have implemented LDA, a topic modeling approach to study bias present in online news media.

However, there are not many NLP research invested in studying COVID-19. Most applications include classification of chest X-rays and CT-scans to detect presence of pneumonia in lungs [ 4 ], a consequence of the virus. Other research areas include studying the genome sequence of the virus[ 5 ][ 6 ][ 7 ] and replicating its structure to fight and find a vaccine. This research is crucial in battling the pandemic. The few NLP based research publications are sentiment classification of online tweets by Samuel et el [ 8 ] to understand fear persisting in people due to the virus. Similar work has been done using the LSTM network to classify sentiments from online discussion forums by Jelodaret. al.[ 9 ]. NKK dataset is the first study on a comparatively larger dataset of a newspaper report on COVID-19, which contributed to the virus’s awareness to the best of our knowledge.

2 Data-set Introduction

2.1 Data Collection

We accumulated 1000 online newspaper report from United States of America (USA) on COVID-19. The newspaper includes The Washington Post (USA) and StarTribune (USA). We have named it as “Covid-News-USA-NNK”. We also accumulated 50 online newspaper report from Bangladesh on the issue and named it “Covid-News-BD-NNK”. The newspaper includes The Daily Star (BD) and Prothom Alo (BD). All these newspapers are from the top provider and top read in the respective countries. The collection was done manually by 10 human data-collectors of age group 23- with university degrees. This approach was suitable compared to automation to ensure the news were highly relevant to the subject. The newspaper online sites had dynamic content with advertisements in no particular order. Therefore there were high chances of online scrappers to collect inaccurate news reports. One of the challenges while collecting the data is the requirement of subscription. Each newspaper required $1 per subscriptions. Some criteria in collecting the news reports provided as guideline to the human data-collectors were as follows:

The headline must have one or more words directly or indirectly related to COVID-19.

The content of each news must have 5 or more keywords directly or indirectly related to COVID-19.

The genre of the news can be anything as long as it is relevant to the topic. Political, social, economical genres are to be more prioritized.

Avoid taking duplicate reports.

Maintain a time frame for the above mentioned newspapers.

To collect these data we used a google form for USA and BD. We have two human editor to go through each entry to check any spam or troll entry.

2.2 Data Pre-processing and Statistics

Some pre-processing steps performed on the newspaper report dataset are as follows:

Remove hyperlinks.

Remove non-English alphanumeric characters.

Remove stop words.

Lemmatize text.

While more pre-processing could have been applied, we tried to keep the data as much unchanged as possible since changing sentence structures could result us in valuable information loss. While this was done with help of a script, we also assigned same human collectors to cross check for any presence of the above mentioned criteria.

The primary data statistics of the two dataset are shown in Table 1 and 2.

Table 1: Covid-News-USA-NNK data statistics

No of words per headline

7 to 20

No of words per body content

150 to 2100

Table 2: Covid-News-BD-NNK data statistics No of words per headline

10 to 20

No of words per body content

100 to 1500

2.3 Dataset Repository

We used GitHub as our primary data repository in account name NKK^1. Here, we created two repositories USA-NKK^2 and BD-NNK^3. The dataset is available in both CSV and JSON format. We are regularly updating the CSV files and regenerating JSON using a py script. We provided a python script file for essential operation. We welcome all outside collaboration to enrich the dataset.

3 Literature Review

Natural Language Processing (NLP) deals with text (also known as categorical) data in computer science, utilizing numerous diverse methods like one-hot encoding, word embedding, etc., that transform text to machine language, which can be fed to multiple machine learning and deep learning algorithms.

Some well-known applications of NLP includes fraud detection on online media sites[ 10 ], using authorship attribution in fallback authentication systems[ 11 ], intelligent conversational agents or chatbots[ 12 ] and machine translations used by Google Translate[ 13 ]. While these are all downstream tasks, several exciting developments have been made in the algorithm solely for Natural Language Processing tasks. The two most trending ones are BERT[ 14 ], which uses bidirectional encoder-decoder architecture to create the transformer model, that can do near-perfect classification tasks and next-word predictions for next generations, and GPT-3 models released by OpenAI[ 15 ] that can generate texts almost human-like. However, these are all pre-trained models since they carry huge computation cost. Information Extraction is a generalized concept of retrieving information from a dataset. Information extraction from an image could be retrieving vital feature spaces or targeted portions of an image; information extraction from speech could be retrieving information about names, places, etc[ 16 ]. Information extraction in texts could be identifying named entities and locations or essential data. Topic modeling is a sub-task of NLP and also a process of information extraction. It clusters words and phrases of the same context together into groups. Topic modeling is an unsupervised learning method that gives us a brief idea about a set of text. One commonly used topic modeling is Latent Dirichlet Allocation or LDA[17].

Keyword extraction is a process of information extraction and sub-task of NLP to extract essential words and phrases from a text. TextRank [ 18 ] is an efficient keyword extraction technique that uses graphs to calculate the weight of each word and pick the words with more weight to it.

Word clouds are a great visualization technique to understand the overall ’talk of the topic’. The clustered words give us a quick understanding of the content.

4 Our experiments and Result analysis

We used the wordcloud library^4 to create the word clouds. Figure 1 and 3 presents the word cloud of Covid-News-USA- NNK dataset by month from February to May. From the figures 1,2,3, we can point few information:

In February, both the news paper have talked about China and source of the outbreak.

StarTribune emphasized on Minnesota as the most concerned state. In April, it seemed to have been concerned more.

Both the newspaper talked about the virus impacting the economy, i.e, bank, elections, administrations, markets.

Washington Post discussed global issues more than StarTribune.

StarTribune in February mentioned the first precautionary measurement: wearing masks, and the uncontrollable spread of the virus throughout the nation.

While both the newspaper mentioned the outbreak in China in February, the weight of the spread in the United States are more highlighted through out March till May, displaying the critical impact caused by the virus.

We used a script to extract all numbers related to certain keywords like ’Deaths’, ’Infected’, ’Died’ , ’Infections’, ’Quarantined’, Lock-down’, ’Diagnosed’ etc from the news reports and created a number of cases for both the newspaper. Figure 4 shows the statistics of this series. From this extraction technique, we can observe that April was the peak month for the covid cases as it gradually rose from February. Both the newspaper clearly shows us that the rise in covid cases from February to March was slower than the rise from March to April. This is an important indicator of possible recklessness in preparations to battle the virus. However, the steep fall from April to May also shows the positive response against the attack. We used Vader Sentiment Analysis to extract sentiment of the headlines and the body. On average, the sentiments were from -0.5 to -0.9. Vader Sentiment scale ranges from -1(highly negative to 1(highly positive). There were some cases

where the sentiment scores of the headline and body contradicted each other,i.e., the sentiment of the headline was negative but the sentiment of the body was slightly positive. Overall, sentiment analysis can assist us sort the most concerning (most negative) news from the positive ones, from which we can learn more about the indicators related to COVID-19 and the serious impact caused by it. Moreover, sentiment analysis can also provide us information about how a state or country is reacting to the pandemic. We used PageRank algorithm to extract keywords from headlines as well as the body content. PageRank efficiently highlights important relevant keywords in the text. Some frequently occurring important keywords extracted from both the datasets are: ’China’, Government’, ’Masks’, ’Economy’, ’Crisis’, ’Theft’ , ’Stock market’ , ’Jobs’ , ’Election’, ’Missteps’, ’Health’, ’Response’. Keywords extraction acts as a filter allowing quick searches for indicators in case of locating situations of the economy,

The Bureau of the Census has released Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF1) 100-Percent data. The file includes the following population items: sex, age, race, Hispanic or Latino origin, household relationship, and household and family characteristics. Housing items include occupancy status and tenure (whether the unit is owner or renter occupied). SF1 does not include information on incomes, poverty status, overcrowded housing or age of housing. These topics will be covered in Summary File 3. Data are available for states, counties, county subdivisions, places, census tracts, block groups, and, where applicable, American Indian and Alaskan Native Areas and Hawaiian Home Lands. The SF1 data are available on the Bureau's web site and may be retrieved from American FactFinder as tables, lists, or maps. Users may also download a set of compressed ASCII files for each state via the Bureau's FTP server. There are over 8000 data items available for each geographic area. The full listing of these data items is available here as a downloadable compressed data base file named TABLES.ZIP. The uncompressed is in FoxPro data base file (dbf) format and may be imported to ACCESS, EXCEL, and other software formats. While all of this information is useful, the Office of Community Planning and Development has downloaded selected information for all states and areas and is making this information available on the CPD web pages. The tables and data items selected are those items used in the CDBG and HOME allocation formulas plus topics most pertinent to the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), the Consolidated Plan, and similar overall economic and community development plans. The information is contained in five compressed (zipped) dbf tables for each state. When uncompressed the tables are ready for use with FoxPro and they can be imported into ACCESS, EXCEL, and other spreadsheet, GIS and database software. The data are at the block group summary level. The first two characters of the file name are the state abbreviation. The next two letters are BG for block group. Each record is labeled with the code and name of the city and county in which it is located so that the data can be summarized to higher-level geography. The last part of the file name describes the contents . The GEO file contains standard Census Bureau geographic identifiers for each block group, such as the metropolitan area code and congressional district code. The only data included in this table is total population and total housing units. POP1 and POP2 contain selected population variables and selected housing items are in the HU file. The MA05 table data is only for use by State CDBG grantees for the reporting of the racial composition of beneficiaries of Area Benefit activities. The complete package for a state consists of the dictionary file named TABLES, and the five data files for the state. The logical record number (LOGRECNO) links the records across tables.

U.S. Daily Surface Data consists of several closely related data sets: DSI-3200, DSI-3202, DSI-3206, and DSI-3210. These are archived at the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). U.S. Daily Surface Data is sometimes called cooperative data or COOP, named after the cooperative observers that recorded the data. In any one year there are about 8,000 stations operating. Most cooperative observers are state universities, state or federal agencies, or private individuals whose stations are managed and maintained by the National Weather Service. Each cooperative observer station may record as little as one parameter (precipitation), or several parameters. U.S. Daily Surface Data is also called Summary of the Day data. The original data was manuscript records, the earliest of which are from the 1800s. Records for approximately 23,000 stations have been archived from the beginning of record through the present. Official surface weather observation standards can be found in the Federal Meteorological Handbook.

AbstractThis dataset comprises detailed records of motor vehicle crashes occurring in Ohio, USA, from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2023. Collected by law enforcement agencies using standardized OH-1 crash reporting forms and centralized by the Ohio Department of Public Safety, the dataset captures detailed information on 1,679,019 crashes involving 2,656,086 vehicles and 3,577,822 occupants. Structured across three levels—crash, vehicle, and occupant—the dataset includes attributes such as crash timing and location, environmental and road conditions, vehicle specifications, operational factors, occupant demographics, injury severity, safety equipment usage, and behavioral indicators like alcohol or drug involvement. Severity information is documented at both the crash and individual occupant levels, covering outcomes ranging from no injury to fatal incidents. The dataset features a total of 119 systematically named variables at the crash, vehicle, and occupant levels. A complete list of features, along with categorical value mappings, is provided in the accompanying documentation.Description of the data and file structureThis dataset contains comprehensive records of motor vehicle crashes reported across the state of Ohio, USA, from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2023. The data were collected by law enforcement agencies using standardized crash reporting forms (OH-1) and centralized through the Ohio Department of Public Safety’s data systems.It captures detailed, structured information related to crash events, vehicles involved, and individuals affected. Each data sample corresponds to an occupant of a vehicle. There are unique identifiers for each crash and involved vehicle. Hence, the dataset is organized into three primary levels:Crash-Level Data: Includes unique identifiers for each of the 1,679,019 reported crashes, along with temporal details (date, time), location attributes, environmental conditions (e.g., weather, light, road surface), and overall crash characteristics (e.g., number of units involved, severity classification, work zone presence). The identifier for the crash is the feature “DocumentNumber”.Vehicle-Level Data: Comprises identifiers for each of the 2,656,086 vehicles (units) involved in a crash. Attributes include vehicle type, make, model, year of manufacture, vehicle defects, and operational details such as posted speed, traffic control devices, and pre-crash actions. Interacting vehicle types and hazardous material indicators are also documented. Vehicle-Level features are identified by the prefix ”Units.” in the feature name.Occupant-Level Data: Contains 3,577,822 records detailing individuals involved in crashes. This includes demographic information (age, gender), seating position, person injury severity, use of safety equipment (e.g., seat belts, airbags, helmets), and behavioral factors such as alcohol or drug involvement, distraction status, and test results where applicable. Occupant-Level features are identified by the prefix “Units.People.” in the feature name.The severity of the accident is also documented. The “CrashSeverity” feature document the severity of the crash in the following levels: Fatal (15021), Suspected Serious Injury (83764), Suspected Minor Injury (483026), Possible Injury (461019), and No Apparent Injury (2440823). Similarly, also individual people injury levels are recorded in the feature “Units.People.Injury”. The file "summary_2023_new.pdf" is a summary file that contains data analysis of the dataset (statistics and plots).There are 119 unique features in the data, and their complete list of name and type is reported below. Their categorical levels in case of integer-encoding is found in the file “mapping.yaml”.Access informationOther publicly accessible locations of the data:The full dataset submitted to figshare is not available elsewhere in its complete and curated form. However, data covering the most recent five years, including the current year, are publicly accessible through the following sources:Ohio Department of Public Safety Crash Retrieval Portal: https://ohtrafficdata.dps.ohio.gov/crashretrievalOhio Statistics and Analytics for Traffic Safety (OSTATS): https://statepatrol.ohio.gov/dashboards-statistics/ostats-dashboardsThese public portals provide access to selected crash data but do not include the full historical dataset or the cleaned, integrated, and reformatted version provided through this submission.Data was derived from the following sources:Ohio Department of Public SafetyHuman subjects dataThis dataset was derived entirely from publicly available traffic crash reports collected and disseminated by the Ohio Department of Public Safety through the Ohio Statistics and Analytics for Traffic Safety (OSTATS) platform.To ensure compliance with ethical standards for data sharing, this dataset contains no direct identifiers (e.g., names, addresses, license plate numbers, or VINs linked to individuals). All personal identifiers have been removed or were not included in the public dataset. Furthermore, the dataset contains no more than three indirect identifiers per record. These indirect identifiers (e.g., crash year, crash county, and age group) were selected based on their relevance to the study while minimizing re-identification risk.Where possible, continuous variables were converted to categories (e.g., age groups instead of exact age), and geographic detail was limited to broader regional indicators rather than precise location data. Data cleaning and aggregation procedures were conducted to further reduce identifiability while retaining the analytic value of the dataset for modeling injury risk across system domains.As described in the associated manuscript, all analyses were conducted on this de-identified dataset, and no additional linkage to identifiable information was performed. As such, this dataset does not require IRB oversight or data use agreements and is suitable for open-access publication under CC-BY licence.No direct interaction or intervention with human participants occurred during the creation of this dataset, and no personally identifiable information (PII) is included.Given the publicly available nature of the source data and the absence of PII, explicit participant consent was not required. However, by relying exclusively on open-access government data and following de-identification protocols aligned with the Common Rule (45 CFR 46), this dataset meets ethical standards for public data sharing.

This dataset contains the owner information for all the accounts listed in the Business License Dataset, and is sorted by Account Number. To identify the owner of a business, you will need the account number or legal name, which may be obtained from theBusiness Licenses dataset: https://data.cityofchicago.org/dataset/Business-Licenses/r5kz-chrr. Data Owner: Business Affairs & Consumer Protection. Time Period: 2002 to present. Frequency: Data is updated daily.

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

Bytemine provides access to one of the largest and most accurate US phone number databases available, featuring over 80 million verified mobile numbers. Our data includes both B2C and B2B contacts, enriched with comprehensive personal and professional details that support a wide range of use cases — from sales and marketing outreach to lead enrichment, identity resolution, and platform integration.

Our US Phone Number Data includes:

80 million+ verified US mobile numbers B2C and B2B contacts with name, email, location, and more Work emails and personal emails 57 contact-level data points including job title, company name, seniority, industry, geography, and more

This dataset gives you unmatched access to individuals across the United States, allowing you to connect with professionals and consumers directly through mobile-first campaigns. Whether you're targeting executives, small business owners, or general consumers, Bytemine provides the precision and scale to reach the right audience.

All phone numbers in our database are:

Verified and regularly updated Matched with accurate metadata (name, email, job, etc.) Compliant with data usage policies Sourced through direct licensing from trusted partners including B2B platforms, employment systems, and verified consumer data sources

This data is ideal for:

Cold calling and phone-based outreach SMS marketing and mobile-based campaigns CRM and marketing automation enrichment Identity resolution and contact matching Prospect list building and segmentation B2B and B2C marketing and retargeting App-based user targeting and onboarding Customer data platforms that need verified mobile identifiers

With access to both business and consumer profiles, Bytemine’s US Phone Number Data allows companies to execute highly targeted and personalized campaigns. Each contact is enriched with up to 57 attributes, giving your team deep insight into who the contact is, where they work, and how best to reach them.

Data can be accessed in two flexible ways:

1. Via our web platform — search, filter, and download targeted lists
2. Via API — automate contact discovery, data enrichment, or validation at scale

Our API makes it easy to integrate contact data into your existing tools, workflows, or SaaS platform. Whether you're building a lead generation engine, contact enrichment feature, or an internal prospecting tool, Bytemine delivers the clean, structured data needed to power it.

Bytemine’s phone number dataset is trusted by sales teams, marketing agencies, growth hackers, product teams, and data-driven platforms that rely on accurate contact information to engage the right audience.

If you need verified, mobile-first contact data for B2B or B2C outreach, Bytemine delivers the scale, accuracy, and flexibility required to grow your pipeline, enrich your database, and reach your customers directly.