Abstract

The Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys Program, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 2012 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide reliable estimates of demographic parameters, such as fertility, mortality, family planning, and fertility preferences, as well as maternal and child health and nutrition, that can be used by program managers and policymakers to evaluate and improve existing programs. The JPFHS data will be useful to researchers and scholars interested in analyzing demographic trends in Jordan, as well as those conducting comparative, regional, or cross-national studies.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample Design The 2012 JPFHS sample was designed to produce reliable estimates of major survey variables for the country as a whole, urban and rural areas, each of the 12 governorates, and for the two special domains: the Badia areas and people living in refugee camps. To facilitate comparisons with previous surveys, the sample was also designed to produce estimates for the three regions (North, Central, and South). The grouping of the governorates into regions is as follows: the North consists of Irbid, Jarash, Ajloun, and Mafraq governorates; the Central region consists of Amman, Madaba, Balqa, and Zarqa governorates; and the South region consists of Karak, Tafiela, Ma'an, and Aqaba governorates.

The 2012 JPFHS sample was selected from the 2004 Jordan Population and Housing Census sampling frame. The frame excludes the population living in remote areas (most of whom are nomads), as well as those living in collective housing units such as hotels, hospitals, work camps, prisons, and the like. For the 2004 census, the country was subdivided into convenient area units called census blocks. For the purposes of the household surveys, the census blocks were regrouped to form a general statistical unit of moderate size (30 households or more), called a "cluster", which is widely used in surveys as a primary sampling unit (PSU).

Stratification was achieved by first separating each governorate into urban and rural areas and then, within each urban and rural area, by Badia areas, refugee camps, and other. A two-stage sampling procedure was employed. In the first stage, 806 clusters were selected with probability proportional to the cluster size, that is, the number of residential households counted in the 2004 census. A household listing operation was then carried out in all of the selected clusters, and the resulting lists of households served as the sampling frame for the selection of households in the second stage. In the second stage of selection, a fixed number of 20 households was selected in each cluster with an equal probability systematic selection. A subsample of two-thirds of the selected households was identified for anthropometry measurements.

Refer to Appendix A in the final report (Jordan Population and Family Health Survey 2012) for details of sampling weights calculation.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2012 JPFHS used two questionnaires, namely the Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire (see Appendix D). The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of the sampled households, and visitors who slept in the household the night before the interview, and to obtain information on each household member’s age, sex, educational attainment, relationship to the head of the household, and marital status. In addition, questions were included on the socioeconomic characteristics of the household, such as source of water, sanitation facilities, and the availability of durable goods. Moreover, the questionnaire included questions about child discipline. The Household Questionnaire was also used to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview (ever-married women age 15-49 years). In addition, all women age 15-49 and children under age 5 living in the subsample of households were eligible for height and weight measurement and anemia testing.

The Woman’s Questionnaire was administered to ever-married women age 15-49 and collected information on the following topics: • Respondent’s background characteristics • Birth history • Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of family planning and exposure to family planning messages • Maternal health (antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care) • Immunization and health of children under age 5 • Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices • Marriage and husband’s background characteristics • Fertility preferences • Respondent’s employment • Knowledge of AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) • Other health issues specific to women • Early childhood development • Domestic violence

In addition, information on births, pregnancies, and contraceptive use and discontinuation during the five years prior to the survey was collected using a monthly calendar.

The Household and Woman’s Questionnaires were based on the model questionnaires developed by the MEASURE DHS program. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaires were made in order to provide detailed information specific to Jordan. The questionnaires were then translated into Arabic.

Anthropometric data were collected during the 2012 JPFHS in a subsample of two-thirds of the selected households in each cluster. All women age 15-49 and children age 0-4 in these households were measured for height using Shorr height boards and for weight using electronic Seca scales. In addition, a drop of capillary blood was taken from these women and children in the field to measure their hemoglobin level using the HemoCue system. Hemoglobin testing was used to estimate the prevalence of anemia.

Cleaning operations

Fieldwork and data processing activities overlapped. Data processing began two weeks after the start of the fieldwork. After field editing of questionnaires for completeness and consistency, the questionnaires for each cluster were packaged together and sent to the central office in Amman, where they were registered and stored. Special teams were formed to carry out office editing and coding of the openended questions.

Data entry and verification started after two weeks of office data processing. The process of data entry, including 100 percent reentry, editing, and cleaning, was done by using PCs and the CSPro (Census and Survey Processing) computer package, developed specially for such surveys. The CSPro program allows data to be edited while being entered. Data processing operations were completed by early January 2013. A data processing specialist from ICF International made a trip to Jordan in February 2013 to follow up on data editing and cleaning and to work on the tabulation of results for the survey preliminary report, which was published in March 2013. The tabulations for this report were completed in April 2013.

Response rate

In all, 16,120 households were selected for the survey and, of these, 15,722 were found to be occupied households. Of these households, 15,190 (97 percent) were successfully interviewed.

In the households interviewed, 11,673 ever-married women age 15-49 were identified and interviews were completed with 11,352 women, or 97 percent of all eligible women.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2012 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2012 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2012 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer

The primary data consist of allele or haplotype frequencies for N=1036 anonymized U.S. population samples. Additional files are supplements to the associated publications. Any changes to spreadsheets are listed in the "Change Log" tab within each spreadsheet. DOI numbers for associated publications are listed below, under "References".

This collection consists of modified records from CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 1960 PUBLIC USE SAMPLE [UNITED STATES]: ONE-IN-ONE HUNDRED SAMPE (ICPSR 7756). The original records consisted of 120-character household records and 120-character person records, whereas the new modified records are rectangular (each person record is combined with the corresponding household record) with a length of 188, after the deletion of some items. Additional information was added to the data records including typical educational requirement for current occupation, occupational prestige score, and group identification code. This version differs from the original public-use sample in the following ways: ages of persons 15-74 are included, 10 percent of the Black population from each file is included, and Mexican Americans (identified by a Spanish surname) from outside Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas are not included. This dataset uses the 1970 equivalent occupational codes. The Census Bureau originally used two separate codes for the 1970 and 1960 files, but these have been modified and are now identical.

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002

2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)

4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

Geographic coverage

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

Response rate

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households

IntroductionData on engagement in HIV care from population-based samples in sub-Saharan Africa are limited. The objective of this study was to use double-sampling methods to estimate linkage to HIV care, ART initiation, and mortality among all adults diagnosed with HIV by a comprehensive home-based counseling and testing (HBCT) program in western Kenya.MethodsHBCT was conducted door-to-door from December 2009 to April 2011 in three sub-counties of western Kenya by AMPATH (Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare). For those identified as HIV-positive, data were merged with electronic medical records to determine engagement with HIV care. A randomly-drawn follow-up sample of 120 adults identified via HBCT who had not linked to care as of June 2015 in Bunyala sub-county were visited by trained fieldworkers to ascertain HIV care engagement and vital status. Double-sampled data were used to generate, via multinomial regression, predicted probabilities of engagement in care and mortality among those whose status could not be ascertained by matching with the electronic medical records in the three catchments.ResultsIncorporating information from the double-sampling yielded estimates of prospective linkage to HIV care that ranged from 40–45%. Mortality estimates of those who did not engage in care following HBCT ranged from 12–16%. Among those who linked to care following HBCT, between 72–81% initiated ART.DiscussionIn settings without universal national identifiers, rates of linkage to care from community-based programs may be subject to substantial underestimation. Follow-up samples of those with missing information can be used to partially correct this bias, as has been demonstrated previously for mortality among those who were lost-to-care programs. There is a need for harmonized data systems across health systems and programs.

This project addresses major gaps in knowledge on vital rates such as age to maturity, survival, sex ratios, and population size (including the males)whcih have made it difficult to conduct meaningful population and risk assessments. Although vital rates are difficult to observe directly, genetic analysis provides a practical approach to understand these processes. Understanding the proportion of males to females in any population has important consequences for population demographic studies. Using hatchling and maternal DNA fingerprints, one can deduce the paternal genotypes ? from one to many fathers per clutch. The resulting genotypes represent individual males that are actively breeding in the population. This means that males can effectively be sampled without ever having seen them or having to catch them in the field. The nesting population on St. Croix is an important US Index Population for leatherbacks that has been intensively monitored using a variety of Capture-Mark-Recapture (CMR) methods since 1981 (Dutton et al. 2005). Due to the richness and consistency of the demographic data, this population offers unique opportunities for research and development of tools & approaches for getting at vital rate parameters that are needed to improve stock assessments in sea turtles, as identified in the recent NRC Report (2010). These approaches can then be applied to other populations, e.g. the critically endangered Pacific leatherback. We have developed non-injurious in-situ techniques to mass sample large numbers of live hatchlings for genetic fingerprinting as part of a long term CMR experiment, and also demonstrated the feasibility of using hatchling genotyping and kinship analysis to determine the genotypes and number of breeding males in the population (Stewart & Dutton 2011). We have sampled a total of 17,087 hatchlings between 2009-2011 as part of this project, will continue field effort in 2012 toward the goal of a minimum sampling of 50,000 hatchlings over the next 2-4 years. At an appropriate time in the future, we will use high throughput genotyping methods currently being developed in the next 2-4 years to create a database of individual hatchling identifications (?genetic tags?) that will be compared to those first time nesters sampled annually into the future. This project will also genotype a subset of the samples collected in 2011 to assess males in two consecutive seasons for a more accurate census of the number of males in the breeding population and to determine the extent of male fidelity and breeding periodicity. Objectives include 1) mass-tagging of leatherback hatchlings for Capture-Mark-Recapture (CMR) studies to determine age at first reproduction and age-specific survival rates and 2) application of kinship approaches to reconstruct parental genotypes from mother-offspring comparison to census males, determine operational sex ratios (OSR) of the breeding population, reproductive success of males and mating system.

A public-use microdata sample focusing on the older population created from the 1990 census. This sample consists of 3 percent of households with at least one member aged 60 or older. Although, the highest age presented is age 90, this allows analysis of data on the very old for most states with a reasonable degree of reliability. Since data for all members in households containing a person 60 years and over will be on the file, users will be able to analyze patterns such as living arrangements and sources of household income from which older members may benefit. Additionally, users will be able to augment the PUMS-O sample with a PUMS file. The Census Bureau has issued two regular PUMS files for the entire population. One PUMS file will contain 1 percent of all households; the other PUMS file will contain 5 percent of all households. Both files have most sample data items, and differ only in geographical composition. The 1-percent file contains geographic areas that reflect metropolitan vs. non-metropolitan areas. The 5-percent file shows counties or groups of counties as well as large sub-county areas such as places of 100,000 or more. The geography on the 5-percent PUMS file matches that of the PUMS-O file. Since data for different households are present on the two files, users can merge the PUMS-O file with the 5-percent PUMS to construct an 8-percent sample. However, weighted averages must be constructed for any estimates created because each sample yields state-level estimates. Thus, it is possible to analyze substate areas even for the very old. In states where the geographic areas identified on the PUMS-O and the 5-percent PUMS are coterminous with State Planning and Service Areas (used by service providers in relation to the Older Americans Act), the Planning and Service Areas are identified. * Dates of Study: 1990-2000 Links: 1980: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/08101 2000: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/04204

Abstract

The 2023 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is the eighth Population and Family Health Survey conducted in Jordan, following those conducted in 1990, 1997, 2002, 2007, 2009, 2012, and 2017–18. It was implemented by the Department of Statistics (DoS) at the request of the Ministry of Health (MoH).

The primary objective of the 2023 JPFHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of key demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the 2023 JPFHS: • Collected data at the national level that allowed calculation of key demographic indicators • Explored the direct and indirect factors that determine levels of and trends in fertility and childhood mortality • Measured contraceptive knowledge and practice • Collected data on key aspects of family health, including immunisation coverage among children, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea and other diseases among children under age 5, and maternity care indicators such as antenatal visits and assistance at delivery • Obtained data on child feeding practices, including breastfeeding, and conducted anthropometric measurements to assess the nutritional status of children under age 5 and women age 15–49 • Conducted haemoglobin testing with eligible children age 6–59 months and women age 15–49 to gather information on the prevalence of anaemia • Collected data on women’s and men’s knowledge and attitudes regarding sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS • Obtained data on women’s experience of emotional, physical, and sexual violence • Gathered data on disability among household members

The information collected through the 2023 JPFHS is intended to assist policymakers and programme managers in evaluating and designing programmes and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population. The survey also provides indicators relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for Jordan.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

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

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49, men aged 15-59, and all children aged 0-4 resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used for the 2023 JPFHS was the 2015 Jordan Population and Housing Census (JPHC) frame. The survey was designed to produce representative results for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas separately, for each of the country’s 12 governorates, and for four nationality domains: the Jordanian population, the Syrian population living in refugee camps, the Syrian population living outside of camps, and the population of other nationalities. Each of the 12 governorates is subdivided into districts, each district into subdistricts, each subdistrict into localities, and each locality into areas and subareas. In addition to these administrative units, during the 2015 JPHC each subarea was divided into convenient area units called census blocks. An electronic file of a complete list of all of the census blocks is available from DoS. The list contains census information on households, populations, geographical locations, and socioeconomic characteristics of each block. Based on this list, census blocks were regrouped to form a general statistical unit of moderate size, called a cluster, which is widely used in various surveys as the primary sampling unit (PSU). The sample clusters for the 2023 JPFHS were selected from the frame of cluster units provided by the DoS.

The sample for the 2023 JPFHS was a stratified sample selected in two stages from the 2015 census frame. Stratification was achieved by separating each governorate into urban and rural areas. In addition, the Syrian refugee camps in Zarqa and Mafraq each formed a special sampling stratum. In total, 26 sampling strata were constructed. Samples were selected independently in each sampling stratum, through a twostage selection process, according to the sample allocation. Before the sample selection, the sampling frame was sorted by district and subdistrict within each sampling stratum. By using a probability proportional to size selection at the first stage of sampling, an implicit stratification and proportional allocation were achieved at each of the lower administrative levels.

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

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Five questionnaires were used for the 2023 JPFHS: (1) the Household Questionnaire, (2) the Woman’s Questionnaire, (3) the Man’s Questionnaire, (4) the Biomarker Questionnaire, and (5) the Fieldworker Questionnaire. The questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s model questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Jordan. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organisations, and international donors. After all questionnaires were finalised in English, they were translated into Arabic.

Cleaning operations

All electronic data files for the 2023 JPFHS were transferred via SynCloud to the DoS central office in Amman, where they were stored on a password-protected computer. The data processing operation included secondary editing, which required resolution of computer-identified inconsistencies and coding of open-ended questions. Data editing was accomplished using CSPro software. During the duration of fieldwork, tables were generated to check various data quality parameters, and specific feedback was given to the teams to improve performance. Secondary editing and data processing were initiated in July and completed in September 2023.

Response rate

A total of 20,054 households were selected for the sample, of which 19,809 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 19,475 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98%.

In the interviewed households, 13,020 eligible women age 15–49 were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 12,595 women, yielding a response rate of 97%. In the subsample of households selected for the male survey, 6,506 men age 15–59 were identified as eligible for individual interviews and 5,873 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 90%.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and in data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2023 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (2023 JPFHS) to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2023 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and sample size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected by simple random sampling, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2023 JPFHS sample was the result of a multistage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed using SAS programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearisation method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

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

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables

• Household age distribution
• Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
• Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men
• Age displacement at age 14/15
• Age displacement at age 49/50
• Pregnancy outcomes by years preceding the survey
• Completeness of reporting
• Standardization exercise results from anthropometry training
• Height and weight data completeness and quality for children
• Height measurements from random subsample of measured children
• Interference in height and weight measurements of children
• Interference in height and weight measurements of women
• Heaping in

1: This value is the absolute value of the ratio of the estimated to the known (i.e. Column 2/Column 1) which is transformed with a logarithm (base 2). Successive columns (5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17) use the preceding estimation value.Recursive Back Estimation Process to Identify and Eliminate Poor Predictors Using the Original Estimator Without Weights.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Lebanon population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Lebanon across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Lebanon was 182, a 0.55% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Lebanon population was 181, a decline of 0% compared to a population of 181 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Lebanon decreased by 120. In this period, the peak population was 302 in the year 2000. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Lebanon is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Lebanon population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. 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 Lebanon Population by Year. You can refer the same here

US Census Bureau American Community Survey 2013-2017 Estimates in the Keys the Valley Region for Race/Ethnicity, Educational Attainment, Unemployment, Health Insurance, Disability and Vehicle Access.

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a nationwide survey designed to provide communities with reliable and timely social, economic, housing, and demographic data every year. Because the ACS is based on a sample, rather than all housing units and people, ACS estimates have a degree of uncertainty associated with them, called sampling error. In general, the larger the sample, the smaller the level of sampling error. Data associated with a small town will have a greater degree of error than data associated with an entire county. To help users understand the impact of sampling error on data reliability, the Census Bureau provides a “margin of error” for each published ACS estimate. The margin of error, combined with the ACS estimate, give users a range of values within which the actual “real-world” value is likely to fall.

Single-year and multiyear estimates from the ACS are all “period” estimates derived from a sample collected over a period of time, as opposed to “point-in-time” estimates such as those from past decennial censuses. For example, the 2000 Census “long form” sampled the resident U.S. population as of April 1, 2000. The estimates here were derived from a sample collected over time from 2013-2017.

Race/Ethnicity

·
WPop: Total population of those who identify as white alone (B01001A).

·
PWPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as white alone (B01001A).

·
BPop: Total population of those who identify as black or African American alone (B01001B).

·
PWPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as black or African American alone (B01001B).

·
AmIPop: Total population of those who identify as American Indian and Alaska Native alone (B01001C).

·
PAmIPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as American Indian and Alaska Native alone (B01001C).

·
APop: Total population of those who identify as Asian alone (B01001D).

·
PAPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as Asian alone (B01001D).

·
PacIPop: Total population of those who identify as Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone (B01001E).

·
PPacIPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone (B01001E).

·
OPop: Total population of those who identify as Some Other Race alone (B01001F).

·
POPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as Some Other Race alone (B01001F).

·
MPop: Total population of those who identify as Two or More Races (B01001G).

·
PMPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as Two or More Races (B01001G).

·
WnHPop: Total population of those who identify as White alone, not Hispanic or Latino (B01001H).

·
PWnHPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as White alone, not Hispanic or Latino (B01001H).

·
LPop: Total population of those who identify as Hispanic or Latino (B01001I).

·
PLPop: Percentage of total population that identifies as Hispanic or Latino (B01001I).

Educational Attainment

·
EdLHS1824: Total population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has not received a High School degree (S1501).

·
PEdLHS1824: Percentage of population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has not received a High School degree (S1501).

·
EdLHS1824: Total population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received a High School degree or equivalent (S1501).

·
PEdLHS1824: Percentage of population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received a High School degree or equivalent (S1501).

·
EdSC1824: Total population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received some amount of college education or an associate’s degree (S1501).

·
PEdSC1824: Percentage of population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received some amount of college education or an associate’s degree (S1501).

·
EdB1824: Total population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received bachelor’s degree or higher (S1501).

·
PEdB1824: Percentage of the population between the ages of 18 and 24 that has received bachelor’s degree or higher (S1501).

·
EdL9: Total population ages 25 and over that has received less than a ninth grade education (S1501).

·
PEdL9: Percentage of population ages 25 and over that has received less than a ninth grade education (S1501).

·
Ed912nD: Total population ages 25 and over that has received some degree of education between grades 9 and 12 but has not received a high school degree (S1501).

·
PEd912nD: Percentage of population ages 25 and over that has received some degree of education between grades 9 and 12 but has not received a high school degree (S1501).

·
EdHS: Total population ages 25 and over that has received a high school degree or equivalent (S1501).

·
PEdHS: Percentage of population ages 25 and over that has received a high school degree or equivalent (S1501).

·
EdSC: Total population ages 25 and over with some college education but no degree (S1501).

·
PEdSC: Percentage of population ages 25 and over with some college education but no degree (S1501).

·
EdAssoc: Total population ages 25 and over with an associate’s degree (S1501).

·
PEdAssoc: Percentage of population population ages 25 and over with an associate’s degree (S1501).

·
EdB: Total population ages 25 and over with bachelor’s degree (S1501).

·
PEdB: Percentage of population ages 25 and over with bachelor’s degree (S1501).

·
EdG: Total population ages 25 and over with a graduate or professional degree (S1501).

·
PEdG: Percentage of population ages 25 and over with a graduate or professional degree (S1501).

Unemployment, Health Insurance, Disability

·
UnempR: Unemployment rate among the population ages 16 and over (S2301).

·
UnIn: Total non-institutionalized population without health insurance (B27001).

·
PUnIn: Percentage of non-institutionalized populations without health insurance (B27001).

·
Disab: Total non-institutionalized population with a disability (S1810).

·
PDisab: Percentage of non-institutionalized populations with a disability (B27001).

Vehicle Access

·
OwnNV: Total number of owner-occupied households without a vehicle (B25044).

·
POwnNV: Percentage of owner-occupied households without a vehicle (B25044).

·
OwnnV: Total number of owner-occupied households with n numbers of vehicles (B25044).

·
POwnnV: Percentage of owner-occupied households with n numbers of vehicles (B25044).

·
RentNV: Total number of renter-occupied households without a vehicle (B25044).

·
PRentNV: Percentage of renter-occupied households without a vehicle (B25044).

·
RentnV: Total number of renter-occupied households with n numbers of vehicles (B25044).

·
POwnnV: Percentage of renter-occupied households with n numbers of vehicles (B25044).

Abstract

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

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

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

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

UPDATING OF SAMPLING FRAME

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

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

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

Cleaning operations

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

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

Response rate

A total of 7,924 occupied housing units were selected for the survey; from among those, 7,592 households were found. Of the occupied households, 7,335 (97 percent) were successfully interviewed. In those households, 5,765 eligible women were identified, and complete interviews were obtained with 5,548 of them (96 percent of all eligible women). Thus, the overall response rate of the 1997 JPFHS was 93 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among the women was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are subject to two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing (such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding questions either by the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors). Although during the implementation of the 1997 JPFHS numerous efforts were made to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are not only impossible to avoid but also difficult to evaluate statistically.

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

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, since the 1997 JDHS-II sample resulted from a multistage stratified design, formulae of higher complexity had to be used. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1997 JDHS-II was the ISSA Sampling Error Module, which uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics, such as fertility and mortality rates.

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

Data appraisal

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

Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.

Abstract

The Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of women of reproductive ages (15-49) and men aged 15 to 60. The survey was designed to collect data on socioeconomic characteristics, marriage patterns, birth history, breastfeeding, use of contraception, immunisation of children, accessibility to health and family planning services, treatment of children during times of illness, and the nutritional status of children and their mothers.

The primary objectives of the TDHS were to: - Collect data for the evaluation of family planning and health programmes, - Determine the contraceptive prevalence rate, which will help in the design of future national family planning programmes, and - Assess the demographic situation of the country.

Geographic coverage

The Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey. This sample should allow for separate analyses in urban and rural areas, and for estimation of contraceptive use in each of the 20 regions located on the mainland and in Zanzibar.

Analysis unit

• Households
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-60

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The principal objective of the Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was to collect data on fertility, family planning, and health of the people. This survey involved randomly selected women aged 15-49 and men aged 15-60 in selected households.

Before the sampling frame was developed, two possibilities for the TDHS sample design were considered: - The 1988 Population census list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) - The National Master Sample for Tanzania created in 1986 (NMS).

The NMS was intended mainly for agricultural purposes and, at that time, only for rural areas. The NMS was based on the 1978 Census information while the urban frame was still being worked upon. Therefore, it was decided that the TDHS sample design would use the 1988 Census information as the basic sampling frame. Since the TDHS sample was to be clustered, it was necessary to have sampling units of manageable and fairly uniform size and with very well defined boundaries. The 1988 Census frame provided the list of enumeration area units (EAs) that had well defined boundaries and manageable uniform size. Therefore, EAs were used as primary sampling units (PSUs).

The target of the TDHS sample was about 7850 women age 15-49 with completed interviews. This sample should allow for separate analyses in urban and rural areas, and for estimation of contraceptive use in each of the 20 regions located on the mainland and in Zanzibar. Estimates for large domains (by combination of a group of regions) were also taken into consideration.

The TDHS used a three-stage sample. The frame was stratified by urban and rural areas. The primary sampling units in the TDHS survey were the wards/branches. The design involved the target of 350 completed interviews for each of 19 regions on the mainland and 500 in each of Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar.

In the first stage, the wards/branches were systematically selected with probability proportional to size (according to 1988 census information). In a second sampling stage, two EAs per selected rural ward/branch and one EA per selected urban ward/branch were chosen with probability proportional to size (also according to 1988 census information). In total, 357 EAs were selected for the TDHS, 95 in the urban area and 262 in the rural. A new listing of households was made shortly before the TDHS fieldwork by special teams including a total of 14 field workers. These teams visited the selected EAs all over the country to list the names of the heads of the households and obtain the population composition of each household (total number of persons in the household). In urban areas, the address of the dwelling was also recorded in order to make it easy to identify the household during the main survey. A fixed number of 30 households in each rural EA and 20 in each urban EA were selected.

About 9560 households were needed to achieve the required sample size, assuming 80 percent overall household completion rate.

See detailed sampling information in the APPENDIX B of the final 1991-1992 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The household, female, and male questionnaires were designed by following the Model Questionnaire "B" which is for low contraceptive prevalence countries. Some adaptations were made to suit the Tanzania situation, but the core questions were not changed. The original questionnaire was prepared in English and later translated into Kiswahili, the language that is widely spoken in the country. There are parts in the country where people are not very conversant with Kiswahili and would find it difficult to respond in Kiswahili but would understand when they are asked anything. The translated document was given to another translator to translate it back into English and comparisons were made to determine the differences.

PRETEST

A pretest to assess the viability of the survey instruments, particularly the questionnaires and the field organization, was carried out in Iringa Rural District, Iringa Region. It covered 16 enumeration areas with a total of 320 households. The pretest, which took a month to complete, was carded out in November/December, 1990, and covered both rural and urban EAs.

The pretest training took two weeks and consisted of classroom training and field practice in neighborhood areas. In all, 14 newly recruited interviewers and the Census staff were involved. The Census staffs who were to be transformed into the TDHS team handled the training for both the fieldwork management and the questionnaire. During the later fieldwork, they supervised the field exercise.

During the fieldwork, the administrative structure of the CCM Party, which involved the Party Branch Offices and the ten-cell leadership, were utilized in an effort to secure the maximum confidence and cooperation of the people in the areas where the team was working. At the end of the fieldwork, the interviewers and the supervisory team returned to the head office in Dares Salaam for debriefing and discussion of their field experiences, particularly those related to the questionnaires and the logistic problems that were encountered. All these experiences were used to improve upon the final version of the questionnaires and the overall logistic arrangements.

Response rate

Out of the 9282 households selected for interview, 8561 households could be located and 8327 were actually interviewed. The shortfall between selected and interviewed households was largely due to the fact that many dwellings were either vacant or destroyed or no competent respondents were present at the time of the interview. A total of 9647 eligible women (i.e., women age 15-49 who spent the night before the interview in a sampled household) were identified for interview, and 9238 women were actually interviewed (96 percent response rate). The main reason for non-interview was absence from the home or incapacitation.

The Tanzania DHS male survey covered men aged between 15 and 60 years who were living in selected households (every fourth household of the female survey). The results of the survey show that 2392 eligible men were identified and 2114 men were interviewed (88 percent response rate). Men were generally not interviewed because they were either incapacitated or not at home during the time of the survey.

Sampling error estimates

The results from sample surveys are affected by two types of errors, non-sampling error and sampling error. Non-sampling error is due to mistakes made in carrying out field activities, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, errors in the way the questions are asked, misunderstanding on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although efforts were made to minimize this type of error during the design and implementation of the TDHS, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be measured statistically. The sample of women selected in the TDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each one would have yielded results that differed somewhat from the actual sample selected. The sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples; although it is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

Sampling error is usually measured in terms of standard error of a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which one can be reasonably assured that, apart from non-sampling errors, the true value of the variable for the whole population falls. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that same statistic as measured in 95 percent of all possible samples with the same design (and expected size) will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic.

If the sample of women had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the Tanzania DHS sample designs depended on stratification, stages, and clusters. Consequently, it was necessary to utilize more complex formulas. The computer package CLUSTERS, developed by the International Statistical

Abstract

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 100% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS OF THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN

The Department of Statistics (DOS) carried out four rounds of the 2016 Employment and Unemployment Survey (EUS). The survey rounds covered a sample of about fourty nine thousand households Nation-wide. The sampled households were selected using a stratified multi-stage cluster sampling design.

It is worthy to mention that the DOS employed new technology in data collection and data processing. Data was collected using electronic questionnaire instead of a hard copy, namely a hand held device (PDA).

The survey main objectives are: - To identify the demographic, social and economic characteristics of the population and manpower. - To identify the occupational structure and economic activity of the employed persons, as well as their employment status. - To identify the reasons behind the desire of the employed persons to search for a new or additional job. - To measure the economic activity participation rates (the number of economically active population divided by the population of 15+ years old). - To identify the different characteristics of the unemployed persons. - To measure unemployment rates (the number of unemployed persons divided by the number of economically active population of 15+ years old) according to the various characteristics of the unemployed, and the changes that might take place in this regard. - To identify the most important ways and means used by the unemployed persons to get a job, in addition to measuring durations of unemployment for such persons. - To identify the changes overtime that might take place regarding the above-mentioned variables.

The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Agency were cleaned and harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, in the context of a major project that started in 2009. During which extensive efforts have been exerted to acquire, clean, harmonize, preserve and disseminate micro data of existing labor force surveys in several Arab countries.

Geographic coverage

Covering a sample representative on the national level (Kingdom), governorates, and the three Regions (Central, North and South).

Analysis unit

1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.

Universe

The survey covered a national sample of households and all individuals permanently residing in surveyed households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

THE CLEANED AND HARMONIZED VERSION OF THE SURVEY DATA PRODUCED AND PUBLISHED BY THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH FORUM REPRESENTS 100% OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS OF THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Cleaning operations

----> Raw Data

A tabulation results plan has been set based on the previous Employment and Unemployment Surveys while the required programs were prepared and tested. When all prior data processing steps were completed, the actual survey results were tabulated using an ORACLE package. The tabulations were then thoroughly checked for consistency of data. The final report was then prepared, containing detailed tabulations as well as the methodology of the survey.

----> Harmonized Data

• The SPSS package is used to clean and harmonize the datasets.
• The harmonization process starts with a cleaning process for all raw data files received from the Statistical Agency.
• All cleaned data files are then merged to produce one data file on the individual level containing all variables subject to harmonization.
• A country-specific program is generated for each dataset to generate/ compute/ recode/ rename/ format/ label harmonized variables.
• A post-harmonization cleaning process is then conducted on the data.
• Harmonized data is saved on the household as well as the individual level, in SPSS and then converted to STATA, to be disseminated.

Abstract

The Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) programme, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 1999 TRCHS was to collect data at the national level (with breakdowns by urban-rural and Mainland-Zanzibar residence wherever warranted) on fertility levels and preferences, family planning use, maternal and child health, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of young children, childhood mortality levels, knowledge and behaviour regarding HIV/AIDS, and the availability of specific health services within the community.1 Related objectives were to produce these results in a timely manner and to ensure that the data were disseminated to a wide audience of potential users in governmental and nongovernmental organisations within and outside Tanzania. The ultimate intent is to use the information to evaluate current programmes and to design new strategies for improving health and family planning services for the people of Tanzania.

Geographic coverage

National. The sample was designed to provide estimates for the whole country, for urban and rural areas separately, and for Zanzibar and, in some cases, Unguja and Pemba separately.

Analysis unit

• Households
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The TRCHS used a three-stage sample design. Overall, 176 census enumeration areas were selected (146 on the Mainland and 30 in Zanzibar) with probability proportional to size on an approximately self-weighting basis on the Mainland, but with oversampling of urban areas and Zanzibar. To reduce costs and maximise the ability to identify trends over time, these enumeration areas were selected from the 357 sample points that were used in the 1996 TDHS, which in turn were selected from the 1988 census frame of enumeration in a two-stage process (first wards/branches and then enumeration areas within wards/branches). Before the data collection, fieldwork teams visited the selected enumeration areas to list all the households. From these lists, households were selected to be interviewed. The sample was designed to provide estimates for the whole country, for urban and rural areas separately, and for Zanzibar and, in some cases, Unguja and Pemba separately. The health facilities component of the TRCHS involved visiting hospitals, health centres, and pharmacies located in areas around the households interviewed. In this way, the data from the two components can be linked and a richer dataset produced.

See detailed sample implementation in the APPENDIX A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The household survey component of the TRCHS involved three questionnaires: 1) a Household Questionnaire, 2) a Women’s Questionnaire for all individual women age 15-49 in the selected households, and 3) a Men’s Questionnaire for all men age 15-59.

The health facilities survey involved six questionnaires: 1) a Community Questionnaire administered to men and women in each selected enumeration area; 2) a Facility Questionnaire; 3) a Facility Inventory; 4) a Service Provider Questionnaire; 5) a Pharmacy Inventory Questionnaire; and 6) a questionnaire for the District Medical Officers.

All these instruments were based on model questionnaires developed for the MEASURE programme, as well as on the questionnaires used in the 1991-92 TDHS, the 1994 TKAP, and the 1996 TDHS. These model questionnaires were adapted for use in Tanzania during meetings with representatives from the Ministry of Health, the University of Dar es Salaam, the Tanzania Food and Nutrition Centre, USAID/Tanzania, UNICEF/Tanzania, UNFPA/Tanzania, and other potential data users. The questionnaires and manual were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Kiswahili.

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his/her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for individual interview and children under five who were to be weighed and measured. Information was also collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, ownership of various consumer goods, and use of iodised salt. Finally, the Household Questionnaire was used to collect some rudimentary information about the extent of child labour.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from women age 15-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: · Background characteristics (age, education, religion, type of employment) · Birth history · Knowledge and use of family planning methods · Antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care · Breastfeeding and weaning practices · Vaccinations, birth registration, and health of children under age five · Marriage and recent sexual activity · Fertility preferences · Knowledge and behaviour concerning HIV/AIDS.

The Men’s Questionnaire covered most of these same issues, except that it omitted the sections on the detailed reproductive history, maternal health, and child health. The final versions of the English questionnaires are provided in Appendix E.

Before the questionnaires could be finalised, a pretest was done in July 1999 in Kibaha District to assess the viability of the questions, the flow and logical sequence of the skip pattern, and the field organisation. Modifications to the questionnaires, including wording and translations, were made based on lessons drawn from the exercise.

Response rate

In all, 3,826 households were selected for the sample, out of which 3,677 were occupied. Of the households found, 3,615 were interviewed, representing a response rate of 98 percent. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant or in which the inhabitants were not at home despite of several callbacks.

In the interviewed households, a total of 4,118 eligible women (i.e., women age 15-49) were identified for the individual interview, and 4,029 women were actually interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. A total of 3,792 eligible men (i.e., men age 15-59), were identified for the individual interview, of whom 3,542 were interviewed, representing a response rate of 93 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among both eligible men and women was the failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The lower response rate among men than women was due to the more frequent and longer absences of men.

The response rates are lower in urban areas due to longer absence of respondents from their homes. One-member households are more common in urban areas and are more difficult to interview because they keep their houses locked most of the time. In urban settings, neighbours often do not know the whereabouts of such people.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the TRCHS to minimise this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the TRCHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the TRCHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the TRCHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (SAMPERR). This module used the Taylor linearisation method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rate

Note: See detailed sampling error calculation in the APPENDIX B

Geographic origin and sample size (N) for both identification databases, population (Pop) and individual (Ind), for the 27 Malaysian populations included in this study.

Monitoring population dynamics is of fundamental importance in conservation but assessing trends in abundance can be costly, especially in large and rough areas. Obtaining trend estimations from counts performed in only a portion of the total area (sample counts) can be a cost-effective method to improve the monitoring and conservation of species difficult to count. We tested the effectiveness of sample counts in monitoring population trends of wild animals, using as a model population the Alpine ibex (Capra ibex) in the Gran Paradiso National Park (Italy), both with computer simulations and using historical count data collected over the last 65 years. Despite sample counts failed to correctly estimate the true population abundance, sampling half of the target area could reliably monitor the trend of the target population. In case of strong changes in abundance, an even lower proportion of the total area could be sufficient to identify the direction of the population trend. However, when there is a high yearly trend variability, the required number of samples increases and even counting in the entire area can be ineffective to detect population trends. The effect of other parameters, such as which portion of the area is sampled and detectability, was lower, but these should be tested case by case. Sample counts could therefore constitute a viable alternative to assess population trends, allowing for important, cost-effective improvements in the monitoring of wild animals of conservation interest. Methods We here provide the R script to run all the simulations in the paper. See Methods and Supplementary materials S1 and S2 for more info

Abstract

The Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI) in Peru carried out the Encuesta Dirigida a la Población Venezolana que Reside en el País (ENPOVE) survey between the months of November and December 2018 in order to gain a better understanding of the Venezuelan population residing in Peru.

The survey was carried out in the capital cities in the departments of Tumbes, La Libertad, Lima-Callao, Arequipa and Cusco, which together are home to 85% of the Venezuelan population in the country. The purpose of the survey was to provide reliable data on the living conditions of the Venezuelan population residing in Peru, including: demographic and social aspects, immigration status, discrimination, violence, health, employment, education, access to basic services, housing and home equipment.

The information can be used by international organizations, researchers, and public policy makers to formulate actions, policies, plans, programs, and projects to meet the most urgent needs of this group. The World Bank, UNHCR, IOM, UNFPA and UNICEF provided technical and financial support to the survey.

Geographic coverage

Urban area of capital cities of the regions of Tumbes, La Libertad, Arequipa, Cusco, Lima and Callao.

Analysis unit

Household and individual

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling is probabilistic and stratified. The sampling consists of two stages, the primary sampling unit being the block, which is defined as the urban geographic area delimited by roads. The secondary sampling unit is the dwelling with at least one Venezuelan person that exists within a block. For the households that are finally selected, information is obtained from all the individuals.

The sampling frame for the blocks was constructed as follows: i) The addresses of 58,067 Venezuelan people registered in the 2017 Population and Housing Census were identified. ii) The addresses of 10,076 people were available registered in the registry of Venezuelans who applied for the Temporary Permit of Permanence from the National Superintendency of Migration of the Ministry of the Interior. iii) The blocks containing the addresses of the aforementioned information sources were identified using the Geographic Information System. A global framework of 19,074 blocks was built.

The concept of block used in the survey is a physical area delimited by streets, avenues, roads, canals, etc. easily identifiable and can contain one or more homes, parks, vacant lots, sports fields, etc.

The original design of the sample included the construction of three strata based on the number of dwellings with a Venezuelan population found in each block of the sampling frame: 1 to 5, 6 to 10, greater than 10. On the other hand, the population of the city of Lima was divided into 4 zones with the following districts:

North Lima: Los Olivos, San Martn De Porres, Comas, Carabayllo, Independencia, Puente Piedra East Lima: San Juan De Lurigancho, Ate, Santa Anita, El Agustino, San Luis, La Molina, Lurigancho Downtown Lima: La Victoria, Lima, Santiago De Surco, Surquillo, San Miguel, Brea, Barranco, Rmac, Lince Jesus Maria, Magdalena Del Mar, San Borja South Lima: Chorrillos, San Juan De Miraflores, Villa El Salvador, Villa Mara Del Triunfo, Lurn, Pachacamac

The housing framework was built by means of an exhaustive registry of buildings and dwellings in each of the selected blocks, identifying those places, be they dwellings or establishments, that had a population from Venezuela. The concept of housing for the purposes of the survey included private and collective dwellings (hotels, hostels, lodgings, churches and shelters), where the Venezuelan population is found. This concept is different from the one used in the regular INEI household surveys, which only considers private households with a maximum of 5 households. The concept of the household used was: People, whether or not they are related, who share the main meals and attend to their vital needs in common. This concept is different from that used in the INEI household surveys, where the budget is considered.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Abstract

The main purpose of the KPMS surveys is to provide data for the study of multiple aspects of household welfare and behavior, analysis of poverty, and understanding the effect of government policies on households.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Community

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

In order to expedite the survey process, NATSTATCOM used much of the same sample design and survey instruments as those used for the 1993 Baseline Survey. However, the Fall 1996-1998 KPMS surveys used a new sampling frame based on the Kyrgyz Household Registration System. This system was taken from the Census Posts intended for use by the first National Census of the Kyrgyz Republic. Using this system, NATSTATCOM updated the central household registration files effective January 1, 1996, and the information that was used for the sampling frame was as up to date as possible. The procedures followed in the stratification and identification of Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) were similar for all rounds of the KPMS as discussed below.

Formation of Strata

Initially the country was divided into seven (7) strata defined by oblasts (Oblasts are administrative divisions of the country which in turn are sub-divided in to Rayons) and by residence location (i.e. urban vs. rural) within oblasts. The rural portion of Bishkek oblast was combined with the rural portion of neighboring Chui oblast for stratification purposes as Bishkek has practically no rural population.

Selection of PSUs and Households

For the 1998 KPMS, a total of 255 PSUs (of which 178 were urban and 77 rural) were identified. The estimated total population was around 1.1 million of which about 421,000 was classified as urban. A minimum of 384 households per oblast was targeted in order to get a representative data at the oblast level11. This translated in to a targeted sample size of 2,688 households for the whole of the Kyrgyz Republic (i.e. 384*7 oblasts=2,688). These households were divided into urban (887 households) and rural (1,801 households). The overall projected response rate for the 1998 KPMS was also set at somewhat above 0.90. With an overall sampling rate of 1/336, this resulted in to a sample close to a target size of 3,000 households for the whole survey.

Once the strata and PSUs were formed and identified, selection of sample PSUs and households was then carried out in the following order:

1) Selection of large and small towns12 [Note: For the 1998 KPMS, large towns were defined as those with a population size of 41,125 or larger. Small towns are those with population less than 41,125. This number, according to a NATSTATCOM document was calculated as follows: n=4.7*350*25. This calculation was based on an estimated household size of 4.7, an estimated interval rate of 350 and an average work load per interviewer of 25 households. No further information is available regarding the bases of such an assumption. At the moment, we do not have information about the cut off number that separates large towns from small ones for the other two KPMS.]

2) Selection of Census Posts in urban areas

3) Selection of Ayil Kenshes (village authorities) and population points in rural areas, and

4) Selection of households from selected Census Posts and Ayil Kenshes. In the rural stratum of each oblast, villages were used as the listing units and within these listing units, equal probability sampling methods were used to select the ultimate sampling units (households). In urban areas, the centralized computer listings from various sources of household registration were used for the selection of households. These lists are categorized into four: Type 1 - Private house resident households listed by BTIs Type 2 - Public house residents listed with other organizations with dormitories only Type 3 - Public and private households listed by JSKs Type 4 - Public and private households listed by all other organizations. In some cases, private households were included in the last three public categories (Types 2, 3 and 4). However, only public households were selected from these types since it was believed that any private households listed in these category types were also included in the Type 1 category. The counts for Type 2, 3, and 4 lists were then adjusted based on the oblast estimates of all urban households.13 Prior to actual household sample selection, lists from types 2 to 4 were updated and adjusted to remove private households, so that any potential double eligibility was eliminated. Urban strata were then formed within each oblast based on type of household listing. In most cases, types had to be combined to form strata of a reasonable size.

Within the limits of rounding and requiring at least one sampling unit per stratum, the allocation of sampling units to urban strata was proportional to the number of households projected for that stratum after allowing for removal of duplicates (private households appearing on a BTI and other lists).

As for rural households, selection of urban households was done using systematic random sampling within each stratum except that more subdividing of urban lists was required before selecting the final list sample that defines each sampling unit.

Even though the list sources were identified and sampled using data as of January 1, 1996 (and using projections of unduplicated counts in some cases), the final listings were updated in the field just prior to the survey period. Therefore, the sample households in selected areas were drawn from the most current available listings.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The KPMS surveys were carried out using a household questionnaire and a community (population point) questionnaire. The household questionnaires were used to collect demographic information on the composition of the household, housing, household consumption including home production, as well as economic activities in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors. For each household member, individual level data on health, education, migration and labor was collected using the household questionnaires. Community questionnaires were used to collect price data and the presence of social services and infrastructure in the community (population point) where the sampled household is located.

The household questionnaire was extensive and required several hours of intense interviewing to gather all that was needed from each household and its embers. The household questionnaire was split into two parts. The first part was used to collect data through a face to face interview on household roster, dwelling, education, health, migration, etc. At the end of the first part, members who shop for food for the whole household and those who know most about income, expenditure and savings of other household members were identified and designated as respondents for the next part (second round). The second round of interview was administered two weeks after the first half and collected data on crops, food and animal products produced by the household, food expenditure and home produced food consumption.

Some sections of the household questionnaire such as those that deal with dwelling and expenditure information were administered to the person most knowledgeable of the family's overall expenditures, income and other finances as well as about the family's business activities and employment. In other sections, each adult in each sample household was interviewed individually. The information gathered from each household included extensive data on education, health, employment, migration, reproduction and reproductive health (for women aged 15 to 49), land use, expenditure, revenue and other financial matters, as well as anthropometric measurements (for children 5 years and younger). Information about children under 14 years of age was collected by asking the relevant questions to the adult household member who is primarily responsible for each child's care.

The community (Population Point) questionnaires were administered to each sample cluster. They were used to collect data on prices of goods and services, distance to schools, shopping and medical facilities, types of housing, commercial and private land use and availability of infrastructure.

HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNAIRE

The KPMS household questionnaires generally contain 15 major sections, and each of these sections covers a separate aspect of household activity. In some cases, the section has sub-sections. These household questionnaires were designed to better assess the changing environment brought about by the advent of a market economy and to enable a more in depth analysis of topics such as housing, health, and education. The various sections of the KPMS household questionnaire are described below.The household questionnaires administered in the KPMS surveys are more or less similar with minor modifications and additions in the successive rounds of the KPMS.

POPULATION POINT QUESTIONNAIRE

The community (population point) questionnaire was used to collect information and data that are relevant to the community/population point where the household is located. The questionnaire was designed to be administered in the geographical area of each sample cluster. It was used to collect data regarding prices of goods and services in the local area and data on community infrastructure. Respondents to these questionnaires are those believed to be well informed members of the community that the interviewers identified by going to the rayon, city, oblast administration or other governmental agency located in the population point6. The

AbstractEffective population size is a fundamental parameter in population genetics, evolutionary biology and conservation biology, yet its estimation can be fraught with difficulties. Several methods to estimate Ne from genetic data have been developed which take advantage of various approaches for inferring Ne. The ability of these methods to accurately estimate Ne, however, has not been comprehensively examined. In this study, we employ seven of the most cited methods for estimating Ne from genetic data (Colony2, CoNe, Estim, MLNe, ONeSAMP, TMVP, and NeEstimator including LDNe) across simulated datasets with populations experiencing migration or no migration. The simulated population demographies are an isolated population with no immigration, an island model metapopulation with a sink population receiving immigrants, and an isolation by distance stepping stone model of populations. We find considerable variance in performance of these methods, both within and across demographic scenarios, with some methods performing very poorly. The most accurate estimates of Ne can be obtained by using LDNe, MLNe, or TMVP; however each of these approaches is outperformed by another in a differing demographic scenario. Knowledge of the approximate demography of population as well as the availability of temporal data largely improves Ne estimates. Usage notesNe500_IdealRawPopulationFilesThese are the "true" population files for ideal (isolation) populations of size 500 simulated from Nemo. They contain all individuals and many extra loci, from which these were sampled to obtain the inputs used in analyses (see Program_InputFiles). Temporal samplers used two time points, from which the files here are identified as belonging to generation 0 or generation 1.Ideal500_Raw.zipNe5000_IdealRawPopulationFilesThese are the "true" population files for ideal (isolation) populations of size 5000 simulated from Nemo. They contain all individuals and many extra loci, from which these were sampled to obtain the inputs used in analyses (see Program_InputFiles). Temporal samplers used two time points, from which the files here are identified as belonging to generation 0 or generation 1.Ideal5000_Raw.zipNe50_Generation0_IdealRawPopulationFilesThese are the "true" population files for ideal (isolation) populations of size 50 simulated from Nemo. They contain all individuals and many extra loci, from which these were sampled to obtain the inputs used in analyses (see Program_InputFiles). Temporal samplers used two time points, from which the files here are identified as belonging to generation 0 or generation 1.Ideal50_Gen0.zipNe50_Generation1_IdealRawPopulationFilesThese are the "true" population files for ideal (isolation) populations of size 50 simulated from Nemo. They contain all individuals and many extra loci, from which these were sampled to obtain the inputs used in analyses (see Program_InputFiles). Temporal samplers used two time points, from which the files here are identified as belonging to generation 0 or generation 1.Ideal50_Gen1.zipEstimationPrograms_FormattedInputFilesSee the ReadMe for further details. These are the input files formatted for each analysis program and are the population samples under analysis.Program_InputFiles.zipProgramOutputFilesFor_Colony_Estim_MLNe_NeEstimator_ONeSamp_TMVPThese are the Ne estimates output by the various programs. See the readme for file naming conventions. Because of their large size, CoNe output files are stored separately.Colony_Estim_MLNe_NeEstimator_ONeSamp_TMVP_OutputFiles.zipCoNe_Ideal_OutputFilesThese are outputs for Cone Ideal (isolation) population cases. See the Readme for file naming conventions.CoNe_Mig50_OutputFilesCoNe Ne estimation output files for Migration scenarios with true Ne = 50. See the same readme for other input/output files for naming conventions.CoNe_Mig500_OutputFilesCoNe Ne estimation output files for Migration scenarios with true Ne = 500. See the same readme for other input/output files for naming conventions.CoNe_IBD50_OutputFilesCoNe Ne estimation output files for IBD scenarios with true Ne = 50. See the same readme for other input/output files for naming conventions.CoNe_IBD500_OutputFilesCoNe Ne estimation output files for IBD scenarios with true Ne = 500. See the same readme for other input/output files for naming conventions.ParamFiles_ConversionAndAnalysisScriptsSee the Readme files contained within each subfolder. These are the input files used for nemo simulations (Migration and IBD raw simulation files were >80GB in size when compressed, and may be requested from KJ Gilbert). Otherwise, these input files contain the parameters used in Nemo v2.2.0 to create the raw population files from which individuals were sampled. R scripts for file conversion to the various program inputs as well as for analyzing the various outputs are also included, but are also made public on GitHub at:...