This layer shows household income ranges for households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households (as defined by the U.S. Census). Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. This layer is symbolized to show median household income. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). To view only the census tracts that are predominantly in Tempe, add the expression City is Tempe in the map filter settings.Layer includes:Total households (of various types including households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households as defined by the U.S. Census)Household income bracketsHousehold median income in dollarsHousehold mean income in dollarsA ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Current Vintage: 2018-2022ACS Table(s): S1901 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community SurveyData Preparation: Data table downloaded and joined with Census Tract boundaries that are within or adjacent to the City of Tempe boundaryDate of Census update: December 15, 2023National Figures: data.census.gov

Abstract

The Household Income and Expenditure Survey (NHIES) 2009 was a survey collecting data on income, consumption and expenditure patterns of households, in accordance with methodological principles of statistical enquiries, which were linked to demographic and socio-economic characteristics of households. A Household Income and expenditure Survey was the sole source of information on expenditure, consumption and income patterns of households, which was used to calculate poverty and income distribution indicators. It also served as a statistical infrastructure for the compilation of the national basket of goods used to measure changes in price levels. It was also used for updating the national accounts.

The main objective of the NHIES 2009-2010 was to comprehensively describe the levels of living of Namibians using actual patterns of consumption and income, as well as a range of other socio-economic indicators based on collected data. This survey was designed to inform policy making at the international, national and regional levels within the context of the Fourth National Development Plan, in support of monitoring and evaluation of Vision 2030 and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG's). The NHIES was designed to provide policy decision making with reliable estimates at regional levels as well as to meet rural - urban disaggregation requirements.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Individuals
• Households

Universe

Every week of the four weeks period of a survey round all persons in the household were asked if they spent at least 4 nights of the week in the household. Any person who spent at least 4 nights in the household was taken as having spent the whole week in the household. To qualify as a household member a person must have stayed in the household for at least two weeks out of four weeks.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The targeted population of NHIES 2009-2010 was the private households of Namibia. The population living in institutions, such as hospitals, hostels, police barracks and prisons were not covered in the survey. However, private households residing within institutional settings were covered. The sample design for the survey was a stratified two-stage probability sample, where the first stage units were geographical areas designated as the Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) and the second stage units were the households. The PSUs were based on the 2001 Census EAs and the list of PSUs serves as the national sample frame. The urban part of the sample frame was updated to include the changes that take place due to rural to urban migration and the new developments in housing. The sample frame is stratified first by region followed by urban and rural areas within region. In urban areas, further stratification is carried out by level of living which is based on geographic location and housing characteristics. The first stage units were selected from the sampling frame of PSUs and the second stage units were selected from a current list of households within each selected PSU, which was compiled just before the interviews.

PSUs were selected using probability proportional to size sampling coupled with the systematic sampling procedure where the size measure was the number of households within the PSU in the 2001 Population and Housing Census (PHC). The households were selected from the current list of households using systematic sampling procedure.

The sample size was designed to achieve reliable estimates at the region level and for urban and rural areas within each region. However, the actual sample sizes in urban or rural areas within some of the regions may not satisfy the expected precision levels for certain characteristics. The final sample consists of 10 660 households in 533 PSUs. The selected PSUs were randomly allocated to the 13 survey rounds.

Sampling deviation

All the expected sample of 533 PSUs was covered. However, a number of originally selected PSUs had to be substituted by new ones due to the following reasons.

Urban areas: Movement of people for resettlement in informal settlement areas from one place to another caused a selected PSU to be empty of households.

Rural areas: In addition to Caprivi region (where one constituency is generally flooded every year) Ohangwena and Oshana regions were badly affected from an unusual flood situation. Although this situation was generally addressed by interchanging the PSUs between survey rounds still some PSUs were under water close to the end of the survey period.

There were five empty PSUs in the urban areas of Hardap (1), Karas (3) and Omaheke (1) regions. Since these PSUs were found in the low strata within the urban areas of the relevant regions the substituting PSUs were selected from the same strata. The PSUs under water were also five in rural areas of Caprivi (1), Ohangwena (2) and Oshana (2) regions. Wherever possible the substituting PSUs were selected from the same constituency where the original PSU was selected. If not, the selection was carried out from the rural stratum of the particular region.

One sampled PSU in urban area of Khomas region (Windhoek city) had grown so large that it had to be split into 7 PSUs. This was incorporated into the geographical information system (GIS) and one PSU out of the seven was selected for the survey. In one PSU in Erongo region only fourteen households were listed and one in Omusati region listed only eleven households. All these households were interviewed and no additional selection was done to cover for the loss in sample.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The instruments for data collection were as in the previous survey the questionnaires and manuals. Form I questionnaire collected demographic and socio-economic information of household members, such as: sex, age, education, employment status among others. It also collected information on household possessions like animals, land, housing, household goods, utilities, household income and expenditure, etc.

Form II or the Daily Record Book is a diary for recording daily household transactions. A book was administered to each sample household each week for four consecutive weeks (survey round). Households were asked to record transactions, item by item, for all expenditures and receipts, including incomes and gifts received or given out. Own produce items were also recorded. Prices of items from different outlets were also collected in both rural and urban areas. The price collection was needed to supplement information from areas where price collection for consumer price indices (CPI) does not currently take place.

Cleaning operations

The data capturing process was undertaken in the following ways: Form 1 was scanned, interpreted and verified using the “Scan”, “Interpret” & “Verify” modules of the Eyes & Hands software respectively. Some basic checks were carried out to ensure that each PSU was valid and every household was unique. Invalid characters were removed. The scanned and verified data was converted into text files using the “Transfer” module of the Eyes & Hands. Finally, the data was transferred to a SQL database for further processing, using the “TranScan” application. The Daily Record Books (DRB or form 2) were manually entered after the scanned data had been transferred to the SQL database. The reason was to ensure that all DRBs were linked to the correct Form 1, i.e. each household's Form 1 was linked to the corresponding Daily Record Book. In total, 10 645 questionnaires (Form 1), comprising around 500 questions each, were scanned and close to one million transactions from the Form 2 (DRBs) were manually captured.

Response rate

Household response rate: Total number of responding households and non-responding households and the reason for non-response are shown below. Non-contacts and incomplete forms, which were rejected due to a lot of missing data in the questionnaire, at 3.4 and 4.0 percent, respectively, formed the largest part of non-response. At the regional level Erongo, Khomas, and Kunene reported the lowest response rate and Caprivi and Kavango the highest.

Data appraisal

To be able to compare with the previous survey in 2003/2004 and to follow up the development of the country, methodology and definitions were kept the same. Comparisons between the surveys can be found in the different chapters in this report. Experiences from the previous survey gave valuable input to this one and the data collection was improved to avoid earlier experienced errors. Also, some additional questions in the questionnaire helped to confirm the accuracy of reported data. During the data cleaning process it turned out, that some households had difficulty to separate their household consumption from their business consumption when recording their daily transactions in DRB. This was in particular applicable for the guest farms, the number of which has shown a big increase during the past five years. All households with extreme high consumption were examined manually and business transactions were recorded and separated from private consumption.

Analysis of ‘NYC Health + Hospitals Options - income eligibility - 2011’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/4156c5bd-d223-48bb-b03b-bc107abdd4ba on 27 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

The NYC Health + Hospitals Options is a discount payment scale that determines fees for NYC Health + Hospitals services for New Yorkers who do not qualify or cannot afford any of the free or low cost health insurance plans available. The reduced fees are based on family size and income. This data shows the minimum and maximum income levels needed to be eligible for the reduced rates in 2011.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Premium B2C Consumer Database - 269+ Million US Records

Supercharge your B2C marketing campaigns with comprehensive consumer database, featuring over 269 million verified US consumer records. Our 20+ year data expertise delivers higher quality and more extensive coverage than competitors.

Core Database Statistics

Consumer Records: Over 269 million

Email Addresses: Over 160 million (verified and deliverable)

Phone Numbers: Over 76 million (mobile and landline)

Mailing Addresses: Over 116,000,000 (NCOA processed)

Geographic Coverage: Complete US (all 50 states)

Compliance Status: CCPA compliant with consent management

Targeting Categories Available

Demographics: Age ranges, education levels, occupation types, household composition, marital status, presence of children, income brackets, and gender (where legally permitted)

Geographic: Nationwide, state-level, MSA (Metropolitan Service Area), zip code radius, city, county, and SCF range targeting options

Property & Dwelling: Home ownership status, estimated home value, years in residence, property type (single-family, condo, apartment), and dwelling characteristics

Financial Indicators: Income levels, investment activity, mortgage information, credit indicators, and wealth markers for premium audience targeting

Lifestyle & Interests: Purchase history, donation patterns, political preferences, health interests, recreational activities, and hobby-based targeting

Behavioral Data: Shopping preferences, brand affinities, online activity patterns, and purchase timing behaviors

Multi-Channel Campaign Applications

Deploy across all major marketing channels:

Email marketing and automation

Social media advertising

Search and display advertising (Google, YouTube)

Direct mail and print campaigns

Telemarketing and SMS campaigns

Programmatic advertising platforms

Data Quality & Sources

Our consumer data aggregates from multiple verified sources:

Public records and government databases

Opt-in subscription services and registrations

Purchase transaction data from retail partners

Survey participation and research studies

Online behavioral data (privacy compliant)

Technical Delivery Options

File Formats: CSV, Excel, JSON, XML formats available

Delivery Methods: Secure FTP, API integration, direct download

Processing: Real-time NCOA, email validation, phone verification

Custom Selections: 1,000+ selectable demographic and behavioral attributes

Minimum Orders: Flexible based on targeting complexity

Unique Value Propositions

Dual Spouse Targeting: Reach both household decision-makers for maximum impact

Cross-Platform Integration: Seamless deployment to major ad platforms

Real-Time Updates: Monthly data refreshes ensure maximum accuracy

Advanced Segmentation: Combine multiple targeting criteria for precision campaigns

Compliance Management: Built-in opt-out and suppression list management

Ideal Customer Profiles

E-commerce retailers seeking customer acquisition

Financial services companies targeting specific demographics

Healthcare organizations with compliant marketing needs

Automotive dealers and service providers

Home improvement and real estate professionals

Insurance companies and agents

Subscription services and SaaS providers

Performance Optimization Features

Lookalike Modeling: Create audiences similar to your best customers

Predictive Scoring: Identify high-value prospects using AI algorithms

Campaign Attribution: Track performance across multiple touchpoints

A/B Testing Support: Split audiences for campaign optimization

Suppression Management: Automatic opt-out and DNC compliance

Pricing & Volume Options

Flexible pricing structures accommodate businesses of all sizes:

Pay-per-record for small campaigns

Volume discounts for large deployments

Subscription models for ongoing campaigns

Custom enterprise pricing for high-volume users

Data Compliance & Privacy

VIA.tools maintains industry-leading compliance standards:

CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) compliant

CAN-SPAM Act adherence for email marketing

TCPA compliance for phone and SMS campaigns

Regular privacy audits and data governance reviews

Transparent opt-out and data deletion processes

Getting Started

Our data specialists work with you to:

1. Define your target audience criteria

2. Recommend optimal data selections

3. Provide sample data for testing

4. Configure delivery methods and formats

5. Implement ongoing campaign optimization

Why We Lead the Industry

With over two decades of data industry experience, we combine extensive database coverage with advanced targeting capabilities. Our commitment to data quality, compliance, and customer success has made us the preferred choice for businesses seeking superior B2C marketing performance.

Contact our team to discuss your specific targeting requirements and receive custom pricing for your marketing objectives.

Introducing Job Posting Datasets: Uncover labor market insights!

Elevate your recruitment strategies, forecast future labor industry trends, and unearth investment opportunities with Job Posting Datasets.

Job Posting Datasets Source:

1. Indeed: Access datasets from Indeed, a leading employment website known for its comprehensive job listings.

2. Glassdoor: Receive ready-to-use employee reviews, salary ranges, and job openings from Glassdoor.

3. StackShare: Access StackShare datasets to make data-driven technology decisions.

Job Posting Datasets provide meticulously acquired and parsed data, freeing you to focus on analysis. You'll receive clean, structured, ready-to-use job posting data, including job titles, company names, seniority levels, industries, locations, salaries, and employment types.

Choose your preferred dataset delivery options for convenience:

Receive datasets in various formats, including CSV, JSON, and more. Opt for storage solutions such as AWS S3, Google Cloud Storage, and more. Customize data delivery frequencies, whether one-time or per your agreed schedule.

Why Choose Oxylabs Job Posting Datasets:

1. Fresh and accurate data: Access clean and structured job posting datasets collected by our seasoned web scraping professionals, enabling you to dive into analysis.

2. Time and resource savings: Focus on data analysis and your core business objectives while we efficiently handle the data extraction process cost-effectively.

3. Customized solutions: Tailor our approach to your business needs, ensuring your goals are met.

4. Legal compliance: Partner with a trusted leader in ethical data collection. Oxylabs is a founding member of the Ethical Web Data Collection Initiative, aligning with GDPR and CCPA best practices.

Pricing Options:

Standard Datasets: choose from various ready-to-use datasets with standardized data schemas, priced from $1,000/month.

Custom Datasets: Tailor datasets from any public web domain to your unique business needs. Contact our sales team for custom pricing.

Experience a seamless journey with Oxylabs:

• Understanding your data needs: We work closely to understand your business nature and daily operations, defining your unique data requirements.
• Developing a customized solution: Our experts create a custom framework to extract public data using our in-house web scraping infrastructure.
• Delivering data sample: We provide a sample for your feedback on data quality and the entire delivery process.
• Continuous data delivery: We continuously collect public data and deliver custom datasets per the agreed frequency.

Effortlessly access fresh job posting data with Oxylabs Job Posting Datasets.

description: This dataset is imported from the US Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and its "Data Explorer" site. The underlying data comes from the US Census 1. dataset: Specifies the month and year of the survey as a string, in "Mon YYYY" format. The CPS is a monthly survey, and NTIA periodically sponsors Supplements to that survey. 2. variable: Contains the standardized name of the variable being measured. NTIA identified the availability of similar data across Supplements, and assigned variable names to ease time-series comparisons. 3. description: Provides a concise description of the variable. 4. universe: Specifies the variable representing the universe of persons or households included in the variable's statistics. The specified variable is always included in the file. The only variables lacking universes are isPerson and isHouseholder, as they are themselves the broadest universes measured in the CPS. 5. A large number of *Prop, *PropSE, *Count, and *CountSE columns comprise the remainder of the columns. For each demographic being measured (see below), four statistics are produced, including the estimated proportion of the group for which the variable is true (*Prop), the standard error of that proportion (*PropSE), the estimated number of persons or households in that group for which the variable is true (*Count), and the standard error of that count (CountSE). DEMOGRAPHIC CATEGORIES 1. us: The usProp, usPropSE, usCount, and usCountSE columns contain statistics about all persons and households in the universe (which represents the population of the fifty states and the District and Columbia). For example, to see how the prevelance of Internet use by Americans has changed over time, look at the usProp column for each survey's internetUser variable. 2. age: The age category is divided into five ranges: ages 3-14, 15-24, 25-44, 45-64, and 65+. The CPS only includes data on Americans ages 3 and older. Also note that household reference persons must be at least 15 years old, so the age314 columns are blank for household-based variables. Those columns are also blank for person-based variables where the universe is "isAdult" (or a sub-universe of "isAdult"), as the CPS defines adults as persons ages 15 or older. Finally, note that some variables where children are technically in the univese will show zero values for the age314* columns. This occurs in cases where a variable simply cannot be true of a child (e.g. the workInternetUser variable, as the CPS presumes children under 15 are not eligible to work), but the topic of interest is relevant to children (e.g. locations of Internet use). 3. work: Employment status is divided into "Employed," "Unemployed," and "NILF" (Not in the Labor Force). These three categories reflect the official BLS definitions used in official labor force statistics. Note that employment status is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by work status, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest. 4. income: The income category represents annual family income, rather than just an individual person's income. It is divided into five ranges: below $25K, $25K-49,999, $50K-74,999, $75K-99,999, and $100K or more. Statistics by income group are only available in this file for Supplements beginning in 2010; prior to 2010, family income range is available in public use datasets, but is not directly comparable to newer datasets due to the 2010 introduction of the practice of allocating "don't know," "refused," and other responses that result in missing data. Prior to 2010, family income is unkown for approximately 20 percent of persons, while in 2010 the Census Bureau began imputing likely income ranges to replace missing data. 5. education: Educational attainment is divided into "No Diploma," "High School Grad," "Some College," and "College Grad." High school graduates are considered to include GED completers, and those with some college include community college attendees (and graduates) and those who have attended certain postsecondary vocational or technical schools--in other words, it signifies additional education beyond high school, but short of attaining a bachelor's degree or equivilent. Note that educational attainment is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by education, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest. 6. sex: "Male" and "Female" are the two groups in this category. The CPS does not currently provide response options for intersex individuals. 7. race: This category includes "White," "Black," "Hispanic," "Asian," "Am Indian," and "Other" groups. The CPS asks about Hispanic origin separately from racial identification; as a result, all persons identifying as Hispanic are in the Hispanic group, regardless of how else they identify. Furthermore, all non-Hispanic persons identifying with two or more races are tallied in the "Other" group (along with other less-prevelant responses). The Am Indian group includes both American Indians and Alaska Natives. 8. disability: Disability status is divided into "No" and "Yes" groups, indicating whether the person was identified as having a disability. Disabilities screened for in the CPS include hearing impairment, vision impairment (not sufficiently correctable by glasses), cognitive difficulties arising from physical, mental, or emotional conditions, serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs, difficulty dressing or bathing, and difficulties performing errands due to physical, mental, or emotional conditions. The Census Bureau began collecting data on disability status in June 2008; accordingly, this category is unavailable in Supplements prior to that date. Note that disability status is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by disability status, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest. 9. metro: Metropolitan status is divided into "No," "Yes," and "Unkown," reflecting information in the dataset about the household's location. A household located within a metropolitan statistical area is assigned to the Yes group, and those outside such areas are assigned to No. However, due to the risk of de-anonymization, the metropolitan area status of certain households is unidentified in public use datasets. In those cases, the Census Bureau has determined that revealing this geographic information poses a disclosure risk. Such households are tallied in the Unknown group. 10. scChldHome: 11.

This layer shows household income ranges for households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households (as defined by the U.S. Census). Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. This layer is symbolized to show median household income. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). To view only the census tracts that are predominantly in Tempe, add the expression City is Tempe in the map filter settings.Layer includes:Total households (of various types including households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households as defined by the U.S. Census)Household income bracketsHousehold median income in dollarsHousehold mean income in dollarsA ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Current Vintage: 2017-2021ACS Table(s): S1901 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Data Preparation: Data table downloaded and joined with Census Tract boundaries that are within or adjacent to the City of Tempe boundaryDate of Census update: December 8, 2022National Figures: data.census.gov

This layer shows household income ranges for households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households (as defined by the U.S. Census). Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. This layer is symbolized to show median household income. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). To view only the census tracts that are predominantly in Tempe, add the expression City is Tempe in the map filter settings.Layer includes:Total households (of various types including households, families, married couple families, and nonfamily households as defined by the U.S. Census)Household income bracketsHousehold median income in dollarsHousehold mean income in dollarsA ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): S1901 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Data Preparation: Data table downloaded and joined with Census Tract boundaries that are within or adjacent to the City of Tempe boundaryDate of Census update: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.gov

This dataset shows that through Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC) Options, low and moderate-income HHC patients can get affordable healthcare.

Families of tax filers; Distribution of total income by census family type and age of older partner, parent or individual (final T1 Family File; T1FF).

The financial indicators are based on data compiled according to the 2008 SNA "System of National Accounts, 2008". Many indicators are expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or as a percentage of Gross Disposable Income (GDI) when referring to the Households and NPISHs sector. The definition of GDP and GDI are the following:

Gross Domestic Product:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is derived from the concept of value added. Gross value added is the difference of output and intermediate consumption. GDP is the sum of gross value added of all resident producer units plus that part (possibly the total) of taxes on products, less subsidies on products, that is not included in the valuation of output [System of National Accounts, 2008, par. 2.138]. GDP is also equal to the sum of final uses of goods and services (all uses except intermediate consumption) measured at purchasers’ prices, less the value of imports of goods and services [System of National Accounts, 2008, par. 2.139]. GDP is also equal to the sum of primary incomes distributed by producer units [System of National Accounts, 2008, par. 2.140].

Gross Disposable Income:
Gross Disposable Income (GDI) is equal to net disposable income which is the balancing item of the secondary distribution income account plus the consumption of fixed capital. The use of the Gross Disposable Income (GDI), rather than net disposable income, is preferable for analytical purposes because there are uncertainty and comparability problems with the calculation of consumption of fixed capital. GDI measures the income available to the total economy for final consumption and gross saving [System of National Accounts, 2008, par. 2.145].

Definition of Debt:
Debt is a commonly used concept, defined as a specific subset of liabilities identified according to the types of financial instruments included or excluded. Generally, debt is defined as all liabilities that require payment or payments of interest or principal by the debtor to the creditor at a date or dates in the future. Consequently, all debt instruments are liabilities, but some liabilities such as shares, equity and financial derivatives are not debt [System of National Accounts, 2008, par. 22.104]. According to the SNA, most debt instruments are valued at market prices. However, some countries do not apply this valuation, in particular for securities other than shares, except financial derivatives (AF33). In this dataset, for financial indicators referring to debt, the concept of debt is the one adopted by the SNA 2008 as well as by the International Monetary Fund in “Public Sector Debt Statistics – Guide for compilers and users” (Pre-publication draft, May 2011). Debt is thus obtained as the sum of the following liability categories, whenever available / applicable in the financial balance sheet of the institutional sector:special drawing rights (AF12), currency and deposits (AF2), debt securities (AF3), loans (AF4), insurance, pension, and standardised guarantees (AF6), and other accounts payable (AF8). This definition differs from the definition of debt applied under the Maastricht Treaty for European countries. First, gross debt according to the Maastricht definition excludes not only financial derivatives and employee stock options (AF7) and equity and investment fund shares (AF5) but also insurance pensions and standardised guarantees (AF6) and other accounts payable (AF8). Second, debt according to Maastricht definition is valued at nominal prices and not at market prices.

To view other related indicator datasets, please refer to:
Institutional Investors Indicators [add link]
Household Dashboard [add link]

This submission derives from Work Package 2 of the H2020 project FoodLAND "Food and Local, Agricultural and Nutritional Diversity" (2020-2025). It consists of two datasets with row data on urban consumers and rural consumers. The experimental protocols have been submitted separately. The datasets are provided as Excel Workbooks, while the questionnaires (urban and rural consumers) are provided in PDF format, one for each of the studied countries (English language - local language available upon request).

The description of the two datasets follows.

1. Urban consumers. This excel archive compiles the data obtained from:
   • a standardised out-of-store/in-the-household survey for urban consumers delivered in 7 African cities across five countries (Morocco, Kenya, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Uganda) - sheet "Survey". Columns are survey’s variables (N=176; e.g., survey demographics, food consumption patterns diet quality indicator at individual (DQQ) and household level (HDDS), propensity to consume nutrient-dense foods or locally produced foods and ingredients, emigration and remittances, income level, setbacks and worries about the future, trust levels) further explained in the Metadata sheet. Rows are individual responses collected through the survey.
   • in-lab behavioural economic experiments with consumers run in 5 African cities across four countries (Morocco, Kenya, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Uganda) - sheet "Experiments". Columns are variables emerging from the experiments ( i.e., Dictator games, Public Good Games, Risk Preferences, Time Preferences, Trust games) further explained in the Metadata sheet. Rows are individual responses collected through the experiments. The sample of the consumers taking part to the behavioral activities matches a sub-sample of the consumers partcipating to the survey activities, through an unique identifier.
   • Sheet “Metadata”. Descriptive metadata of the datasets (“Survey”, “Experiments”).
2. Rural consumers. This file compiles data from a standardised survey with rural consumers (500 pairs of women and child) in 5 Food Hubs from five countries (Morocco, Kenya, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Uganda). The dataset is structured as an excel archive divided into two sheets:
   • Sheet “Survey”. This worksheet presents the full dataset collected through the rural consumers’ surveys. Columns are survey’s variables (N=205) further explained in the Metadata sheet. Rows are individual responses collected through the survey.
   • Sheet “Metadata”. Descriptive metadata of the datasets (“Survey”).

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the acceptability of a novel technology, MAchine Learning Application (MALA), among the mothers of newborns who required resuscitation.SettingThis study took place at Bharatpur Hospital, which is the second-largest public referral hospital with 13 000 deliveries per year in Nepal.DesignThis is a cross-sectional survey.Data collection and analysisData collection took place from January 21 to February 13, 2022. Self-administered questionnaires on acceptability (ranged 1–5 scale) were collected from participating mothers. The acceptability of the MALA system, which included video and audio recordings of the newborn resuscitation, was examined among mothers according to their age, parity, education level and technology use status using a stratified analysis.ResultsThe median age of 21 mothers who completed the survey was 25 years (range 18–37). Among them, 11 mothers (52.4%) completed their bachelor’s or master’s level of education, 13 (61.9%) delivered first child, 14 (66.7%) owned a computer and 16 (76.2%) carried a smartphone. Overall acceptability was high that all participating mothers positively perceived the novel technology with video and audio recordings of the infant’s care during resuscitation. There was no statistical difference in mothers’ acceptability of MALA system, when stratified by mothers’ age, parity, or technology usage (p>0.05). When the acceptability of the technology was stratified by mothers’ education level (up to higher secondary level vs. bachelor’s level or higher), mothers with Bachelor’s degree or higher more strongly felt that they were comfortable with the infant’s care being video recorded (p = 0.026) and someone using a tablet when observing the infant’s care (p = 0.046). Compared with those without a computer (n = 7), mothers who had a computer at home (n = 14) more strongly agreed that they were comfortable with someone observing the resuscitation activity of their newborns (71.4% vs. 14.3%) (p = 0.024).ConclusionThe novel technology using video and audio recordings for newborn resuscitation was accepted by mothers in this study. Its application has the potential to improve resuscitation quality in low-and-middle income settings, given proper informed consent and data protection measures are in place.

This analysis presents a rigorous exploration of financial data, incorporating a diverse range of statistical features. By providing a robust foundation, it facilitates advanced research and innovative modeling techniques within the field of finance.

MFS Intermediate Income: A Reliable Option? (MIN)

Financial data:

• Historical daily stock prices (open, high, low, close, volume)

• Fundamental data (e.g., market capitalization, price to earnings P/E ratio, dividend yield, earnings per share EPS, price to earnings growth, debt-to-equity ratio, price-to-book ratio, current ratio, free cash flow, projected earnings growth, return on equity, dividend payout ratio, price to sales ratio, credit rating)

• Technical indicators (e.g., moving averages, RSI, MACD, average directional index, aroon oscillator, stochastic oscillator, on-balance volume, accumulation/distribution A/D line, parabolic SAR indicator, bollinger bands indicators, fibonacci, williams percent range, commodity channel index)

Machine learning features:

• Feature engineering based on financial data and technical indicators

• Sentiment analysis data from social media and news articles

• Macroeconomic data (e.g., GDP, unemployment rate, interest rates, consumer spending, building permits, consumer confidence, inflation, producer price index, money supply, home sales, retail sales, bond yields)

Potential Applications:

• Stock price prediction

• Portfolio optimization

• Algorithmic trading

• Market sentiment analysis

• Risk management

Use Cases:

• Researchers investigating the effectiveness of machine learning in stock market prediction

• Analysts developing quantitative trading Buy/Sell strategies

• Individuals interested in building their own stock market prediction models

• Students learning about machine learning and financial applications

Additional Notes:

• The dataset may include different levels of granularity (e.g., daily, hourly)

• Data cleaning and preprocessing are essential before model training

• Regular updates are recommended to maintain the accuracy and relevance of the data

In the financial year 2021, a majority of Indian households fell under the aspirers category, earning between ******* and ******* Indian rupees a year. On the other hand, about ***** percent of households that same year, accounted for the rich, earning over * million rupees annually. The middle class more than doubled that year compared to ** percent in financial year 2005. Middle-class income group and the COVID-19 pandemic During the COVID-19 pandemic specifically during the lockdown in March 2020, loss of incomes hit the entire household income spectrum. However, research showed the severest affected groups were the upper middle- and middle-class income brackets. In addition, unemployment rates were rampant nationwide that further lead to a dismally low GDP. Despite job recoveries over the last few months, improvement in incomes were insignificant. Economic inequality While India maybe one of the fastest growing economies in the world, it is also one of the most vulnerable and severely afflicted economies in terms of economic inequality. The vast discrepancy between the rich and poor has been prominent since the last ***** decades. The rich continue to grow richer at a faster pace while the impoverished struggle more than ever before to earn a minimum wage. The widening gaps in the economic structure affect women and children the most. This is a call for reinforcement in in the country’s social structure that emphasizes access to quality education and universal healthcare services.

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) can lead to visual impairment and blindness if not detected and treated in time. Knowing the barriers/enablers in advance in contrasting different country income settings may accelerate development of a successful DR screening (DRS) program. This would be especially applicable in the low-income settings with the rising prevalence of DR.

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to identify and contrast the barriers/enablers to DRS for different contexts using both consumers i.e., people with diabetes (PwDM) and provider perspectives and system level factors in different country income settings.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library from the databases start date to December 2018. We included the studies reported on barriers and enablers to access DRS services based at health care facilities. We categorised and synthesized themes related to the consumers (individuals), providers and the health systems (environment) as main dimensions according to the constructs of social cognitive theory, supported by the quantitative measures i.e., odds ratios as reported by each of the study authors.

Main Results: We included 77 studies primarily describing the barriers and enablers. Most of the studies were from high income settings (72.7%, 56/77) and cross sectional in design (76.6%, 59/77). From the perspectives of consumers, lack of knowledge, attitude, awareness and motivation were identified as major barriers. The enablers were fear of blindness, proximity of screening facility, experiences of vision loss and being concerned of eye complications. In providers’ perspectives, lack of skilled human resources, training programs, infrastructure of retinal imaging and cost of services were the main barriers. Higher odds of uptake of DRS services was observed when PwDM were provided health education (odds ratio (OR) 4.3) and having knowledge on DR (OR range 1.3-19.7).

Conclusion: Knowing the barriers to access DRS is a pre-requisite in development of a successful screening program. The awareness, knowledge and attitude of the consumers, availability of skilled human resources and infrastructure emerged as the major barriers to access to DRS in any income setting.

The Ghana Socioeconomic Panel Survey is a joint effort between the Economic Growth Centre at Yale University and the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER), at the University of Ghana (Legon, Ghana). The survey is meant to remedy a major constraint on the understanding of development in low-income countries the absence of detailed, multi-level and long-term scientific data that follows individuals over time and describes both the natural and man-made environment in which the individuals reside. Most data collection efforts are short-term carried out at one point in time; and limited in scope – collecting information on only a few aspects of the lives of the persons in the study; and when there are multiple rounds of data collection, individuals who leave the study area are dropped. This means that the most mobile people are not included in existing surveys and studies, perhaps substantially biasing inferences about who benefits from and who bears the cost of the development process. The goal of this project is to follow all individuals, or a random subset, over time using a comprehensive set of survey instruments to shed new light on long-run processes of economic development. The 2009 survey is the first in a series that is intended to include 5 surveys over the next 15-21 years. Surveys will be implemented approximately every 3 years. In subsequent waves of the panel, a sample of moved households and individuals who have moved out of original households to form new households or joined other households originally not in the panel sample, will be interviewed in addition to the original sample. The number of households in the Panel Study thus has the potential of increasing due to the nature of the design; tracking wholly moved and split households. The principal objective of the panel survey is to provide a comprehensive data base for carrying out a wide range of studies of the medium- and long-term changes, or lack of changes, that take place during the process of development. The information gathered from the survey is expected to inform decision makers in the formulation of economic and social policies to: Identify target groups for government assistance; Construct models to stimulate the impact on individual groups of the various policy options and to analyze the impact of decisions that have already been implemented; Access the economic situation on living conditions of households; and Provide benchmark data for district assemblies.

This data release contains the input-data files and R scripts associated with the analysis presented in [citation of manuscript]. The spatial extent of the data is the contiguous U.S. The input-data files include one comma separated value (csv) file of county-level data, and one csv file of city-level data. The county-level csv (“county_data.csv”) contains data for 3,109 counties. This data includes two measures of water use, descriptive information about each county, three grouping variables (climate region, urban class, and economic dependency), and contains 18 explanatory variables: proportion of population growth from 2000-2010, fraction of withdrawals from surface water, average daily water yield, mean annual maximum temperature from 1970-2010, 2005-2010 maximum temperature departure from the 40-year maximum, mean annual precipitation from 1970-2010, 2005-2010 mean precipitation departure from the 40-year mean, Gini income disparity index, percent of county population with at least some college education, Cook Partisan Voting Index, housing density, median household income, average number of people per household, median age of structures, percent of renters, percent of single family homes, percent apartments, and a numeric version of urban class. The city-level csv (city_data.csv) contains data for 83 cities. This data includes descriptive information for each city, water-use measures, one grouping variable (climate region), and 6 explanatory variables: type of water bill (increasing block rate, decreasing block rate, or uniform), average price of water bill, number of requirement-oriented water conservation policies, number of rebate-oriented water conservation policies, aridity index, and regional price parity. The R scripts construct fixed-effects and Bayesian Hierarchical regression models. The primary difference between these models relates to how they handle possible clustering in the observations that define unique water-use settings. Fixed-effects models address possible clustering in one of two ways. In a "fully pooled" fixed-effects model, any clustering by group is ignored, and a single, fixed estimate of the coefficient for each covariate is developed using all of the observations. Conversely, in an unpooled fixed-effects model, separate coefficient estimates are developed only using the observations in each group. A hierarchical model provides a compromise between these two extremes. Hierarchical models extend single-level regression to data with a nested structure, whereby the model parameters vary at different levels in the model, including a lower level that describes the actual data and an upper level that influences the values taken by parameters in the lower level. The county-level models were compared using the Watanabe-Akaike information criterion (WAIC) which is derived from the log pointwise predictive density of the models and can be shown to approximate out-of-sample predictive performance. All script files are intended to be used with R statistical software (R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org) and Stan probabilistic modeling software (Stan Development Team. 2017. RStan: the R interface to Stan. R package version 2.16.2. http://mc-stan.org).

Transcripts of in-depth interviews and group discussions with managers, researchers, ethics committee members, field data collectors and community members on the issues around ethical data sharing in the context of research involving women and children in urban India. We interviewed researchers, managers, and research participants associated with a Mumbai non-governmental organization, as well as researchers from other organizations and members of ethics committees. We conducted 22 individual semi-structured interviews and involved 44 research participants in focus group discussions. We used framework analysis to examine ideas about data and data sharing in general; its potential benefits or harms, barriers, obligations, and governance; and the requirements for consent. Both researchers and participants were generally in favor of data sharing, although limited experience amplified their reservations. It is increasingly recognized that effective and appropriate data sharing requires the development of models of good data sharing practice capable of taking seriously both the potential benefits to be gained and the importance of ensuring that the rights and interests of participants are respected and that risk of harms is minimized. Calls for the greater sharing of individual level data from biomedical and public health research are receiving support among researchers and research funders. Despite its potential importance, data sharing presents important ethical, social, and institutional challenges in low income settings. This dataset comprises qualitative research conducted in India, exploring the experiences of key research stakeholders and their views about what constitutes good data sharing practice.