In 2020, there were 257 women killed by male single offenders in the state of Texas. Texas was the state with the highest number of women murdered by men in single offender homicides. California had the second most women killed by male single offenders, at 222 cases.
Between 2009/10 and 2023/24, 1,142 women have been killed by a partner, or an ex-partner in England and Wales, compared with 514 killed by family members, 316 killed by friends or acquaintances, and 273 killed by strangers. In every reporting year in the provided time period, partners or ex-partners were responsible for the highest number of homicides of female victims.
In 2023, the FBI reported that there were 13,789 victims of murder who identified as male, compared to 3,849 victims of murder who identified as female in the United States. A further 75 murder victims were of an unknown gender in that year.
Of the 570 recorded homicides in England and Wales in 2023/24, 414 of the victims were male, and 156 victims were female. Although the majority of homicide victims are men, they are also responsible for far more homicides than females are, with the vast majority of homicide suspects being male in England and Wales.
Number, percentage and rate (per 100,000 population) of homicide victims, by racialized identity group (total, by racialized identity group; racialized identity group; South Asian; Chinese; Black; Filipino; Arab; Latin American; Southeast Asian; West Asian; Korean; Japanese; other racialized identity group; multiple racialized identity; racialized identity, but racialized identity group is unknown; rest of the population; unknown racialized identity group), gender (all genders; male; female; gender unknown) and region (Canada; Atlantic region; Quebec; Ontario; Prairies region; British Columbia; territories), 2019 to 2023.
In 2022, an estimated 800 femicides were reported across European countries. Femicide, which refers to the gender-related killing of women and girls, represents the most extreme cases of violence against women. In this year there were estimated to have been 120 femicides in Italy, 118 in France, 113 in Germany and 83 in Spain.
Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 1,173 civilians having been shot, 248 of whom were Black, as of December 2024. In 2023, there were 1,164 fatal police shootings. Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 6.1 fatal shootings per million of the population per year between 2015 and 2024. Police brutality in the U.S. In recent years, particularly since the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, police brutality has become a hot button issue in the United States. The number of homicides committed by police in the United States is often compared to those in countries such as England, where the number is significantly lower. Black Lives Matter The Black Lives Matter Movement, formed in 2013, has been a vocal part of the movement against police brutality in the U.S. by organizing “die-ins”, marches, and demonstrations in response to the killings of black men and women by police. While Black Lives Matter has become a controversial movement within the U.S., it has brought more attention to the number and frequency of police shootings of civilians.
The goal of the Chicago Women's Health Risk Study (CWHRS) was to develop a reliable and validated profile of risk factors directly related to lethal or life-threatening outcomes in intimate partner violence, for use in agencies and organizations working to help women in abusive relationships. Data were collected to draw comparisons between abused women in situations resulting in fatal outcomes and those without fatal outcomes, as well as a baseline comparison of abused women and non-abused women, taking into account the interaction of events, circumstances, and interventions occurring over the course of a year or two. The CWHRS used a quasi-experimental design to gather survey data on 705 women at the point of service for any kind of treatment (related to abuse or not) sought at one of four medical sites serving populations in areas with high rates of intimate partner homicide (Chicago Women's Health Center, Cook County Hospital, Erie Family Health Center, and Roseland Public Health Center). Over 2,600 women were randomly screened in these settings, following strict protocols for safety and privacy. One goal of the design was that the sample would not systematically exclude high-risk but understudied populations, such as expectant mothers, women without regular sources of health care, and abused women in situations where the abuse is unknown to helping agencies. To accomplish this, the study used sensitive contact and interview procedures, developed sensitive instruments, and worked closely with each sample site. The CWHRS attempted to interview all women who answered "yes -- within the past year" to any of the three screening questions, and about 30 percent of women who did not answer yes, provided that the women were over age 17 and had been in an intimate relationship in the past year. In total, 705 women were interviewed, 497 of whom reported that they had experienced physical violence or a violent threat at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year (the abused, or AW, group). The remaining 208 women formed the comparison group (the non-abused, or NAW, group). Data from the initial interview sections comprise Parts 1-8. For some women, the AW versus NAW interview status was not the same as their screening status. When a woman told the interviewer that she had experienced violence or a violent threat in the past year, she and the interviewer completed a daily calendar history, including details of important events and each violent incident that had occurred the previous year. The study attempted to conduct one or two follow-up interviews over the following year with the 497 women categorized as AW. The follow-up rate was 66 percent. Data from this part of the clinic/hospital sample are found in Parts 9-12. In addition to the clinic/hospital sample, the CWHRS collected data on each of the 87 intimate partner homicides occurring in Chicago over a two-year period that involved at least one woman age 18 or older. Using the same interview schedule as for the clinic/hospital sample, CWHRS interviewers conducted personal interviews with one to three "proxy respondents" per case, people who were knowledgeable and credible sources of information about the couple and their relationship, and information was compiled from official or public records, such as court records, witness statements, and newspaper accounts (Parts 13-15). In homicides in which a woman was the homicide offender, attempts were made to contact and interview her. This "lethal" sample, all such homicides that took place in 1995 or 1996, was developed from two sources, HOMICIDES IN CHICAGO, 1965-1995 (ICPSR 6399) and the Cook County Medical Examiner's Office. Part 1 includes demographic variables describing each respondent, such as age, race and ethnicity, level of education, employment status, screening status (AW or NAW), birthplace, and marital status. Variables in Part 2 include details about the woman's household, such as whether she was homeless, the number of people living in the household and details about each person, the number of her children or other children in the household, details of any of her children not living in her household, and any changes in the household structure over the past year. Variables in Part 3 deal with the woman's physical and mental health, including pregnancy, and with her social support network and material resources. Variables in Part 4 provide information on the number and type of firearms in the household, whether the woman had experienced power, control, stalking, or harassment at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year, whether she had experienced specific types of violence or violent threats at the hands of an intimate partner in the past year, and whether she had experienced symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder related to the incidents in the past month. Variables in Part 5 specify the partner or partners who were responsible for the incidents in the past year, record the type and length of the woman's relationship with each of these partners, and provide detailed information on the one partner she chose to talk about (called "Name"). Variables in Part 6 probe the woman's help-seeking and interventions in the past year. Variables in Part 7 include questions comprising the Campbell Danger Assessment (Campbell, 1993). Part 8 assembles variables pertaining to the chosen abusive partner (Name). Part 9, an event-level file, includes the type and the date of each event the woman discussed in a 12-month retrospective calendar history. Part 10, an incident-level file, includes variables describing each violent incident or threat of violence. There is a unique identifier linking each woman to her set of events or incidents. Part 11 is a person-level file in which the incidents in Part 10 have been aggregated into totals for each woman. Variables in Part 11 include, for example, the total number of incidents during the year, the number of days before the interview that the most recent incident had occurred, and the severity of the most severe incident in the past year. Part 12 is a person-level file that summarizes incident information from the follow-up interviews, including the number of abuse incidents from the initial interview to the last follow-up, the number of days between the initial interview and the last follow-up, and the maximum severity of any follow-up incident. Parts 1-12 contain a unique identifier variable that allows users to link each respondent across files. Parts 13-15 contain data from official records sources and information supplied by proxies for victims of intimate partner homicides in 1995 and 1996 in Chicago. Part 13 contains information about the homicide incidents from the "lethal sample," along with outcomes of the court cases (if any) from the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts. Variables for Part 13 include the number of victims killed in the incident, the month and year of the incident, the gender, race, and age of both the victim and offender, who initiated the violence, the severity of any other violence immediately preceding the death, if leaving the relationship triggered the final incident, whether either partner was invading the other's home at the time of the incident, whether jealousy or infidelity was an issue in the final incident, whether there was drug or alcohol use noted by witnesses, the predominant motive of the homicide, location of the homicide, relationship of victim to offender, type of weapon used, whether the offender committed suicide after the homicide, whether any criminal charges were filed, and the type of disposition and length of sentence for that charge. Parts 14 and 15 contain data collected using the proxy interview questionnaire (or the interview of the woman offender, if applicable). The questionnaire used for Part 14 was identical to the one used in the clinic sample, except for some extra questions about the homicide incident. The data include only those 76 cases for which at least one interview was conducted. Most variables in Part 14 pertain to the victim or the offender, regardless of gender (unless otherwise labeled). For ease of analysis, Part 15 includes the same 76 cases as Part 14, but the variables are organized from the woman's point of view, regardless of whether she was the victim or offender in the homicide (for the same-sex cases, Part 15 is from the woman victim's point of view). Parts 14 and 15 can be linked by ID number. However, Part 14 includes five sets of variables that were asked only from the woman's perspective in the original questionnaire: household composition, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), social support network, personal income (as opposed to household income), and help-seeking and intervention. To avoid redundancy, these variables appear only in Part 14. Other variables in Part 14 cover information about the person(s) interviewed, the victim's and offender's age, sex, race/ethnicity, birthplace, employment status at time of death, and level of education, a scale of the victim's and offender's severity of physical abuse in the year prior to the death, the length of the relationship between victim and offender, the number of children belonging to each partner, whether either partner tried to leave and/or asked the other to stay away, the reasons why each partner tried to leave, the longest amount of time each partner stayed away, whether either or both partners returned to the relationship before the death, any known physical or emotional problems sustained by victim or offender, including the four-item Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) scale of depression, drug and alcohol use of the victim and offender, number and type of guns in the household of the victim and offender, Scales of Power and Control (Johnson, 1996) or Stalking and Harassment (Sheridan, 1992) by either intimate partner in the year prior to the death, a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS)
Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Number of homicide victims and persons accused of homicide, by age group (total all ages; 0 to 11 years; 12 to 17 years; 18 to 24 years; 25 to 29 years; 30 to 39 years; 40 to 49 years; 50 to 59 years; 60 years and over; age unknown) and sex (both sexes; male; female; sex unknown), Canada, 1974 to 2017.
Find data on deaths of Massachusetts residents. Information is obtained from death certificates received by the Registry of Vital Records and Statistics.
The 2013 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS) was designed to provide data to monitor the population and health situation in Nigeria with an explicit goal of providing reliable information about maternal and child health and family planning services. The primary objective of the 2013 NDHS was to provide up-to-date information on fertility levels, marriage, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, child feeding practices, nutritional status of women and children, adult and childhood mortality, awareness and attitudes regarding HIV/AIDS, and domestic violence. This information is intended to assist policymakers and programme managers in evaluating and designing programmes and strategies for improving health and family planning services in the country.
National coverage
Sample survey data [ssd]
Sample Design The sample for the 2013 NDHS was nationally representative and covered the entire population residing in non-institutional dwelling units in the country. The survey used as a sampling frame the list of enumeration areas (EAs) prepared for the 2006 Population Census of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, provided by the National Population Commission. The sample was designed to provide population and health indicator estimates at the national, zonal, and state levels. The sample design allowed for specific indicators to be calculated for each of the six zones, 36 states, and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.
Administratively, Nigeria is divided into states. Each state is subdivided into local government areas (LGAs), and each LGA is divided into localities. In addition to these administrative units, during the 2006 population census, each locality was subdivided into census enumeration areas. The primary sampling unit (PSU), referred to as a cluster in the 2013 NDHS, is defined on the basis of EAs from the 2006 EA census frame. The 2013 NDHS sample was selected using a stratified three-stage cluster design consisting of 904 clusters, 372 in urban areas and 532 in rural areas. A representative sample of 40,680 households was selected for the survey, with a minimum target of 943 completed interviews per state.
A complete listing of households and a mapping exercise were carried out for each cluster from December 2012 to January 2013, with the resulting lists of households serving as the sampling frame for the selection of households. All regular households were listed. The NPC listing enumerators were trained to use Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers to calculate the coordinates of the 2013 NDHS sample clusters.
A fixed sample take of 45 households were selected per cluster. All women age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the 2013 NDHS sample or visitors present in the households on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. In a subsample of half of the households, all men age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the sample or visitors present in the households on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Also, a subsample of one eligible woman in each household was randomly selected to be asked additional questions regarding domestic violence.
For further details on sample size and design, see Appendix B of the final report.
Face-to-face [f2f]
Three questionnaires were used in the 2013 NDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, and the Man’s Questionnaire.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all of the usual members of and visitors to the selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including age, sex, marital status, education, and relationship to the head of the household. Information on other characteristics of household members was collected as well, including current school attendance and survivorship of parents among those under age 18. If a child in the household had a parent who was sick for more than three consecutive months in the 12 months preceding the survey or a parent who had died, additional questions related to support for orphans and vulnerable children were asked. Furthermore, if an adult in the household was sick for more than three consecutive months in the 12 months preceding the survey or an adult in the household had died, questions were asked relating to support for sick people or people in households where a member had died.
The Household Questionnaire also collected information on characteristics of the household’s dwelling unit, such as source of water; type of toilet facilities; materials used for the floor of the house; ownership of various durable goods; ownership of agricultural land; ownership of livestock, farm animals, or poultry; and ownership and use of mosquito nets and long-lasting insecticidal nets. The Household Questionnaire was further used to record height and weight measurements for children age 0-59 months and women age 15-49. In addition, data on the age and sex of household members in the Household Questionnaire were used to identify women and men who were eligible for individual interviews.
The Woman’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49. These women were asked questions on the following main topics: • Background characteristics (age, religion, education, literacy, media exposure, etc.) • Reproductive history and childhood mortality • Knowledge, source, and use of family planning methods • Fertility preferences • Antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care • Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices • Child immunisation and childhood illnesses • Marriage and sexual activity • Women’s work and husbands’ background characteristics • Malaria prevention and treatment • Women’s decision making • Awareness of AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections • Maternal mortality • Domestic violence
The Man’s Questionnaire was administered to all men age 15-49 in every second household in the 2013 NDHS sample. The Man’s Questionnaire collected much of the same information found in the Woman’s Questionnaire but was shorter because it did not contain a detailed reproductive history or questions on maternal and child health or nutrition.
The processing of the 2013 NDHS data began simultaneously with the fieldwork. Completed questionnaires were edited in the field immediately by the field editors and checked by the supervisors before being dispatched to the data processing centre in Abuja. The questionnaires were then edited and entered by 26 data processing personnel specially trained for this task. Data were entered using the CSPro computer package, and all data were entered twice to allow 100 percent verification. The concurrent processing of the data offered a distinct advantage because of the assurance that the data were error free and authentic. Moreover, the double entry of data enabled easy comparisons and identification of errors and inconsistencies. Inconsistencies were resolved by tallying results with the paper questionnaire entries. Secondary editing of the data was completed in the last week of July 2013. The final cleaning of the data set was carried out by the ICF data processing specialist and completed in August.
A total of 40,320 households were selected from 896 sample points, of which 38,904 were found to be occupied at the time of the fieldwork. Of the occupied households, 38,522 were successfully interviewed, yielding a household response rate of 99 percent. In view of the security challenges in the country, this response rate is highly encouraging and appears to be the result of a well-coordinated team effort.
In the interviewed households, a total of 39,902 women age 15-49 were identified as eligible for individual interviews, and 98 percent of them were successfully interviewed. Among men, 18,229 were identified as eligible for interviews, and 95 percent were successfully interviewed. As expected, response rates were slightly lower in urban areas than in rural areas.
Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.2 of the survey report.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling errors and 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 2013 Nigeria DHS (NDHS) to minimize this type of error, non-sampling 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 2013 NDHS 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.
Sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
List of variables, definitions and measurements for the study in urban South Ethiopia, 2019.
In 2023, the FBI reported that there were 9,284 Black murder victims in the United States and 7,289 white murder victims. In comparison, there were 554 murder victims of unknown race and 586 victims of another race. Victims of inequality? In recent years, the role of racial inequality in violent crimes such as robberies, assaults, and homicides has gained public attention. In particular, the issue of police brutality has led to increasing attention following the murder of George Floyd, an African American who was killed by a Minneapolis police officer. Studies show that the rate of fatal police shootings for Black Americans was more than double the rate reported of other races. Crime reporting National crime data in the United States is based off the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s new crime reporting system, which requires law enforcement agencies to self-report their data in detail. Due to the recent implementation of this system, less crime data has been reported, with some states such as Delaware and Pennsylvania declining to report any data to the FBI at all in the last few years, suggesting that the Bureau's data may not fully reflect accurate information on crime in the United States.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average for 2017 based on 65 countries was 1.8 kidnappings per 100,000 people. The highest value was in Belgium: 10.3 kidnappings per 100,000 people and the lowest value was in Bermuda: 0 kidnappings per 100,000 people. The indicator is available from 2003 to 2017. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.
In the United States, more men than women are shot to death by the police. As of October 22, the U.S. police shot 904 men and 44 women to death in 2024. In 2023, the police shot 1,107 men and 48 women to death.
How many criminal homicides were there in the U.S.? In 2023, there were 19,252 reported cases of murder or non-negligent manslaughter in the United States, a decrease from 21,781 cases reported in the previous year. This figure has also decreased in comparison to 1991, when there were 24,700 reported murder and non-negligent manslaughter cases. Murder vs. Manslaughter While it is can be easy to confuse the two terms, murder and nonnegligent manslaughter are two different crimes. While there is some variation from state to state, murder is usually seen as having some planning or forethought involved in the crime, while manslaughter is considered to be a “crime of passion,” with the absence of forethought. Courts tend to differentiate between the states of mind of the accused when bringing manslaughter or murder charges against them. The victims In the United States, there were far more male murder victims than female murder victims, and Black victims made up a large proportion of the total number of victims. Additionally, many murders in the U.S. are perpetrated by either an acquaintance of the victim or a stranger.
The 2019 Sierra Leone Demographic and Health Survey (2019 SLDHS) is a nationwide survey with a nationally representative sample of approximately 13,872 selected households. All women age 15-49 who are usual household members or who spent the night before the survey in the selected households were eligible for individual interviews.
The primary objective of the 2019 SLDHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the survey collected information on fertility, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding practices, nutritional status of women and children, maternal and child health, adult and childhood mortality, women’s empowerment, domestic violence, female genital cutting, prevalence and awareness and behaviour regarding HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other health-related issues such as smoking.
The information collected through the 2019 SLDHS is intended to assist policymakers and programme managers in evaluating and designing programmes and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population.
National coverage
The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49, all men age 15-59, and all children aged 0-5 resident in the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
The sampling frame used for the 2019 SLDHS is the Population and Housing Census of the Republic of Sierra Leone, which was conducted in 2015 by Statistics Sierra Leone. Administratively, Sierra Leone is divided into provinces. Each province is subdivided into districts, each district is further divided into chiefdoms/census wards, and each chiefdom/census ward is divided into sections. During the 2015 Population and Housing Census, each locality was subdivided into convenient areas called census enumeration areas (EAs). The primary sampling unit (PSU), referred to as a cluster for the 2019 SLDHS, is defined based on EAs from the 2015 EA census frame. The 2015 Population and Housing Census provided the list of EAs that served as a foundation to estimate the number of households and distinguish EAs as urban or rural for the survey sample frame.
The sample for the 2019 SLDHS was a stratified sample selected in two stages. Stratification was achieved by separating each district into urban and rural areas. In total, 31 sampling strata were created. Samples were selected independently in every stratum via a two-stage selection process. Implicit stratifications were achieved at each of the lower administrative levels by sorting the sampling frame before sample selection according to administrative order and by using probability-proportional-to-size selection during the first sampling stage.
In the first stage, 578 EAs were selected with probability proportional to EA size. EA size was the number of households residing in the EA. A household listing operation was carried out in all selected EAs, and the resulting lists of households served as a sampling frame for the selection of households in the second stage. In the second stage’s selection, a fixed number of 24 households were selected in every cluster through equal probability systematic sampling, resulting in a total sample size of approximately 13,872 selected households. The household listing was carried out using tablets, and random selection of households was carried out through computer programming. The survey interviewers interviewed only the pre-selected households. To prevent bias, no replacements and no changes of the pre-selected households were allowed in the implementing stages.
For further details on sample selection, see Appendix A of the final report.
Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]
Five questionnaires were used for the 2019 SLDHS: The Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Man’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. The questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey (DHS-7) questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Sierra Leone. Comments were solicited from various stakeholders representing government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organisations, and international donors. The survey protocol was reviewed and approved by the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee and the ICF Institutional Review Board. All questionnaires were finalised in English, and the 2019 SLDHS used computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) for data collection.
The processing of the 2019 SLDHS data began almost as soon as the fieldwork started. As data collection was completed in each cluster, all electronic data files were transferred via the IFSS to the Stats SL central office in Freetown. These data files were registered and checked for inconsistencies, incompleteness, and outliers. The field teams received alerts on any inconsistencies and errors. Secondary editing, carried out in the central office, involved resolving inconsistencies and coding open-ended questions. The Stats SL data processor coordinated the exercise at the central office. The biomarker paper questionnaires were compared with electronic data files to check for any inconsistencies in data entry. Data entry and editing were carried out using the CSPro Systems software package. Concurrent processing of the data offered a distinct advantage because it maximised the likelihood of the data being error-free and accurate. Timely generation of field check tables allowed for effective monitoring. The secondary editing of the data was completed in mid-October 2019.
A total of 13,793 households were selected for the sample, of which 13,602 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 13,399 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 99%. In the interviewed households, 16,099 women age 15-49 were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 15,574 women, yielding a response rate of 97%. In the subsample of households selected for the male survey, 7,429 men age 15-59 were identified, and 7,197 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%.
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 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 2019 Sierra Leone Demographic and Health Survey (SLDHS) 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 2019 SLDHS 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 among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
Sampling errors are 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 as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2019 SLDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programmes developed by ICF. These programmes use the Taylor linearization 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.
Note: A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in APPENDIX B of the survey report.
Data Quality Tables
See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the final
In the United States, the leading causes of death among women are heart disease and cancer. Heart disease and cancer are similarly the leading causes of death among U.S. men. In 2022, heart disease accounted for 20.3 percent of all deaths among women in the United States, while cancer accounted for 18.5 percent of deaths. COVID-19 was the third leading cause of death among both men and women in 2020 and 2021, and the fourth leading cause in 2022. Cancer among women in the U.S. The most common types of cancer among U.S. women are breast, lung and bronchus, and colon and rectum. In 2024, there were around 310,720 new breast cancer cases among women, compared to 118,270 new cases of lung and bronchus cancer. Although breast cancer is the most common form of cancer among women in the United States, lung and bronchus cancer causes the highest number of cancer deaths. In 2024, around 59,280 women were expected to die from lung and bronchus cancer, compared to 42,250 from breast cancer. Breast cancer Although breast cancer is the second most deadly form of cancer among women, rates of death have decreased over the past few decades. This decrease is possibly due to early detection, progress in therapy, and increasing awareness of risk factors. In 2022, the death rate due to breast cancer was 18.7 per 100,000 population, compared to a rate of 33.3 per 100,000 in the year 1990. The state with the highest rate of deaths due to breast cancer is Delaware, while Massachusetts had the lowest rates. Massachusetts is also one of the states with the highest share of women receiving a breast cancer screening in the last two years.
As of November 17, 277 Black people were killed by the police in the United States in 2024. This compares to 201 Hispanic people and 445 white people. The rate of police shootings of Black Americans is much higher than any other ethnicity, at 6.2 per million people. This rate stands at 2.8 per million for Hispanic people and 2.4 per million for white people.
California reported the largest number of homicides to the FBI in 2023, at 1,929 for the year. Texas recorded the second-highest number of murders, with 1,845 for the year. Homicide victim demographics There were a total of 19,252 reported homicide cases in the U.S. in 2023. When looking at murder victims by gender and ethnicity, the vast majority were male, while just over half of the victims were Black or African American. In addition, homicide victims in the United States were found most likely to be between the ages of 20 and 34 years old, with the majority of victims aged between 17 to 54 years old. Are murders up? In short, no – since the 1990s the number of murders in the U.S. has decreased significantly. In 1990, the murder rate per 100,000 people stood at 9.4, and stood at 5.7 in 2023. It should be noted though that the number of homicides increased slightly from 2014 to 2017, although figures declined again in 2018 and 2019, before ticking up once more in 2020 and 2021. Despite this decline, when viewed in international comparison, the U.S. murder rate is still notably high. For example, the Canadian homicide rate stood at 1.94 in 2023, while the homicide rate in England and Wales was even lower.
In 2020, there were 257 women killed by male single offenders in the state of Texas. Texas was the state with the highest number of women murdered by men in single offender homicides. California had the second most women killed by male single offenders, at 222 cases.