During a 2023 survey carried out among working-age consumers from the United States, nearly ******* respondents stated that they preferred for their data to be collected via interactive surveys. Roughly a ***** name a loyalty card/program as their favored data collection method.

During a late 2023 survey among working-age consumers in the United Kingdom, **** percent of respondents stated that they preferred for their data to be collected via interactive surveys. Meanwhile, **** percent of respondents mentioned loyalty cards/programs as their favored data collection method.

Notes: DMC, data collection method; MCOD, medical certification of death; VA, verbal autopsy; COD, cause-of-death.Data collection methods for vital statistics.

Data collection tools, administration, sample size and analytical techniques.

According to a survey carried out in August 2020 in the United Kingdom (UK), ** percent of marketing companies collected customer data through their website. Half did so through social media, while a slightly smaller share said they recorded customer data at organized events. Collection via purchase lists and preference centres were the least used methods.

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

According to a 2023 survey of adults in the United States, most respondents expressed concern regarding social media companies data collection practices. About ** percent of respondents were very concerned about how social media platforms collect their personal data, while ** percent were somewhat concerned. In contrast, only ** percent of respondents were not very concerned, and a mere **** percent of respondents were not at all concerned about their personal data being collected by these companies.

BackgroundsThe characteristics and conditions of growth and development have made adolescence one of the most vital and influential ages for prevention and health promotion, especially in the area of high-risk behaviors. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to determine adolescent health information seeking behavior related to high-risk behaviors in a selected educational district in Isfahan (Iran).MethodologyThe present study was of an applied type, which was conducted using the survey research method. The statistical population consisted of adolescent students at public schools in Isfahan (6519 subjects), and the sample size was determined to be 364 based on Cochran's formula. The sampling method was of a cluster sampling type, and the data collection tool was a researcher-made questionnaire. The validity of the questionnaire was approved by medical librarians, and using the Cronbach's alpha method, the reliability was obtained to be 0.85. SPSS 16 software was used for data analysis at two statistical levels: descriptive and inferential (independent t-test, one-sample t-test, chi-square, Pearson correlation coefficient and Mann-Whitney).Findings"Lack of mobility" was the most important health information need related to adolescent high-risk behaviors. The most important sources to obtain health information related to high-risk behaviors were "the Internet" with a mean score of 3.69 and "virtual social media" with a mean score of 3.49 out of 5. Adolescents had a positive attitude towards health information. The most important barriers to seeking health information were mentioned as follows: "difficulty in determining the quality of information found", "absence of appropriate information", and "concerns about the disclosure of their problems or illness to others". From the perspective of adolescents, the most important criterion for the evaluation of information quality was "the trueness and correctness of the information" and the need for health information related to high-risk behaviors was higher in girls than in boys.Conclusions/SignificanceConsidering adolescents’ positive attitude towards use of health information, it is necessary to put valid information at their disposal through different information resources, taking into account their level of information literacy. Accordingly, medical librarians’ abilities are suggested to be used for the production, evaluation, and introduction of health-related reading materials in the field of high-risk behaviors in easy language and suitable for adolescents.

Abstract

The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) 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 BDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. In general, the objectives of the BDHS are to: - assess the overall demographic situation in Bangladesh, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programs in Bangladesh, and - advance survey methodology.

More specifically, the objective of the BDHS is to provide up-to-date information on fertility and childhood mortality levels; nuptiality; fertility preferences; awareness, approval, and use of family planning methods; breastfeeding practices; nutrition levels; and maternal and child health. This information is intended to assist policymakers and administrators in evaluating and designing programs and strategies for improving health and family planning services in the country.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 10-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

Bangladesh is divided into six administrative divisions, 64 districts (zillas), and 490 thanas. In rural areas, thanas are divided into unions and then mauzas, a land administrative unit. Urban areas are divided into wards and then mahallas. The 1996-97 BDHS employed a nationally-representative, two-stage sample that was selected from the Integrated Multi-Purpose Master Sample (IMPS) maintained by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Each division was stratified into three groups: 1 ) statistical metropolitan areas (SMAs), 2) municipalities (other urban areas), and 3) rural areas. 3 In the rural areas, the primary sampling unit was the mauza, while in urban areas, it was the mahalla. Because the primary sampling units in the IMPS were selected with probability proportional to size from the 1991 Census frame, the units for the BDHS were sub-selected from the IMPS with equal probability so as to retain the overall probability proportional to size. A total of 316 primary sampling units were utilized for the BDHS (30 in SMAs, 42 in municipalities, and 244 in rural areas). In order to highlight changes in survey indicators over time, the 1996-97 BDHS utilized the same sample points (though not necessarily the same households) that were selected for the 1993-94 BDHS, except for 12 additional sample points in the new division of Sylhet. Fieldwork in three sample points was not possible (one in Dhaka Cantonment and two in the Chittagong Hill Tracts), so a total of 313 points were covered.

Since one objective of the BDHS is to provide separate estimates for each division as well as for urban and rural areas separately, it was necessary to increase the sampling rate for Barisal and Sylhet Divisions and for municipalities relative to the other divisions, SMAs and rural areas. Thus, the BDHS sample is not self-weighting and weighting factors have been applied to the data in this report.

Mitra and Associates conducted a household listing operation in all the sample points from 15 September to 15 December 1996. A systematic sample of 9,099 households was then selected from these lists. Every second household was selected for the men's survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all ever-married women age 10-49, interviewers also interviewed all currently married men age 15-59. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 10,000 ever-married women age 10-49 and 3,000 currently married men age 15-59.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the BDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women's Questionnaire, a Men' s Questionnaire and a Community Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with relatively high levels of contraceptive use. These model questionnaires were adapted for use in Bangladesh during a series of meetings with a small Technical Task Force that consisted of representatives from NIPORT, Mitra and Associates, USAID/Bangladesh, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (ICDDR,B), Population Council/Dhaka, and Macro International Inc (see Appendix D for a list of members). Draft questionnaires were then circulated to other interested groups and were reviewed by the BDHS Technical Review Committee (see Appendix D for list of members). The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla (see Appendix E for final version in English).

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 the individual interview. In addition, information was collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, and ownership of various consumer goods.

The Women's Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 10-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc.), - Reproductive history, - Knowledge and use of family planning methods, - Antenatal and delivery care, - Breastfeeding and weaning practices, - Vaccinations and health of children under age five, - Marriage, - Fertility preferences, - Husband's background and respondent's work, - Knowledge of AIDS, - Height and weight of children under age five and their mothers.

The Men's Questionnaire was used to interview currently married men age 15-59. It was similar to that for women except that it omitted the sections on reproductive history, antenatal and delivery care, breastfeeding, vaccinations, and height and weight. The Community Questionnaire was completed for each sample point and included questions about the existence in the community of income-generating activities and other development organizations and the availability of health and family planning services.

Response rate

A total of 9,099 households were selected for the sample, of which 8,682 were successfully interviewed. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant or in which the inhabitants had left for an extended period at the time they were visited by the interviewing teams. Of the 8,762 households occupied, 99 percent were successfully interviewed. In these households, 9,335 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview (i.e., ever-married and age 10-49) and interviews were completed for 9,127 or 98 percent of them. In the half of the households that were selected for inclusion in the men's survey, 3,611 eligible ever-married men age 15-59 were identified, of whom 3,346 or 93 percent were interviewed.

The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was the failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The refusal rate was low.

Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

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 BDHS 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 BDHS 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 BDHS 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 BDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module used the Taylor

Software tools used to collect and analyze data. Parentheses for analysis software indicate the tools participants were taught to use as part of their education in research methods and statistics. “Other” responses for data collection software were largely comprised of survey tools (e.g. Survey Monkey, LimeSurvey) and tools for building and running behavioral experiments (e.g. Gorilla, JsPsych). “Other” responses for data analysis software largely consisted of neuroimaging-related tools (e.g. SPM, AFNI).

Abstract

The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.

The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.

The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.

The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).

The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.

The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.

Response rate

A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men 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 affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of shortfalls 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 1998 GDHS 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 1998 GDHS 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 1998 GDHS 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 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module 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.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - 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.

The Best Management Practices Statistical Estimator (BMPSE) version 1.2.0 was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Project Delivery and Environmental Review to provide planning-level information about the performance of structural best management practices for decision makers, planners, and highway engineers to assess and mitigate possible adverse effects of highway and urban runoff on the Nation's receiving waters (Granato 2013, 2014; Granato and others, 2021). The BMPSE was assembled by using a Microsoft Access® database application to facilitate calculation of BMP performance statistics. Granato (2014) developed quantitative methods to estimate values of the trapezoidal-distribution statistics, correlation coefficients, and the minimum irreducible concentration (MIC) from available data. Granato (2014) developed the BMPSE to hold and process data from the International Stormwater Best Management Practices Database (BMPDB, www.bmpdatabase.org). Version 1.0 of the BMPSE contained a subset of the data from the 2012 version of the BMPDB; the current version of the BMPSE (1.2.0) contains a subset of the data from the December 2019 version of the BMPDB. Selected data from the BMPDB were screened for import into the BMPSE in consultation with Jane Clary, the data manager for the BMPDB. Modifications included identifying water quality constituents, making measurement units consistent, identifying paired inflow and outflow values, and converting BMPDB water quality values set as half the detection limit back to the detection limit. Total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) values were added to the BMPSE from BMPDB data; they were calculated from individual PAH measurements at sites with enough data to calculate totals. The BMPSE tool can sort and rank the data, calculate plotting positions, calculate initial estimates, and calculate potential correlations to facilitate the distribution-fitting process (Granato, 2014). For water-quality ratio analysis the BMPSE generates the input files and the list of filenames for each constituent within the Graphical User Interface (GUI). The BMPSE calculates the Spearman’s rho (ρ) and Kendall’s tau (τ) correlation coefficients with their respective 95-percent confidence limits and the probability that each correlation coefficient value is not significantly different from zero by using standard methods (Granato, 2014). If the 95-percent confidence limit values are of the same sign, then the correlation coefficient is statistically different from zero. For hydrograph extension, the BMPSE calculates ρ and τ between the inflow volume and the hydrograph-extension values (Granato, 2014). For volume reduction, the BMPSE calculates ρ and τ between the inflow volume and the ratio of outflow to inflow volumes (Granato, 2014). For water-quality treatment, the BMPSE calculates ρ and τ between the inflow concentrations and the ratio of outflow to inflow concentrations (Granato, 2014; 2020). The BMPSE also calculates ρ between the inflow and the outflow concentrations when a water-quality treatment analysis is done. The current version (1.2.0) of the BMPSE also has the option to calculate urban-runoff quality statistics from inflows to BMPs by using computer code developed for the Highway Runoff Database (Granato and Cazenas, 2009;Granato, 2019). Granato, G.E., 2013, Stochastic empirical loading and dilution model (SELDM) version 1.0.0: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 4, chap. C3, 112 p., CD-ROM https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/04/c03 Granato, G.E., 2014, Statistics for stochastic modeling of volume reduction, hydrograph extension, and water-quality treatment by structural stormwater runoff best management practices (BMPs): U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5037, 37 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145037. Granato, G.E., 2019, Highway-Runoff Database (HRDB) Version 1.1.0: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P94VL32J. Granato, G.E., and Cazenas, P.A., 2009, Highway-Runoff Database (HRDB Version 1.0)--A data warehouse and preprocessor for the stochastic empirical loading and dilution model: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, FHWA-HEP-09-004, 57 p. https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5269/disc_content_100a_web/FHWA-HEP-09-004.pdf Granato, G.E., Spaetzel, A.B., and Medalie, L., 2021, Statistical methods for simulating structural stormwater runoff best management practices (BMPs) with the stochastic empirical loading and dilution model (SELDM): U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2020–5136, 41 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20205136

Abstract

The health and wealth of a nation and its potential to develop and grow depend on its ability to feed its people. To help ensure that food will remain available to those who need it, there is nothing more important to give priority to than agriculture. Accurate and timely statistics about the basic produce and supplies of agriculture are essential to assess the agricultural situation. To help policy maker's deal with the fundamental challenge they are faced within the agricultural sector of the economy and develop measures and policies to maintain food security, there should be a continuous provision of statistics. The collection of reliable, comprehensive and timely data on agriculture is thus required for the above purposes. In this perspective, the Central Statistical Agency (CSA) has endeavored to generate agricultural data for policy makers and other users. The general objective of CSA's annual Agricultural Sample Survey (AgSS) is to collect basic quantitative information on the country's agriculture that is considered essential for development planning, socio-economic policy formulation, food security, etc. The AgSS is composed of four components: Crop production forecast survey, Main (“Meher”) season survey, Livestock survey, and survey of the “Belg” season crop area and production.

The specific objectives of the Main (“Meher”) season area and production survey are: - To estimate the total cultivated land area, production and yield per hectare of major crops (temporary). - To estimate the total farm inputs applied area and quantity of inputs applied by type for major temporary and permanent crops.

Geographic coverage

The survey covered all sedentary rural agricultural population in all regions of the country except urban and nomadic areas which were not included in the survey.

Analysis unit

Agricultural household/ Holder/ Crop

Universe

Agricultural households

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2000/2001 (1993 E.C) Meher season agricultural sample survey covered the rural part of the country except three zones in Afar regional state and six zones in Somalie regional state that are predominantly nomadic. A two-stage stratified sample design was used to select the sample. Each zones/special wereda was adopted as stratum for which major findings of the survey are reported except the four regions; namely, Gambella, Harari, Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa which were considered as strata/reporting levels. The primary sampling units (PSUs) were enumeration areas (EAs) and agricultural households were the secondary sampling units. The survey questionnaires were administered to all agricultural holders within the sample households. A fixed number of sample EAs were determined for each stratum/reporting level based on precision of major estimates and cost considerations. Within each stratum EAs were selected using probability proportional to size systematic sampling; size being total number of agricultural households in the EAs as obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. From each sample EA, 40 agricultural households were systematically selected for the annual agricultural sample survey from a fresh list of households prepared at the beginning of the field work of the annual agricultural survey. Of the forty agricultural households, the first twenty-five were used for obtaining information on area under crops, Meher and Beleg season production of crops, land use, agricultural practices, crop damage, and quantity of agricultural households sampled in each of the selected EAs, data on crop cutting were collected for only the fifteen households (11th - 25th households selected). A total of 1,430 EAs were selected for the survey. However, 8 EAs were closed for various reasons beyond the control of the Authority and the survey succeeded in covering 1422 (99.44%) EAs. Within respect to ultimate sampling units, for the Meher season agricultural sample survey, it was planned to cover 35,750 agricultural households.

Note: Distribution of the number of sampling units sampled and covered by strata is given in Appendix I of the 2000-2001 annual Agricultural Sample Survey report which is provided as external resource.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2000-2001 annual Agricultural Sample Survey used structured questionnaires to collect agricultural information from selected sample households. Lists of forms in the questionnaires: - AgSS Form 93/0: Used to list all households and agricultural holders in the sample enumeration areas. - AgSS Form 93/1: Used to list selected households and agricultural holders in the sample enumeration areas. - AgSS Form 93/3A: Used to list fields and agricultural practices only pure stand temporary and permanent crops, list of fields and agricultural practices for mixed crops, other land use, quantity of improved and local seeds by type of crop and type and quantity of crop protection chemicals. - AgSS Form 93/4A: Used to collect results of area measurement. - AgSS Form 93/5: Used to list fields for selecting fields for crop cuttings and collect information about details of crop cutting.

Note: The questionnaires are presented in the Appendix IV of the 2000-2001 Agricultural Sample Survey Volume I report which is provided as external resource.

Cleaning operations

Editing, Coding and Verification: In order to insure the quality of the collected survey data an editing, coding and verification instruction manual was prepared and printed. Then 23 editors-coders and 22 verifiers were trained for two days in the editing, coding and verification operation using the aforementioned manual as a reference and teaching aid. The completed questionnaires were edited, coded and later verified on a 100% basis before the questionnaires were passed over to the data entry unit. The editing, coding and verification exercise of all questionnaires was completed in about 30 days.

Data Entry, Cleaning and Tabulation: Before starting data entry, professional staff of Agricultural Statistics Department prepared edit specifications to use on personal computers utilizing the Integrated Microcomputer Processing System (IMPS) software for data consistency checking purposes. The data on the coded questionnaires were then entered into personal computers using IMPS software. The data were then checked and cleaned using the edit specification prepared earlier for this purpose. The data entry operation involved about 31 data encoders and it took 28 days to complete the job. Finally, tabulation was done on personal computers to produce results as indicated in the tabulation plan.

Response rate

A total of 1,430 EAs were selected for the survey. However, 8 EAs were closed for various reasons beyond the control of the Authority and the survey succeeded in covering 1422 (99.44%) EAs. Within respect to ultimate sampling units, for the Meher season agricultural sample survey, it was planned to cover 35,750 agricultural households. The response rate was found to be 99.14%.

Sampling error estimates

Estimation procedures of parameters of interest (total and ratio) and their sampling error is presented in Appendix II of the 2000-2001 annual Agricultural Sample Survey report which is provided as external resource.

BackgroundIndividual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses that obtain “raw” data from studies rather than summary data typically adopt a “two-stage” approach to analysis whereby IPD within trials generate summary measures, which are combined using standard meta-analytical methods. Recently, a range of “one-stage” approaches which combine all individual participant data in a single meta-analysis have been suggested as providing a more powerful and flexible approach. However, they are more complex to implement and require statistical support. This study uses a dataset to compare “two-stage” and “one-stage” models of varying complexity, to ascertain whether results obtained from the approaches differ in a clinically meaningful way. Methods and FindingsWe included data from 24 randomised controlled trials, evaluating antiplatelet agents, for the prevention of pre-eclampsia in pregnancy. We performed two-stage and one-stage IPD meta-analyses to estimate overall treatment effect and to explore potential treatment interactions whereby particular types of women and their babies might benefit differentially from receiving antiplatelets. Two-stage and one-stage approaches gave similar results, showing a benefit of using anti-platelets (Relative risk 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.97). Neither approach suggested that any particular type of women benefited more or less from antiplatelets. There were no material differences in results between different types of one-stage model. ConclusionsFor these data, two-stage and one-stage approaches to analysis produce similar results. Although one-stage models offer a flexible environment for exploring model structure and are useful where across study patterns relating to types of participant, intervention and outcome mask similar relationships within trials, the additional insights provided by their usage may not outweigh the costs of statistical support for routine application in syntheses of randomised controlled trials. Researchers considering undertaking an IPD meta-analysis should not necessarily be deterred by a perceived need for sophisticated statistical methods when combining information from large randomised trials.

Abstract

The Victims of Crime Survey (VCS) is a countrywide household-based survey which collects data on the prevalence of particular kinds of crime within South Africa. The survey includes information on victimisation experienced by individuals and households and their perspectives on community responses to crime. Therefore, VCS data can be used for research in the development of policies and strategies for crime prevention and public safety and education programmes. Statistics South Africa (StatsSA) conducted its first VCS in 1998. Following the VCS 1998, victims surveys were conducted by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS). Since 2011, StatsSA began conducting an annual collection of the VCS as a source of information on crime in South Africa. The main objectives of the survey are to:

• Provide information about the dynamics of crime from the perspective of households and the victims of crime.

• Explore public perceptions of the activities of the police, prosecutors, courts and correctional services in the prevention of crime and victimisation.

• Provide complimentary data on the level of crime within South Africa in addition to the statistics published annually by the South African Police Service.

The VCS 2016/17 is the seventh release in the collection and is comparable to the new Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey (GPSJS). StatsSA launched the GPSJS in April 2018 in response to the need for standardised international reporting standards on governance and access to justice that are recommended by the SDGs, ShaSA and Agenda 2063. Therefore, the VCS 2016/17 (and all subsequent releases) can be used as a complementary dataset to the GPSJS releases.

Geographic coverage

The survey has national coverage.

Analysis unit

Households and individuals

Universe

The target population of the survey consists of all private households in all nine provinces of South Africa and residents in workers' hostels. The survey does not cover other collective living quarters such as students' hostels, old-age homes, hospitals, prisons and military barracks, and is therefore only representative of non-institutionalised and non-military persons or households in South Africa.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

VCS 201/2017 uses a Master Sample frame which has been developed as a general-purpose household survey frame that can be used by other Stats SA household-based surveys. VCS 2016/2017 collection was based on the Stats SA 2013 Master Sample.This Master Sample is based on information collected during the 2011 Census conducted by Stats SA. In preparation for Census 2011, the country was divided into 103 576 enumeration areas (EAs). The census EAs, together with the auxiliary information for the EAs, were used as the frame units or building blocks for the formation of primary sampling units (PSUs) for the Master Sample. There are 3 324 primary sampling units (PSUs) in the Master Sample with an expected sample of approximately 33 000 dwelling units (DUs). The updating of the Master Sample as compared to previous VCSs is expected to improve the precision of statistical estimates.

The Master Sample is designed to be representative at provincial level and within provinces at metro/non-metro levels. Within the metros, the sample is further distributed by geographical type. The three geography types are Urban, Tribal and Farms. This implies, for example, that within a metropolitan area, the sample is representative of the different geography types that may exist within that metro.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The VOCS 2016/17 questionnaire was based on the questionnaires used in the International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) and previous VOCSs conducted by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) and Statistics SA.

Sections 10 to 20 of the questionnaire relate to household crimes. A proxy respondent (preferably head of the household or acting head of household) answered on behalf of the household. Section 21 to 28 of the questionnaire about crimes on individuals were asked of a household member who was selected using the birthday section method. This methodology selects an individual who is 16 years or older, whose birthday is soonest after the survey date.

Data appraisal

Comparability:

Prior to 2014/2015, VOCS respondents were asked about their crime-related experiences in the previous calendar year, but since 2014/15 VCS changed to a Continuous Data Collection (CDC) method. In this data collection method, respondents were interviewed on a rolling basis over the course of a year and asked about crime experienced in the 12 months prior to the interview. As a result of this, the victimisation experiences reported by respondents interviewed in a period of 12 months relate to a broader span of 23 months.

The VCS 2016/17 is comparable to previous and subsequent VCSs in that several questions have remained unchanged over time. Where possible, it was generally indicated in the report.

Abstract

During 2018, the National Statistical Agency (NSA) of Namibia received technical assistance from the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics hosted by FAO on the measurement of Post-Harvest Losses (PHL). In this regard, a pilot survey was conducted by NSA in the Kavango West region to compare estimations using subjective and objective methods. The main crops analyzed are millet and maize. Subjective measurement methods included farmer recall, while the objective methods chosen were implemented through crop cutting, and samples of harvested crop analyzed in a lab. Unfortunately, the project ended before the samples were received from the lab, so these data are not available.

The pilot survey was conducted in Kavango West region only and the Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) were derived from the 2013/14 Agricultural Census frame. Staff from the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF), (agricultural technicians as enumerators and agricultural technician as team supervisors) carried out field activities. In total, a sample of 350 farms were enumerated. The data collection took place from May 2018 to August 2018 (30 working days) and included both the subjective and objective measure of the PHL.

Geographic coverage

Regional coverage

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

Agricultural households in the Kavango West region

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The PHL pilot study mainly followed the National Census of Agriculture (NCA) 2013/14 methodology. The NCA 2013/14 used a stratified two stage cluster sample design. At the first stage, primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected with Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) from the sampling frame based on the Enumeration Areas of 2011 Population and Housing Census. The size measure of a PSU in the sampling frame was the number of agricultural households which was derived from the questions included in 2011 Population and Housing Census as per the FAO recommendations.

The list of agricultural households was prepared through the listing process within a selected PSU to compile the sampling frame for agricultural households which was selected systematically.

A third stage of sampling was also conducted to select plots which contained the two main crops, maize, and millet for objective measurement as described below.

A list of plots planted with maize or millet in each sampled PSU was created. Then, one plot was randomly selected from the two main crops of the holder. An area was then marked within the selected plot according to the FAO guidelines and the matured crop inside this marked area was cut and weighed when the crop was wet and dry.

Crop cutting enable estimation of the yield of a crop and the losses during harvesting, threshing/shelling, and cleaning/winnowing. This was done through processing the produce of sub-plots in selected fields. Interviewers did the crop cutting manually according to the techniques used by the farmer. After the manual harvesting was done, the second team of supervisors entered the field and collected all fallen ears/cobs, grains and weighed them after which the information was recorded. These figures are used to estimate the average yields of each of the crops.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Cleaning operations

The dataset received by the Office of Chief Statistician (OCS) team was already cleaned by Aliou Mballo directly with NSA. During the cleaning process, all direct identifiers were removed. Furthermore, the declaration, phyiscal measurement, and storage data for the second crops, were transposed from wide to long. So instead of the farmer declaration variables of the second crop captured by the variables titled from “D6” to “D10-6” in the questionnaire being in their own columns, there is a second row in the dataset containing data from sections C, D, E and G containing data for the second crop, spread across columns “crop_code” to “D5-6”. The same logic applies to the physical measurements and storage data.

The sections CDEG dataset contains data for some crops which do not correspond to records in the Section C dataset on agricultural practices. This is due to a mistake amongst some enumerators which filled in directly Section D for some crops and skipped agricultural practices. This is especially prevelant for measurement data for maize. The data from the lab was not received in time for the project deadline. Accordingly, section “H_Storage_Lab” from the questionnaire was not available to be included in the dataset.

This dataset collection is a compilation of data tables sourced from the website of Tilastokeskus (Statistics Finland), in Finland. The collection comprises numerous tables, each filled with related data that's been meticulously organized into columns and rows. The data within the collection is served from the Statistics Finland's service interface (WFS). Given the nature of the source and the method of data delivery, this dataset collection provides a rich and in-depth analysis opportunity for those seeking to examine and understand the specific data field it covers. This dataset is licensed under CC BY 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.fi).

The continuous growth of the global human population results in increased use and change of landscapes, with infrastructures like transportation or energy facilities, being a particular risk to large carnivores. Environmental Impact Assessments were established to identify the probable environmental consequences of any new proposed project, find ways to reduce impacts, and provide evidence to inform decision making and mitigation. Portugal has a wolf population of around 300 individuals, designated as an endangered species with full legal protection. They occupy the northern mountainous areas of the country which has also been the focus of new human infrastructures over the last 20 years. Consequently, dozens of wolf monitoring programs have been established to evaluate wolf population status, to identify impacts, and to inform appropriate mitigation or compensation measures. We reviewed Portuguese wolf monitoring programs to answer four key questions: do wolf programs examine adequate biological parameters to meet monitoring objectives? is the study design suitable for measuring impacts? are data collection methods and effort sufficient for the stated inference objectives? and do statistical analyses of the data lead to robust conclusions? Overall, we found a mismatch between the stated aims of wolf monitoring and the results reported, and often neither aligns with the existing national wolf monitoring guidelines. Despite the vast effort expended and the diversity of methods used, data analysis makes almost exclusive use of relative indices or summary statistics, with little consideration of the potential biases that arise through the (imperfect) observational process. This makes comparisons of impacts across space and time difficult and is therefore unlikely to contribute to a general understanding of wolf responses to infrastructure-related disturbance. We recommend the development of standardized monitoring protocols and advocate for the use of statistical methods that account for imperfect detection to guarantee accuracy, reproducibility, and efficacy of the programs. Methods We reviewed all major wolf monitoring programs developed for environmental impact assessments in Portugal since 2002 (Table S1, Supplementary material). Given that the focus here is on the adequacy of targeted wolf monitoring for delivering conclusions about the effects of infrastructure development, we reviewed only monitoring programs that were specifically designed for wolves and not those concerned with general mammalian assessment. The starting point was a compilation from the 2019-2021 National Wolf Census (Pimenta et al., 2023), where every wolf monitoring program that occurred between 2014 and 2019 in Portugal was identified. The list was completed with projects that started before 2014 or after 2019 based on personal knowledge, inquires to principal scientific teams, governmental agencies, and EIA consultants. Depending on duration, wolf monitoring programs can produce several, usually annual, reports that are not peer-reviewed and do not appear on standard search engines (e.g., Web of Science or Google Schoolar) but are publicly available from the Portuguese Environmental Agency (APA – www.apambiente.pt). We conducted an online search on APA´s search engine (https://siaia.apambiente.pt/) and identified a total of 30 projects. For each of these projects, we were interested in the first and the last report to identify any methodological changes. If the last report was not present, we reviewed the most recent one. If no report was present, we requested it from the team responsible. Our investigation centred on characterizing and quantifying four components of wolf monitoring programs that are interlinked and that should be ideally determined by the initial objectives: (1) biological parameters, i.e., what wolf parameters were studied to assess impacts; (2) study design, i.e., what sampling schemes were followed to collect and analyse data; (3) data collection, i.e., which sampling methodology and how much effort was used to collect data; and (4) data analysis, i.e., how data were analysed to estimate relevant parameters and assess impact. Biological parameters were identified and classified under two categories: occurrence and demography, which broadly correspond to the necessary inputs to assess impacts like exclusion effect and changes in reproductive patterns. Occurrence-related parameters refer to variables used to measure the presence or absence of wolves, whereas demographic parameters refer to variables that intend to measure population-level effects such as abundance, density, survival, or reproduction. We also recorded whether any effort was made to quantify prey population distribution or abundance as recommended in the guidelines. For study design, we reviewed the sampling design of the project, with specific focus on the spatial and temporal aspect of the study such as total area surveyed, the definition of a sampling site within this region (i.e., resolution), the duration of the study and the number of sampling seasons. The goal here was to determine whether the sampling scheme used was appropriate for assessing infrastructure impacts on wolf distribution or demography, depending on what the focus was. For data collection, we identified the main data collection methodologies used and the corresponding sampling effort. By far the most frequent method used is sign surveys, and specifically scat surveys, and for these studies we recorded whether genetic identification of species or individuals based on faecal DNA was attempted. We compare how sampling effort varies by the various inference objectives and, as above, assess which, if any, project or data collection approach is most likely to produce evidence of impact. We divided the Analysis component into two groups: single-year and multi-year analyses. For single-year analysis we identified how monitoring projects used data to make inferences about the state biological parameters of interest and discuss the associated strengths and weaknesses. For multi-year analyses, we recorded how differences or trends were quantified and associated with infrastructure impacts, commenting on the statistical robustness of the analyses used across the projects.

Research Design: Mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative methods. Data Collection: - Survey questionnaire (Google Forms) with 500 respondents from 10 college libraries. - In-depth interviews with 20 librarians and library administrators. - Observational studies in 5 college libraries. Data Analysis: - Descriptive statistics (mean, median, mode, standard deviation). - Inferential statistics (t-tests, ANOVA). - Thematic analysis for qualitative data. Instruments and Software: - Google Forms - Microsoft Excel - SPSS - NVivo Protocols: - Survey protocol: pilot-tested with a small group. - Interview protocol: used an interview guide. Workflows: - Data cleaning and validation.

In 2022, online surveys were by far the most used traditional quantitative methodologies in the market research industry worldwide. During the survey, 85 percent of respondents stated that they regularly used online surveys as one of their three most used methods. Moreover, nine percent of respondents stated that they used online surveys only occasionally.