Average and median population, population change and proportion of rural population, as well as selected resource income statistics of all communities (census subdivisions) and resource-based communities, for 2016 and 2021.

As of June 23, 2020, 74 percent of deaths due to COVID-19 in the District of Columbia were among Black Americans, even though they make up just 44 percent of the total population. This statistic shows the percentage of coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths compared to population among Black Americans in select U.S. states as of June 23, 2020.

These Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) files contain records representing 1-percent samples of the occupied and vacant housing units in the United States and the people in the occupied units in 2000. Group quarters people also are included. The files contain individual weights for each person and housing unit, which when applied to the individual records, expand the sample to the relevant total. Some of the items included on the housing record are: acreage, agricultural sales, bedrooms, condominium fee, contract rent, cost of utilities, family income in 1999, farm residence, fire, hazard, and flood insurance, fuels used, gross rent, heating fuel, household income in 1999, household type, kitchen facilities, linguistic isolation, meals included in rent, mobile home costs, mortgage payment, mortgage status, plumbing facilities, presence and age of own children, presence of subfamilies in household, real estate taxes, rooms, selected monthly owner costs, size of building (units in structure), telephone service, tenure, vacancy status, value (of housing unit), vehicles available, year householder moved into unit, and year structure was built. Some of the items included on the person record are: ability to speak English, age, ancestry, citizenship, class of worker, disability status, earnings in 1999, educational attainment, grandparents as caregivers, Hispanic origin, hours worked, income in 1999 by type, industry, language spoken at home, marital status, means of transportation to work, migration Public Use Microdata Area (PUMA), migration state, mobility status, veteran period of service, years of military service, occupation, personal care limitation, place of birth, place of work PUMA, place of work state, poverty status in 1999, race, relationship, school enrollment and type of school, time of departure for work, travel time to work, vehicle occupancy, weeks worked in 1999, work limitation status, work status in 1999, and year of entry. The Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) files contain geographic units known as super-Public Use Microdata Areas (super-PUMAs) and Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs). To maintain the confidentiality of the PUMS data, minimum population thresholds are set for PUMAs and super-PUMAs. For the 1-percent state-level files, the super-PUMAs contain a minimum population of 400,000 and are composed of a PUMA or a group of contiguous PUMAs delineated on the 5-percent state-level PUMS files. Super-PUMAs are a new geographic entity for Census 2000. Super-PUMAs and PUMAs also are defined for place of residence on April 1, 1995, and place of work.

Proportion of the school age population, by selected characteristics, in and out of census metropolitan areas (CMAs). This table is included in Section A: A portrait of the school-age population: Cultural diversity of the Pan Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP). PCEIP draws from a wide variety of data sources to provide information on the school-age population, elementary, secondary and postsecondary education, transitions, education finance and labour market outcomes. The program presents indicators for all of Canada, the provinces, the territories, as well as selected international comparisons and comparisons over time. PCEIP is an ongoing initiative of the Canadian Education Statistics Council, a partnership between Statistics Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada that provides a set of statistical measures on education systems in Canada.

This statistic compares the share of populations in China, Japan and the United States that is expected to be over 60 years of age by 2050. The Japanese population estimated to age the fastest with about ** percent of the populace expected to be over ** by 2050.

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

Abstract

The 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 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide reliable estimates of demographic parameters, such as fertility, mortality, family planning, fertility preferences, as well as maternal and child health and nutrition that can be used by program managers and policy makers to evaluate and improve existing programs. In addition, 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 crossnational studies.

The content of the 2002 JPFHS was significantly expanded from the 1997 survey to include additional questions on women’s status, reproductive health, and family planning. In addition, all women age 15-49 and children less than five years of age were tested for anemia.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: 1) nonsampling errors and 2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding 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 2002 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 2002 JPFHS 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 2002 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2002 JPFHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (ISSAS). This module used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The 2002 JPFHS used two questionnaires – namely, the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Arabic. The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of the sampled households and to obtain information on each member’s age, sex, educational attainment, relationship to the head of 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. The Household Questionnaire was also used to identify women who are eligible for the individual interview: ever-married women age 15-49. In addition, all women age 15-49 and children under five years living in the household were measured to determine nutritional status and tested for anemia.

The household and women’s questionnaires were based on the DHS Model “A” Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with high contraceptive prevalence. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaire were made in order to provide detailed information specific to Jordan, using experience gained from the 1990 and 1997 Jordan Population and Family Health Surveys. For each evermarried woman age 15 to 49, information on the following topics was collected:

1. Respondent’s background
2. Birth history
3. Knowledge and practice of family planning
4. Maternal care, breastfeeding, immunization, and health of children under five years of age
5. Marriage
6. Fertility preferences
7. Husband’s background and respondent’s employment
8. Knowledge of AIDS and STIs

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

Cleaning operations

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

Data entry and verification started after one week of office data processing. The process of data entry, including one hundred percent re-entry, 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 the end of October 2002. A data processing specialist from ORC Macro made a trip to Jordan in October and November 2002 to follow up data editing and cleaning and to work on the tabulation of results for the survey preliminary report. The tabulations for the present final report were completed in December 2002.

Response rate

A total of 7,968 households were selected for the survey from the sampling frame; among those selected households, 7,907 households were found. Of those households, 7,825 (99 percent) were successfully interviewed. In those households, 6,151 eligible women were identified, and complete interviews were obtained with 6,006 of them (98 percent of all eligible women). The overall response rate was 97 percent.

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 result 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 2002 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 2002 JPFHS 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 2002 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2002 JPFHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (ISSAS). This module used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: See detailed

Local Getis-Ord Gi* statistics were calculated as a measure of residential racial segregation. Measures were calculated at the census tract level on the proportion of non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian [and Pacific Islander for 1990 and 2000 census], and Hispanic persons per census tract. Gi* statistics are Z-scores that compare the proportion of the population in the focal tract and its neighboring tracts, to the average proportion of a larger geographic unit. For the majority of tracts, the larger geographic unit was the Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA) these tracts belonged to, and for the minority of tracts that fell outside the boundaries of a CBSA, the County was used as the larger unit.Data for the measures were obtained from the IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS) data finder. Data were downloaded for the 1990 and 2000 census, and the 2006-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2019 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) estimates. Geographically standardized time series tables were used for 1990 and 2000 census data. All other ACS data were standardized to 2010 census tract boundaries.G*statistics were calculated using both Rook and Queen conceptualization of spatial relationships. With Rook contiguity, neighbors are determined by those that share a common edge only, while Queen contiguity neighbors are those that share both an edge or a "corner" (common vertex). See detailed documentation for further details.

Abstract

The National Family Health Survey (NFHS) was carried out as the principal activity of a collaborative project to strengthen the research capabilities of the Population Reasearch Centres (PRCs) in India, initiated by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW), Government of India, and coordinated by the International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS), Bombay. Interviews were conducted with a nationally representative sample of 89,777 ever-married women in the age group 13-49, from 24 states and the National Capital Territoty of Delhi. The main objective of the survey was to collect reliable and up-to-date information on fertility, family planning, mortality, and maternal and child health. Data collection was carried out in three phases from April 1992 to September 1993. THe NFHS is one of the most complete surveys of its kind ever conducted in India.

The households covered in the survey included 500,492 residents. The young age structure of the population highlights the momentum of the future population growth of the country; 38 percent of household residents are under age 15, with their reproductive years still in the future. Persons age 60 or older constitute 8 percent of the population. The population sex ratio of the de jure residents is 944 females per 1,000 males, which is slightly higher than sex ratio of 927 observed in the 1991 Census.

The primary objective of the NFHS is to provide national-level and state-level data on fertility, nuptiality, family size preferences, knowledge and practice of family planning, the potentiel demand for contraception, the level of unwanted fertility, utilization of antenatal services, breastfeeding and food supplemation practises, child nutrition and health, immunizations, and infant and child mortality. The NFHS is also designed to explore the demographic and socioeconomic determinants of fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health. This information is intended to assist policymakers, adminitrators and researchers in assessing and evaluating population and family welfare programmes and strategies. The NFHS used uniform questionnaires and uniform methods of sampling, data collection and analysis with the primary objective of providing a source of demographic and health data for interstate comparisons. The data collected in the NFHS are also comparable with those of the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) conducted in many other countries.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Data collected for women 13-49, indicators calculated for women 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 1992-93 DHS is defined as the universe of all women age 13-49 who were either permanent residents of the households in the NDHS sample or visitors present in the households on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN

The sample design for the NFHS was discussed during a Sample Design Workshop held in Madurai in Octber, 1991. The workshop was attended by representative from the PRCs; the COs; the Office of the Registrar General, India; IIPS and the East-West Center/Macro International. A uniform sample design was adopted in all the NFHS states. The Sample design adopted in each state is a systematic, stratified sample of households, with two stages in rural areas and three stages in urban areas.

SAMPLE SIZE AND ALLOCATION

The sample size for each state was specified in terms of a target number of completed interviews with eligible women. The target sample size was set considering the size of the state, the time and ressources available for the survey and the need for separate estimates for urban and rural areas of the stat. The initial target sample size was 3,000 completed interviews with eligible women for states having a population of 25 million or less in 1991; 4,000 completed interviews for large states with more than 25 million population; 8,000 for Uttar Pradesh, the largest state; and 1,000 each for the six small northeastern states. In States with a substantial number of backward districts, the initial target samples were increased so as to allow separate estimates to be made for groups of backward districts.

The urban and rural samples within states were drawn separetly and , to the extent possible, sample allocation was proportional to the size of the urban-rural populations (to facilitate the selection of a self-weighting sample for each state). In states where the urban population was not sufficiently large to provide a sample of at least 1,000 completed interviews with eligible women, the urban areas were appropriately oversampled (except in the six small northeastern states).

THE RURAL SAMPLE: THE FRAME, STRATIFICATION AND SELECTION

A two-stage stratified sampling was adopted for the rural areas: selection of villages followed by selection of households. Because the 1991 Census data were not available at the time of sample selection in most states, the 1981 Census list of villages served as the sampling frame in all the states with the exception of Assam, Delhi and Punjab. In these three states the 1991 Census data were used as the sampling frame.

Villages were stratified prior to selection on the basis of a number of variables. The firts level of stratification in all the states was geographic, with districts subdivided into regions according to their geophysical characteristics. Within each of these regions, villages were further stratified using some of the following variables : village size, distance from the nearest town, proportion of nonagricultural workers, proportion of the population belonging to scheduled castes/scheduled tribes, and female literacy. However, not all variables were used in every state. Each state was examined individually and two or three variables were selected for stratification, with the aim of creating not more than 12 strata for small states and not more than 15 strata for large states. Females literacy was often used for implicit stratification (i.e., the villages were ordered prior to selection according to the proportion of females who were literate). Primary sampling Units (PSUs) were selected systematically, with probaility proportional to size (PPS). In some cases, adjacent villages with small population sizes were combined into a single PSU for the purpose of sample selection. On average, 30 households were selected for interviewing in each selected PSU.

In every state, all the households in the selected PSUs were listed about two weeks prior to the survey. This listing provided the necessary frame for selecting households at the second sampling stage. The household listing operation consisted of preparing up-to-date notional and layout sketch maps of each selected PSU, assigning numbers to structures, recording addresses (or locations) of these structures, identifying the residential structures, and listing the names of the heads of all the households in the residentiak structures in the selected PSU. Each household listing team consisted of a lister and a mapper. The listing operation was supervised by the senior field staff of the concerned CO and the PRC in each state. Special efforts were made not to miss any household in the selected PSU during the listing operation. In PSUs with fewer than 500 households, a complete household listing was done. In PSUs with 500 or more households, segmentation of the PSU was done on the basis of existing wards in the PSU, and two segments were selected using either systematic sampling or PPS sampling. The household listing in such PSUs was carried out in the selected segments. The households to be interviewed were selected from provided with the original household listing, layout sketch map and the household sample selected for each PSU. All the selected households were approached during the data collection, and no substitution of a household was allowed under any circumstances.

THE RURAL URBAN SAMPLE: THE FRAME, STRATIFICATION AND SELECTION

A three-stage sample design was adopted for the urban areas in each state: selection of cities/towns, followed by urban blocks, and finally households. Cities and towns were selected using the 1991 population figures while urban blocks were selected using the 1991 list of census enumeration blocks in all the states with the exception of the firts phase states. For the first phase states, the list of urban blocks provided by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSSO) served as the sampling frame.

All cities and towns were subdivided into three strata: (1) self-selecting cities (i.e., cities with a population large enough to be selected with certainty), (2) towns that are district headquaters, and (3) other towns. Within each stratum, the cities/towns were arranged according to the same kind of geographic stratification used in the rural areas. In self-selecting cities, the sample was selected according to a two-stage sample design: selection of the required number of urban blocks, followed by selection of households in each of selected blocks. For district headquarters and other towns, a three stage sample design was used: selection of towns with PPS, followed by selection of two census blocks per selected town, followed by selection of households from each selected block. As in rural areas, a household listing was carried out in the selected blocks, and an average of 20 households per block was selected systematically.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three types of questionnaires were used in the NFHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women's Questionnaire, and the Village Questionnaire. The overall content

This study contains an assortment of data files relating to the electoral and demographic history of New York State. Part 1, Mortality Statistics of the Seventh Census, 1850: Place of Birth for United States Cities, contains counts of persons by place of birth for United States cities as reported in the 1850 United States Census. Place of birth is coded for states and for selected foreign countries, and percentages are also included. Part 2, Selected Tables of New York State and United States Censuses of 1835-1875: New York State Counties, contains data from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875, and includes data from the United States Censuses of 1840 and 1850. The bulk of the tables concern church and synagogue membership. The tables for 1835 and 1845 include counts of persons by sex, legal male voters, alien males, not taxed Colored, taxed Colored, and taxed Colored can vote. The 1840 tables include total population, employment by industry, and military pensioners. The 1855 tables provide counts of persons by place of birth. Part 3, New York State Negro Suffrage Referenda Returns, 1846, 1860, and 1869, by Election District, contains returns for 28 election districts on the issue of Negro suffrage, with information on number of votes for, against, and total votes. Also provided are percentages of votes for and against Negro suffrage. Part 4, New York State Liquor License Referendum Returns, 1846, Town Level, contains returns from the Liquor License Referendum held in May 1846. For each town the file provides total number of votes cast, votes for, votes against, and percentage of votes for and against. The source of the data are New York State Assembly Documents, 70 Session, 1847, Document 40. Part 5, New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875: Counts of Churches and Church Membership by Denomination, contains counts of churches, total value of church property, church seating capacity, usual number of persons attending church, and number of church members from the New York State Censuses of 1845, 1855, 1865, and 1875. Counts are by denomination at the state summary level. Part 6, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1830-1875, Town Level, presents town-level data for the elections of 1830, 1834, 1838, 1840, and 1842. The file also includes various summary statistics from the New York State Censuses of 1835, 1845, 1855, and 1865 with limited data from the 1840 United States Census. The data for 1835 and 1845 include male eligible voters, aliens not naturalized, non-white persons not taxed, and non-white persons taxed. The data for 1840 include population, employment by industry, and military service pensioners. The data for 1845 cover total population and number of males, place of birth, and churches. The data for 1855 and 1865 provide counts of persons by place of birth, number of dwellings, total value of dwellings, counts of persons by race and sex, number of voters by native and foreign born, and number of families. The data for 1865 also include counts of Colored not taxed and data for churches and synagogues such as number, value, seating capacity, and attendance. The data for 1875 include population, native and foreign born, counts of persons by race, by place of birth, by native, by naturalized citizens, and by alien males aged 21 and over. Part 7, New York State Election Returns, Censuses, and Religious Censuses: Merged Tables, 1844-1865, Town Level, contains town-level data for the state of New York for the elections of 1844 and 1860. It also contains data for 1850 such as counts of persons by sex and race. Data for 1855 includes counts of churches, value of churches and real estate, seating capacity, and church membership. Data for 1860 include date church was founded and source of that information. Also provided are total population counts for the years 1790, 1800, 1814, 1820, 1825, 1830, 1835, 1845, 1856, 1850, 1855, 1860, and 1865. (ICPSR 3/16/2015)

Abstract

The 1993 Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women less than 50 years old. The survey was designed to provide information on fertility levels and trends, infant and child mortality, family planning, and maternal and child health. The TDHS was conducted by the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies under a subcontract through an agreement between the General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. of Calverton, Maryland. Fieldwork was conducted from August to October 1993. Interviews were carried out in 8,619 households and with 6,519 women.

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of ever-married women of reproductive ages, designed to collect data on fertility, marriage patterns, family planning, early age mortality, socioeconomic characteristics, breastfeeding, immunisation of children, treatment of children during episodes of illness, and nutritional status of women and children. The TDHS, as part of the international DHS project, is also the latest survey in a series of national-level population and health surveys in Turkey, which have been conducted by the Institute of Population Studies, Haeettepe University (HIPS).

More specifically, the objectives of the TDHS are to:

Collect data at the national level that will allow the calculation of demographic rates, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; Analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality; Measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by method, region, and urban- rural residence; Collect data on mother and child health, including immunisations, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections among children under five, antenatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding; Measure the nutritional status of children under five and of their mothers using anthropometric measurements.

The TDHS information is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in evaluating existing programs and in designing new strategies for improving family planning and health services in Turkey.

MAIN RESULTS

Fertility in Turkey is continuing to decline. If Turkish women maintain current fertility rates during their reproductive years, they can expect to have all average of 2.7 children by the end of their reproductive years. The highest fertility rate is observed for the age group 20-24. There are marked regional differences in fertility rates, ranging from 4.4 children per woman in the East to 2.0 children per woman in the West. Fertility also varies widely by urban-rural residence and by education level. A woman living in rural areas will have almost one child more than a woman living in an urban area. Women who have no education have almost one child more than women who have a primary-level education and 2.5 children more than women with secondary-level education.

The first requirement of success ill family planning is the knowledge of family planning methods. Knowledge of any method is almost universal among Turkish women and almost all those who know a method also know the source of the method. Eighty percent of currently married women have used a method sometime in their life. One third of currently married women report ever using the IUD. Overall, 63 percent of currently married women are currently using a method. The majority of these women are modern method users (35 percent), but a very substantial proportion use traditional methods (28 percent). the IUD is the most commonly used modern method (I 9 percent), allowed by the condom (7 percent) and the pill (5 percent). Regional differences are substantial. The level of current use is 42 percent in tile East, 72 percent in tile West and more than 60 percent in tile other three regions. "File common complaints about tile methods are side effects and health concerns; these are especially prevalent for the pill and IUD.

One of the major child health indicators is immunisation coverage. Among children age 12-23 months, the coverage rates for BCG and the first two doses of DPT and polio were about 90 percent, with most of the children receiving those vaccines before age one. The results indicate that 65 percent of the children had received all vaccinations at some time before the survey. On a regional basis, coverage is significantly lower in the Eastern region (41 percent), followed by the Northern and Central regions (61 percent and 65 percent, respectively). Acute respiratory infections (ARI) and diarrhea are the two most prevalent diseases of children under age five in Turkey. In the two weeks preceding the survey, the prevalence of ARI was 12 percent and the prevalence of diarrhea was 25 percent for children under age five. Among children with diarrhea 56 percent were given more fluids than usual.

Breastfeeding in Turkey is widespread. Almost all Turkish children (95 percent) are breastfed for some period of time. The median duration of breastfeeding is 12 months, but supplementary foods and liquids are introduced at an early age. One-third of children are being given supplementary food as early as one month of age and by the age of 2-3 months, half of the children are already being given supplementary foods or liquids.

By age five, almost one-filth of children arc stunted (short for their age), compared to an international reference population. Stunting is more prevalent in rural areas, in the East, among children of mothers with little or no education, among children who are of higher birth order, and among those born less than 24 months after a prior birth. Overall, wasting is not a problem. Two percent of children are wasted (thin for their height), and I I percent of children under five are underweight for their age. The survey results show that obesity is d problem among mothers. According to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculations, 51 percent of mothers are overweight, of which 19 percent are obese.

Geographic coverage

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 12-49
• Children under five

Universe

The population covered by the 1993 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the TDHS was designed to provide estimates of population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates for the nation as a whole, fOr urban and rural areas, and for the five major regions of the country. A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS sample.

Sample selection was undertaken in three stages. The sampling units at the first stage were settlements that differed in population size. The frame for the selection of the primary sampling units (PSUs) was prepared using the results of the 1990 Population Census. The urban frame included provinces and district centres and settlements with populations of more than 10,000; the rural frame included subdistricts and villages with populations of less than 10,000. Adjustments were made to consider the growth in some areas right up to survey time. In addition to the rural-urban and regional stratifications, settlements were classified in seven groups according to population size.

The second stage of selection involved the list of quarters (administrative divisions of varying size) for each urban settlement, provided by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Every selected quarter was subdivided according tothe number of divisions(approximately 100 households)assigned to it. In rural areas, a selected village was taken as a single quarter, and wherever necessary, it was divided into subdivisions of approximately 100 households. In cases where the number of households in a selected village was less than 100 households, the nearest village was selected to complete the 100 households during the listing activity, which is described below.

After the selection of the secondary sampling units (SSUs), a household listing was obtained for each by the TDHS listing teams. The listing activity was carried out in May and June. From the household lists, a systematic random sample of households was chosen for the TDHS. All ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used in the main fieldwork for the TDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive age. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed in the DHS program and on the questionnaires that had been employed in previous Turkish population and health surveys. The questionnaires were adapted to obtain data needed for program planning in Turkey during consultations with population and health agencies. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Turkish.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, marital status and relationship to the head of household for each person listed as a household member

This table describes the proportion of the population with one or more underlying health conditions that are believed to increase the risk of negative outcomes following COVID-19 infection, including hospitalization and death. Estimates are based on data from the 2017-2018 Canadian Community Health Survey, and are provided for the Canadian adult (age 18 and older) population by select demographic and socio-economic characteristics at the national and provincial/territorial level.

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.

Abstract

The 1993 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey (KDHS) was a nationally representative survey of 7,540 women age 15-49 and 2,336 men age 20-54. The KDHS was designed to provide information on levels and trends of fertility, infant and child mortality, family planning knowledge and use, maternal and child health, and knowledge of AIDS. In addition, the male survey obtained data on men's knowledge and attitudes towards family planning and awareness of AIDS. The data are intended for use by programme managers and policymakers to evaluate and improve family planning and matemal and child health programmes. Fieldwork for the KDHS took place from mid-February until mid-August 1993. All areas of Kenya were covered by the survey, except for seven northem districts which together contain less than four percent of the country's population.

The KDHS was conducted by the National Council for Population and Development (NCPD) and the Central Bureau of Statistics of the Government of Kenya. Macro International Inc. provided financial and technical assistance to the project through the intemational Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) contract with the U.S. Agency for International Development.

OBJECTIVES

The KDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. It was designed as a follow-on to the 1989 KDHS, a national-level survey of similar size that was implemented by the same organisations. In general, the objectives of KDHS are to: - assess the overall demographic situation in Kenya, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programmes in Kenya, - advance survey methodology, and - assist the NCPD to strengthen and improve its technical skills to conduct demographic and health surveys.

The KDHS was specifically designed to: - provide data on the family planning and fertility behaviour of the Kenyan population to enable the NCPD to evaluate and enhance the National Family Planning Programme, - measure changes in fertility and contraceptive prevalence and at the same time study the factors which affect these changes, such as marriage patterns, urban/rural residence, availability of contraception, breastfeeding habits and other socioeconomic factors, and - examine the basic indicators of maternal and child health in Kenya.

KEY FINDINGS

The 1993 KDHS reinforces evidence of a major decline in fertility which was first revealed by the findings of the 1989 KDHS. Fertility continues to decline and family planning use has increased. However, the disparity between knowledge and use of family planning remains quite wide. There are indications that infant and under five child mortality rates are increasing, which in part might be attributed to the increase in AIDS prevalence.

Geographic coverage

The 1993 KDHS sample is national in scope, with the exclusion of all three districts in North Eastern Province and four other northern districts (Samburu and Turkana in Rift Valley Province and Isiolo and 4 Marsabit in Eastern Province). Together the excluded areas account for less than 4 percent of Kenya's population.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 20-54
• Children under five

Universe

The population covered by the 1993 KDHS is defined as the universe of all women age 15-49 in Kenya and all husband age 20-54 living in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 1993 KDHS was national in scope, with the exclusion of all three districts in Northeastern Province and four other northern districts (Isiolo and Marsabit from Eastern Province and Samburu and Turkana from Rift Valley Province). Together the excluded areas account for less than four percent of Kenya's population. The KDHS sample points were selected from a national master sample maintained by the Central Bureau of Statistics, the third National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP-3), which is an improved version of NASSEP2 used in the 1989 survey. This master sample follows a two-stage design, stratified by urban-rural residence, and within the rural stratum, by individual district. In the first stage, 1989 census enumeration areas (EAs) were selected with probability proportional to size. The selected EAs were segmented into the expected number of standard-sized clusters to form NASSEP clusters. The entire master sample consists of 1,048 rural and 325 urban ~ sample points ("clusters"). A total of 536 clusters---92 urban and 444 rural--were selected for coverage in the KDHS. Of these, 520 were successfully covered. Sixteen clusters were inaccessible for various reasons.

As in the 1989 KDHS, selected districts were oversampled in the 1993 survey in order to produce more reliable estimates for certain variables at the district level. Fifteen districts were thus targetted in the 1993 KDHS: Bungoma, Kakamega, Kericho, Kilifi, Kisii, Machakos, Meru, Murang'a, Nakuru, Nandi, Nyeri, Siaya, South Nyanza, Taita-Taveta, and Uasin Gishu; in addition, Nairobi and Mombasa were also targetted. Although six of these districts were subdivided shortly before the sample design was finalised) the previous boundaries of these districts were used for the KDHS in order to maintain comparability with the 1989 survey. About 400 rural households were selected in each of these 15 districts, just over 1000 rural households in other districts, and about 18130 households in urban areas, for a total of almost 9,000 households. Due to this oversampling, the KDHS sample is not self-weighting at the national level.

After the selection of the KDHS sample points, fieldstaff from the Central Bureau of Statistics conducted a household listing operation in January and early February 1993, immediately prior to the launching of the fieldwork. A systematic sample of households was then selected from these lists, with an average "take" of 20 households in the urban clusters and 16 households in rural clusters, for a total of 8,864 households selected. Every other household was identified as selected for the male survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all women age 15-49, interviewers were to also interview all men age 20-54. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 8,000 women age 15-49 and 2,500 men age 20-54.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the KDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Woman's Questionnaire, a Man's Questionnaire and a Services Availability Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model B Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with low levels of contraceptive use. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaires were made during a series of meetings organised around specific topics or sections of the questionnaires (e.g., fertility, family planning). The NCPD invited staff from a variety of organisations to attend these meetings, including the Population Studies Research Institute and other departments of the University of Nairobi, the Woman's Bureau, and various units of the Ministry of Health. The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Kiswahili and eight of the most widely spoken local languages in Kenya (Kalenjin, Kamba, Kikuyu, Kisii, Luhya, Luo, Meru, and Mijikenda).

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors of selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his/her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for individual interview. 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.

b) The Woman's Questionnaire was used to collect information from women aged 15-49. 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, Awareness of AIDS. In addition, interviewing teams measured the height and weight of children under age five (identified through the birth histories) and their mothers.

c) Information from a subsample of men aged 20-54 was collected using a Man's Questionnaire. Men were asked about their background characteristics, knowledge and use of family planning methods, marriage, fertility preferences, and awareness of AIDS.

d) The Services Availability Questionnaire was used to collect information on the health and family planning services obtained within the cluster areas. One service availability questionnaire was to be completed in each cluster.

Cleaning operations

All questionnaires for the KDHS were returned to the NCPD headquarters for data processing. The processing operation consisted of office editing, coding of open-ended questions, data entry, and editing errors found by the computer programs. One NCPD officer, one data processing supervisor, one questionnaire administrator, two office editors, and initially four data entry operators were responsible for the data processing operation. Due to attrition and the need to speed up data processing, another four data entry operators were later hired

As of June 23, 2020, 54 percent of deaths due to COVID-19 in the state of Michigan were among White Americans, where they make up 78 percent of the total population. This statistic shows the percentage of coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths compared to population among White Americans in select U.S. states as of June 23, 2020.

Designed to facilitate analysis of the status of Blacks around the turn of the century, this oversample of Black-headed households in the United States was drawn from the 1910 manuscript census schedules. The sample complements the 1/250 Public Use Sample of the 1910 census manuscripts collected by Samuel H. Preston at the University of Pennsylvania: CENSUS OF POPULATION, 1910 [UNITED STATES]: PUBLIC USE SAMPLE (ICPSR 9166). Part 1, Household Records, contains a record for each household selected in the sample and supplies variables describing the location, type, and composition of the households. Part 2, Individual Records, contains a record for each individual residing in the sampled households and includes information on demographic characteristics, occupation, literacy, nativity, ethnicity, and fertility. Manuscript census records for 1910 from counties with at least 10 percent of the population African-American (Negro, Black, or Mulatto) located in nine states where a large number of counties had at least this same proportion of African-Americans (Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas). The four states with the largest population of Blacks (South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia) were excluded from the oversample because the 1/250 Public Use Sample (referred to above) provided sufficient cases for most analyses. Sampling was carried out using computer software that randomly selected households based on the manuscript census microfilm reel number, sequence, and page and line number, with two different sampling fractions. Counties in Maryland, Kentucky, and Texas were sampled using a 0.01 sampling fraction, while a 0.005 sampling fraction was employed in Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, and Arkansas. In Louisiana, both fractions were utilized to test optimum sampling fractions. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Created variable labels and/or value labels.. The data contain blanks and alphabetic characters. This oversample can be combined with the 1/250 Public Use Sample by differential weighting of households (or individuals) by county of enumeration as described in the User's Guide. Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Household Records DS2: Individual Records

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/ .

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2), 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by Kantar, on behalf of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). General information on the methodology and implementation is available in the documentations tab. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older with access to landline and/or mobile phones.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A multi-stage sampling, random route walk method was employed. The first level was an automatic selection of all administrative level one units in the country. After this, PSUs were selected in each units, followed by SSUs. Exclusions: The regions of Tillabéri and Diffa were excluded from sampling for safety reasons. The unsampled areas cover approximately 13 percent of the national population. Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

The margin of error is estimated as NA. This is calculated around a proportion at the 95% confidence level. The maximum margin of error was calculated assuming a reported percentage of 50% and takes into account the design effect.

In 2022, around 28 percent of the population aged 15 years and over in Türkiye smoked every day. This statistic shows the percentage of the population in select countries worldwide who smoked daily as of 2022.

Abstract

The Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey 2000 (CDHS) is the first nationally representative survey ever conducted in Cambodia on population and health issues. The primary objective of the survey is to provide the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Planning (MoP), and other relevant institutions and users with updated and reliable data on infant and child mortality, fertility preferences, family planning behavior, maternal mortality, utilization of maternal and child health services, health expenditures, women’s status, domestic violence, and knowledge and behavior regarding AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). This information contributes to policy decisions, planning, monitoring, and program evaluation for the development of Cambodia, at both national- and local-government levels.

The long-term objectives of the survey are to technically strengthen the capacity both of the Ministry of Health and the National Institute of Statistics (NIS) of MoP for planning, conducting, and analyzing the results of further surveys.

The CDHS 2000 survey was conducted by the National Institute of Statistics of the Ministry of Planning, and the Ministry of Health. The CDHS executive committee and technical committee were established to oversee all technical aspects of implementation. They consisted of representatives from the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Planning, the National Institute of Statistics, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). ORC Macro provided technical assistance including sampling design, survey methodology, interviewer training, and data analysis through the MEASURE DHS+ project. Funding for the survey came from UNFPA, UNICEF, and USAID.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The CDHS survey called for a nationally representative sample of 15,300 women between the ages of 15 and 49. Survey estimates are produced for 12 individual provinces (Banteay Mean Chey, Kampong Cham, Kampong Chhnang, Kampong Spueu, Kampong Thum, Kandal, Kaoh Kong, Phnom Penh, Prey Veaeng, Pousat, Svay Rieng, and Takaev) and for the following 5 groups of provinces: - Bat Dambang and Krong Pailin - Kampot, Krong Preah Sihanouk, and Krong Kaeb - Kracheh, Preah Vihear, and Stueng Traeng - Mondol Kiri and Rotanak Kiri - Otdar Mean Chey and Siem Reab.

The master sample developed in 1998 by the National Institute of Statistics served as the sampling frame for the CDHS survey. The master sample is based on the 1998 Cambodia General Population Census and consists of 600 villages selected with probability proportional to the number of households within the village. Villages are listed with the total population count and the number of enumeration areas (EAs), households, and segments. Enumeration areas were created during the cartography conducted in preparation for the 1998 census. A segment in a village corresponds to a block of about ten households. Segments were created only for villages retained in the master sample and maps showing their boundaries were also available for all of them.

The sample for the CDHS survey is a stratified sample selected in three stages. As for the master sample, stratification was achieved by separating every reporting domain into urban and rural areas. The sample was selected independently in every stratum.

The master sample contains a small number of villages for some of the provinces. For this reason, additional villages were directly selected from the census frame in order to reach the required sample size in these provinces. In the first stage, 471 villages were selected with probability proportional to the number of households in the village. Of these 471 villages, 63 were directly selected from the 1998 census frame. In the second stage, 5 or fewer segments were retained from each of the villages selected from the master sample, while 1 EA was retained from each of the 63 villages directly selected from the 1998 census frame. Each of these EAs consists of several segments.

A household listing was carried out in all selected segments and EAs, and the resulting lists of households served as the sampling frame for the selection of households in the third stage. All women 15-49 were interviewed in selected households.

In addition, a subsample of 50 percent of households was selected for data collection of anthropometry. Anemia testing was implemented in 25 percent of the sample. Only the women identified in the households with anemia testing were eligible for the section related to women's status. In this subsample of households, only one woman was selected in each household to be interviewed on domestic violence.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Two types of questionnaires were used in the CDHS 2000 survey: the Household Questionnaire and the Women’s questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the international MEASURE DHS+ model. They were modified according to the situation in Cambodia and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning program managers and policymakers, mainly the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Planning, and other relevant institutions and organizations. The agencies involved in developing these questionnaires were the National Institute of Public Health/MoH, the National Institute of Statistics/MoP, UNFPA, UNICEF, USAID, WHO, Hellen Keller International, Marie Stopes International, the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Project Against Domestic Violence, and the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) project of ORC Macro. The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into Khmer. Back translation of the questionnaires, from Khmer to English, was also conducted.

The Household Questionnaire enumerated all the usual members and visitors of the selected households and collected information on the socioeconomic status of the households. The first part of the questionnaire collected information on the relationship of the persons to the head of household and items such as residence, sex, age, marital status, and level of education. This information was used to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview. The Household Questionnaire also contained information on the prevalence of accidents, physical impairment, illness, and health expenditures. Information was also collected on the dwelling units, including source of water, type of toilet facilities, fuels used for cooking, materials used for the house’s floor and roof, and ownership of a variety of consumer goods. In addition, during the household survey, anthropometry and anemia testing were carried out to determine nutritional status among children less than five years old and women age 15-49.

The Women’s Questionnaire collected information from all women age 15-49 on the following topics:-• Respondent’s background characteristics - Reproduction - Contraceptin (knowledge and use of family planning) - Pregnancy, antenatal care, delivery, and postnatal care - Infant feeding practices, child immunization, and health - Marriage and sexual activity - Fertility preference - Husband’s background characteristics and women’s work - Knowledge of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections - Maternal mortality and adult mortality - Women’s status - Domestic violence (household relations module).

Response rate

A total of 12,810 households were selected in the sample, of which 12,475 were occupied at the time the fieldwork was carried out. Of the 12,475 occupied households, 12,236 were successfully interviewed, resulting in a household response rate of 98.1 percent. The main reason for the noninterviewed households was that those households no longer existed in the sampled clusters at the time of the interview.

A total of 15,558 women in these households were identified as women eligible to be interviewed. Questionnaires were then completed for 15,351 of those women, which represented a response rate of 98.7 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among eligible women was a failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to their household.

Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.2 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 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 2000 Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey (CDHS) 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 2000 Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey 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.

Dataset from Singapore Department of Statistics. For more information, visit https://data.gov.sg/datasets/d_19514eee6744b2db2c64c52c39604f87/view