Abstract

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

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

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

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

UPDATING OF SAMPLING FRAME

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

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

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

Cleaning operations

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

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

Response rate

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

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

Sampling error estimates

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

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

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

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

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

Data appraisal

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

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

A data set of cross-nationally comparable microdata samples for 15 Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) countries (Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, UK, USA) based on the 1990 national population and housing censuses in countries of Europe and North America to study the social and economic conditions of older persons. These samples have been designed to allow research on a wide range of issues related to aging, as well as on other social phenomena. A common set of nomenclatures and classifications, derived on the basis of a study of census data comparability in Europe and North America, was adopted as a standard for recoding. This series was formerly called Dynamics of Population Aging in ECE Countries. The recommendations regarding the design and size of the samples drawn from the 1990 round of censuses envisaged: (1) drawing individual-based samples of about one million persons; (2) progressive oversampling with age in order to ensure sufficient representation of various categories of older people; and (3) retaining information on all persons co-residing in the sampled individual''''s dwelling unit. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania provided the entire population over age 50, while Finland sampled it with progressive over-sampling. Canada, Italy, Russia, Turkey, UK, and the US provided samples that had not been drawn specially for this project, and cover the entire population without over-sampling. Given its wide user base, the US 1990 PUMS was not recoded. Instead, PAU offers mapping modules, which recode the PUMS variables into the project''''s classifications, nomenclatures, and coding schemes. Because of the high sampling density, these data cover various small groups of older people; contain as much geographic detail as possible under each country''''s confidentiality requirements; include more extensive information on housing conditions than many other data sources; and provide information for a number of countries whose data were not accessible until recently. Data Availability: Eight of the fifteen participating countries have signed the standard data release agreement making their data available through NACDA/ICPSR (see links below). Hungary and Switzerland require a clearance to be obtained from their national statistical offices for the use of microdata, however the documents signed between the PAU and these countries include clauses stipulating that, in general, all scholars interested in social research will be granted access. Russia requested that certain provisions for archiving the microdata samples be removed from its data release arrangement. The PAU has an agreement with several British scholars to facilitate access to the 1991 UK data through collaborative arrangements. Statistics Canada and the Italian Institute of statistics (ISTAT) provide access to data from Canada and Italy, respectively. * Dates of Study: 1989-1992 * Study Features: International, Minority Oversamples * Sample Size: Approx. 1 million/country Links: * Bulgaria (1992), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/02200 * Czech Republic (1991), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06857 * Estonia (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06780 * Finland (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06797 * Romania (1992), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06900 * Latvia (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/02572 * Lithuania (1989), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03952 * Turkey (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/03292 * U.S. (1990), http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/06219

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

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

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

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

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

Objectives

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

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

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

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

Geographic coverage

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

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

Response rate

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

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

China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data was reported at 0.105 % in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.102 % for 2022. China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data is updated yearly, averaging 0.100 % from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2023, with 37 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 100.000 % in 2020 and a record low of 0.063 % in 1994. China Population Statistics: Sample Survey: Sampling Fraction data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: Level of Education.

Abstract

The main objectives of the study were to assess the knowledge and beliefs of high-risk groups about STI and HIV, determine the prevalence of HIV infection and syphilis among these groups and obtain baseline data that will permit comparisons of risk behaviours, HIV infection and syphilis over time.

Geographic coverage

Six selected states

Analysis unit

State, group, individual

Universe

The Integrated Biological and Behavioural Surveillance Survey 2007 covered only males and females aged up to 15-49 years among seven sub-populations at risk of HIV in six selected states of Nigeria, namely Female Sex Workers (both brothel- and non-brothel-based), men who have sex with men (MSM), injecting drug users (IDU), members of the armed forces, police, and transport workers (TW).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

In order to reach a representative sample of all groups involved in the 2007 IBBSS, a number of different sampling techniques were used depending on the group in question, including simple random sampling (SRS), cluster sampling (probability proportionate to size (PPS) for fixed populations), time-location sampling (TLS) and respondent-driven sampling (RDS). For MSM and IDU, the RDS method was used, while a TLS technique was used to select non-brothel-based FSW and TW. The brothel-based FSW, armed forces, and police were selected using a two-stage cluster sampling technique. The take all (TA) sampling method was used when the desired sample size was not attainable based on the results of target population mapping.

ITLS is a form of cluster sampling that contains both time and location dimensions. TLS provides the opportunity to reach members of a target population who access certain locations at any point in time. The process starts by creating time * location PSU (PSU that have both a time and a location dimensions) from which a random sample is selected. At the second stage all or a sub-sample of randomly selected population members who appear at the site during a designated time interval of fixed length, for example 4 hours, are interviewed. To the extent that all members of a target population access the locations at some point in time, TLS is a probability sampling method because: (i) all population members have a non-zero chance of selection as long as the TLS frame is complete; and (ii) the selection probabilities can be calculated by taking the time dimension as well as the space dimension into account.

RDS is a method that combines "snowball sampling" with a mathematical model that weights the sample to compensate for the fact that the sample was collected in a non-random way. Characterized by long referral chains (to ensure that all members of the target population can be reached) and a statistical theory of the sampling process which controls for bias including the effects of choice of seeds and differences in network size, RDS overcomes the shortcomings of institutional sampling (coverage) and snow-ball type methods (statistical validity). By making chain-referral into a probability sampling method and consequently resolving the dilemma of a choice between coverage and statistical validity, RDS has become the most appropriate method for reaching the hard-to-reach population groups. The RDS process starts with the recruitment of the initial seeds each of whom recruits a maximum of two to three members from their population group.

Sampling deviation

Cluster samples were chosen randomly based on sampling frames developed through the mapping process. This process was to identify places where potential subjects could be reached and sampled. Field work for the mapping exercise was performed over one week. Due to the limited period some hidden populations may not be adequately represented in sampling frames.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was designed in collaboration with FMOH, SFH, CDC, WHO, UNAIDS and other stakeholders. At both central- and state-level trainings, each question in the questionnaire was reviewed and role-played and possible challenges were identified and addressed. The questionnaire of Integrated Biological and Behavioural Surveillance Survey 2007 was grouped into fifteen sections

Section 0: Identification particularsBackground characteristics Section 1: Background characteristics Section 2: Marriage and partnerships Section 3: Sexual history numbers and types of partners Section 4: Sexual history-regular partners (for those with spouse/live-in sexual partners only; for MSM, female spouse/live-in sexual partners only) Section 5: Sexual history-boy friends/girl friends (for those with boy friends/girl friends sexual partners only; for MSM, female boy friends/girl friends sexual partners only) Section 6: Sexual history-purchasing sex (male only) (for those with commercial sex partners only; for MSM, female commercial sex partners only) Section 7: Sexual history-casual-non regular non-paying sexual partners (for those with casual sexual partners only; for MSM, female casual sexual partners only) Section 8: Selling sex (for female populatios only) Section 9: Social habits (all groups) Section 10: Dru use/needle sharing (all population reporting drug injection in the past 12 months) Section 11: MSM-men who have sex with men (ask all respondents) Section 12: STIs (ask all respondents) Section 13: Knowledge, opinions, and attitudes towards HIV/AIDS (ask all respondents) Section 12: Exposure to interventions

Cleaning operations

After data entry, the data was cleaned using STATA 10. Frequency counts were carried out to check consistency and assess cleaniness of the database. The data cleaning also included the following:

Searching for ages outside the age range criteria; Cross-checking all corresponding skips to the questionnaire; Reviewing the cluster allocations; Cross-checking the questionnaire completion responses from the interviewers in the database with the records in the supervisors log to ensure they matched; Tallying the supervisors log of blood samples collected to ensure that recorded numbers of samples collected matched the results recorded in the database; and Consistency checks involving cross-checking answers to related questions.

Response rate

There were 11,175 individuals selected for this study out of whom 0.8% and 8.1% refused to participate in behavioural and biological componenets of the study respectively.

Non-brothel based FSW had the highest refusal rate of 2.7% and 19.4% for behavioural and biological components respectively, followed by brothel-based FSW at 2.2% and 13.1% respectively. Refusal rates for the behavioural component were less than 0.5% for other groups.

For the biological component, refusal rates were 3% for police, 0.8% for the armed forces, 1 .2% for TW, 4.6% for MSM, and 3.3% for IDU.

Sampling error estimates

No sampling error estimate

Data appraisal

A template for the questionnaire was designed with pre-programmed consistency checks for cross-checking answers, including skips and eligibility criteria. Laboratory data forms were collected on a periodic basis from the central laboratories and brought to the same centralized location for data entry. At least 25% of the questionnaires entered daily by each data entry clerk had the behaviour and other non-biological data entered, while 100% double-data entry was achieved for the biological data for quality control purposes. The data entry clerks were supervised by three supervisors who reviewed and validated all questionnaires entered.

Abstract

IPUMS-International is an effort to inventory, preserve, harmonize, and disseminate census microdata from around the world. The project has collected the world's largest archive of publicly available census samples. The data are coded and documented consistently across countries and over time to facillitate comparative research. IPUMS-International makes these data available to qualified researchers free of charge through a web dissemination system.

The IPUMS project is a collaboration of the Minnesota Population Center, National Statistical Offices, and international data archives. Major funding is provided by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Additional support is provided by the University of Minnesota Office of the Vice President for Research, the Minnesota Population Center, and Sun Microsystems.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Dwelling

UNITS IDENTIFIED: - Dwellings: No - Households: Yes - Individuals: Yes - Group quarters: Yes

UNIT DESCRIPTIONS: - Group quarters: A collective household is a group of persons that does not live in an ordinary household, but lives in a collective establishment, sharing meal times.

Universe

Residents in France, of any nationality. Does not include French citizens living in other countries, foreign tourists, or people passing through.

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN: Systematic manual sorting into lots with different sample units according to target population. Lots divide the population into different samples (1/20,1/5,3/4).

SAMPLE UNIT: Private dwellings and individuals for group quarters and compte a part

SAMPLE FRACTION: 5%

SAMPLE UNIVERSE: The microdata sample includes mainland France and Corsica.

SAMPLE SIZE (person records): 2,487,778

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Separate forms for buildings, group quarters (collective households), group quarters (compte a part), private households, and boats. Four forms for individuals (living in group quarters and private dwellings; two different forms for people compte a part; living in boats).

This collection contains individual-level and 1-percent national sample data from the 1960 Census of Population and Housing conducted by the Census Bureau. It consists of a representative sample of the records from the 1960 sample questionnaires. The data are stored in 30 separate files, containing in total over two million records, organized by state. Some files contain the sampled records of several states while other files contain all or part of the sample for a single state. There are two types of records stored in the data files: one for households and one for persons. Each household record is followed by a variable number of person records, one for each of the household members. Data items in this collection include the individual responses to the basic social, demographic, and economic questions asked of the population in the 1960 Census of Population and Housing. Data are provided on household characteristics and features such as the number of persons in household, number of rooms and bedrooms, and the availability of hot and cold piped water, flush toilet, bathtub or shower, sewage disposal, and plumbing facilities. Additional information is provided on tenure, gross rent, year the housing structure was built, and value and location of the structure, as well as the presence of air conditioners, radio, telephone, and television in the house, and ownership of an automobile. Other demographic variables provide information on age, sex, marital status, race, place of birth, nationality, education, occupation, employment status, income, and veteran status. The data files were obtained by ICPSR from the Center for Social Analysis, Columbia University. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at ICPSR at https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR07756.v1. We highly recommend using the ICPSR version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units and the group quarters population for states and counties..Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.ACS data generally reflect the geographic boundaries of legal and statistical areas as of January 1 of the estimate year. For more information, see Geography Boundaries by Year..Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..Users must consider potential differences in geographic boundaries, questionnaire content or coding, or other methodological issues when comparing ACS data from different years. Statistically significant differences shown in ACS Comparison Profiles, or in data users' own analysis, may be the result of these differences and thus might not necessarily reflect changes to the social, economic, housing, or demographic characteristics being compared. For more information, see Comparing ACS Data..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

Population: County data was reported at 502.967 Person th in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 527.827 Person th for 2021. Population: County data is updated yearly, averaging 753.829 Person th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2022, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 797,604.783 Person th in 1982 and a record low of 430.197 Person th in 2019. Population: County data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey.

Data associated with the paper: Who Tweets with Their Location? Understanding the Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and the Use of Geoservices and Geotagging on Twitter Luke Sloan & Jeffrey Morgan

Abstract

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

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

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

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

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

Universe

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

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

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

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

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

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

Cleaning operations

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

Response rate

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

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

Sampling error estimates

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

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

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

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

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

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables

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

between each population sample as calculated using the CODIS loci. Estimates less than 0.0 are reported as 0.0.

Abstract (en): The Urban Household Sample of the 1860 United States Census was designed to supplement the Bateman-Foust rural sample with observations from urban areas. The sample covers both northern and southern towns and cities and permits examination of female occupations and labor force participation rates. Information on individuals includes occupation, city of residence, age, sex, race, dollar value of real and personal property owned, whether American or foreign born, and literacy. The second release of this collection adds nine constructed variables, including several weight variables, collapsed occupation, ICPSR state code, region, and unique internal family and household identifier numbers. 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.. All individuals living in towns with populations of 3,000 or more who were enumerated in the 1860 Census of Population Manuscript Schedules. Stratified random sample. 2009-07-24 SAS, SPSS, and Stata setups have been added to this data collection. Funding insitution(s): University of Chicago. Booth School of Business. Center for Population Economics. Nathanial T. Wilcox of the University of Chicago collaborated with Jon Moen for the second release of the data collection.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

households/individuals

Kind of data

survey

Frequency of data collection

Quarterly

Sampling procedure

Sample size:

As a source of animal and plant population data, the Global Population Dynamics Database (GPDD) is unrivalled. Nearly five thousand separate time series are available here. In addition to all the population counts, there are taxonomic details of over 1400 species. The type of data contained in the GPDD varies enormously, from annual counts of mammals or birds at individual sampling sites, to weekly counts of zooplankton and other marine fauna. The project commenced in October 1994, following discussions on ways in which the collaborating partners could make a practical and enduring contribution to research into population dynamics. A small team was assembled and, with assistance and advice from numerous interested parties we decided to construct the database using the popular Microsoft Access platform. After an initial design phase, the major task has been that of locating, extracting, entering and validating the data in all the various tables. Now, nearly 5000 individual datasets have been entered onto the GPDD. The Global Population Dynamics Database comprises six Tables of data and information. The tables are linked to each other as shown in the diagram shown in figure 3 of the GPDD User Guide (GPDD-User-Guide.pdf). Referential integrity is maintained through record ID numbers which are held, along with other information in the Main Table. It's structure obeys all the rules of a standard relational database.

This layer shows total population count by sex and age group. This is shown by tract, county, and state centroids. This service is updated annually to contain the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis. This layer is symbolized to show the percent and count of the dependent population (ages 65+ and <18). To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): B01001Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. For more information about ACS layers, visit the FAQ. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:This layer is updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Click here to learn more about ACS data releases.Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases, specifically, the National Sub-State Geography Database (named tlgdb_(year)_a_us_substategeo.gdb). Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract level boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2023 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters).The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Negative values (e.g., -4444...) have been set to null, with the exception of -5555... which has been set to zero. These negative values exist in the raw API data to indicate the following situations:The margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate.Either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution.The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution, or in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate.The estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.The data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small.

Population: City: Age 15 to 64: Anhui data was reported at 13.705 Person th in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 13.631 Person th for 2022. Population: City: Age 15 to 64: Anhui data is updated yearly, averaging 8.738 Person th from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2023, with 27 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 11,787.862 Person th in 2020 and a record low of 3.193 Person th in 2002. Population: City: Age 15 to 64: Anhui data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Socio-Demographic – Table CN.GA: Population: Sample Survey: By Age and Region: City.

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

Population designation, location, altitude, latitude, longitude, habitat and sample size per population in each sampling site.

Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) are computer-accessible files containing records for a sample of housing units, with information on the characteristics of each housing unit and the people in it for 1940-1990. Within the limits of sample size and geographical detail, these files allow users to prepare virtually any tabulations they require. Each datafile is documented in a codebook containing a data dictionary and supporting appendix information. Electronic versions for the codebooks are only available for the 1980 and 1990 datafiles. Identifying information has been removed to protect the confidentiality of the respondents. PUMS is produced by the United States Census Bureau (USCB) and is distributed by USCB, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), and Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).