The previous review in this series introduced the notion of data description and outlined some of the more common summary measures used to describe a dataset. However, a dataset is typically only of interest for the information it provides regarding the population from which it was drawn. The present review focuses on estimation of population values from a sample.
The Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys Program, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.
The primary objective of the 2012 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide reliable estimates of demographic parameters, such as fertility, mortality, family planning, and fertility preferences, as well as maternal and child health and nutrition, that can be used by program managers and policymakers to evaluate and improve existing programs. The JPFHS data will be useful to researchers and scholars interested in analyzing demographic trends in Jordan, as well as those conducting comparative, regional, or cross-national studies.
National coverage
Sample survey data [ssd]
Sample Design The 2012 JPFHS sample was designed to produce reliable estimates of major survey variables for the country as a whole, urban and rural areas, each of the 12 governorates, and for the two special domains: the Badia areas and people living in refugee camps. To facilitate comparisons with previous surveys, the sample was also designed to produce estimates for the three regions (North, Central, and South). The grouping of the governorates into regions is as follows: the North consists of Irbid, Jarash, Ajloun, and Mafraq governorates; the Central region consists of Amman, Madaba, Balqa, and Zarqa governorates; and the South region consists of Karak, Tafiela, Ma'an, and Aqaba governorates.
The 2012 JPFHS sample was selected from the 2004 Jordan Population and Housing Census sampling frame. The frame excludes the population living in remote areas (most of whom are nomads), as well as those living in collective housing units such as hotels, hospitals, work camps, prisons, and the like. For the 2004 census, the country was subdivided into convenient area units called census blocks. For the purposes of the household surveys, the census blocks were regrouped to form a general statistical unit of moderate size (30 households or more), called a "cluster", which is widely used in surveys as a primary sampling unit (PSU).
Stratification was achieved by first separating each governorate into urban and rural areas and then, within each urban and rural area, by Badia areas, refugee camps, and other. A two-stage sampling procedure was employed. In the first stage, 806 clusters were selected with probability proportional to the cluster size, that is, the number of residential households counted in the 2004 census. A household listing operation was then carried out in all of the selected clusters, and the resulting lists of households served as the sampling frame for the selection of households in the second stage. In the second stage of selection, a fixed number of 20 households was selected in each cluster with an equal probability systematic selection. A subsample of two-thirds of the selected households was identified for anthropometry measurements.
Refer to Appendix A in the final report (Jordan Population and Family Health Survey 2012) for details of sampling weights calculation.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The 2012 JPFHS used two questionnaires, namely the Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire (see Appendix D). The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of the sampled households, and visitors who slept in the household the night before the interview, and to obtain information on each household member’s age, sex, educational attainment, relationship to the head of the household, and marital status. In addition, questions were included on the socioeconomic characteristics of the household, such as source of water, sanitation facilities, and the availability of durable goods. Moreover, the questionnaire included questions about child discipline. The Household Questionnaire was also used to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview (ever-married women age 15-49 years). In addition, all women age 15-49 and children under age 5 living in the subsample of households were eligible for height and weight measurement and anemia testing.
The Woman’s Questionnaire was administered to ever-married women age 15-49 and collected information on the following topics: • Respondent’s background characteristics • Birth history • Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of family planning and exposure to family planning messages • Maternal health (antenatal, delivery, and postnatal care) • Immunization and health of children under age 5 • Breastfeeding and infant feeding practices • Marriage and husband’s background characteristics • Fertility preferences • Respondent’s employment • Knowledge of AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) • Other health issues specific to women • Early childhood development • Domestic violence
In addition, information on births, pregnancies, and contraceptive use and discontinuation during the five years prior to the survey was collected using a monthly calendar.
The Household and Woman’s Questionnaires were based on the model questionnaires developed by the MEASURE DHS program. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaires were made in order to provide detailed information specific to Jordan. The questionnaires were then translated into Arabic.
Anthropometric data were collected during the 2012 JPFHS in a subsample of two-thirds of the selected households in each cluster. All women age 15-49 and children age 0-4 in these households were measured for height using Shorr height boards and for weight using electronic Seca scales. In addition, a drop of capillary blood was taken from these women and children in the field to measure their hemoglobin level using the HemoCue system. Hemoglobin testing was used to estimate the prevalence of anemia.
Fieldwork and data processing activities overlapped. Data processing began two weeks after the start of the fieldwork. After field editing of questionnaires for completeness and consistency, the questionnaires for each cluster were packaged together and sent to the central office in Amman, where they were registered and stored. Special teams were formed to carry out office editing and coding of the openended questions.
Data entry and verification started after two weeks of office data processing. The process of data entry, including 100 percent reentry, editing, and cleaning, was done by using PCs and the CSPro (Census and Survey Processing) computer package, developed specially for such surveys. The CSPro program allows data to be edited while being entered. Data processing operations were completed by early January 2013. A data processing specialist from ICF International made a trip to Jordan in February 2013 to follow up on data editing and cleaning and to work on the tabulation of results for the survey preliminary report, which was published in March 2013. The tabulations for this report were completed in April 2013.
In all, 16,120 households were selected for the survey and, of these, 15,722 were found to be occupied households. Of these households, 15,190 (97 percent) were successfully interviewed.
In the households interviewed, 11,673 ever-married women age 15-49 were identified and interviews were completed with 11,352 women, or 97 percent of all eligible women.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2012 Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2012 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2012 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer
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
Different countries have different health outcomes that are in part due to the way respective health systems perform. Regardless of the type of health system, individuals will have health and non-health expectations in terms of how the institution responds to their needs. In many countries, however, health systems do not perform effectively and this is in part due to lack of information on health system performance, and on the different service providers.
The aim of the WHO World Health Survey is to provide empirical data to the national health information systems so that there is a better monitoring of health of the people, responsiveness of health systems and measurement of health-related parameters.
The overall aims of the survey is to examine the way populations report their health, understand how people value health states, measure the performance of health systems in relation to responsiveness and gather information on modes and extents of payment for health encounters through a nationally representative population based community survey. In addition, it addresses various areas such as health care expenditures, adult mortality, birth history, various risk factors, assessment of main chronic health conditions and the coverage of health interventions, in specific additional modules.
The objectives of the survey programme are to: 1. develop a means of providing valid, reliable and comparable information, at low cost, to supplement the information provided by routine health information systems. 2. build the evidence base necessary for policy-makers to monitor if health systems are achieving the desired goals, and to assess if additional investment in health is achieving the desired outcomes. 3. provide policy-makers with the evidence they need to adjust their policies, strategies and programmes as necessary.
The survey sampling frame must cover 100% of the country's eligible population, meaning that the entire national territory must be included. This does not mean that every province or territory need be represented in the survey sample but, rather, that all must have a chance (known probability) of being included in the survey sample.
There may be exceptional circumstances that preclude 100% national coverage. Certain areas in certain countries may be impossible to include due to reasons such as accessibility or conflict. All such exceptions must be discussed with WHO sampling experts. If any region must be excluded, it must constitute a coherent area, such as a particular province or region. For example if ¾ of region D in country X is not accessible due to war, the entire region D will be excluded from analysis.
Households and individuals
The WHS will include all male and female adults (18 years of age and older) who are not out of the country during the survey period. It should be noted that this includes the population who may be institutionalized for health reasons at the time of the survey: all persons who would have fit the definition of household member at the time of their institutionalisation are included in the eligible population.
If the randomly selected individual is institutionalized short-term (e.g. a 3-day stay at a hospital) the interviewer must return to the household when the individual will have come back to interview him/her. If the randomly selected individual is institutionalized long term (e.g. has been in a nursing home the last 8 years), the interviewer must travel to that institution to interview him/her.
The target population includes any adult, male or female age 18 or over living in private households. Populations in group quarters, on military reservations, or in other non-household living arrangements will not be eligible for the study. People who are in an institution due to a health condition (such as a hospital, hospice, nursing home, home for the aged, etc.) at the time of the visit to the household are interviewed either in the institution or upon their return to their household if this is within a period of two weeks from the first visit to the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
SAMPLING GUIDELINES FOR WHS
Surveys in the WHS program must employ a probability sampling design. This means that every single individual in the sampling frame has a known and non-zero chance of being selected into the survey sample. While a Single Stage Random Sample is ideal if feasible, it is recognized that most sites will carry out Multi-stage Cluster Sampling.
The WHS sampling frame should cover 100% of the eligible population in the surveyed country. This means that every eligible person in the country has a chance of being included in the survey sample. It also means that particular ethnic groups or geographical areas may not be excluded from the sampling frame.
The sample size of the WHS in each country is 5000 persons (exceptions considered on a by-country basis). An adequate number of persons must be drawn from the sampling frame to account for an estimated amount of non-response (refusal to participate, empty houses etc.). The highest estimate of potential non-response and empty households should be used to ensure that the desired sample size is reached at the end of the survey period. This is very important because if, at the end of data collection, the required sample size of 5000 has not been reached additional persons must be selected randomly into the survey sample from the sampling frame. This is both costly and technically complicated (if this situation is to occur, consult WHO sampling experts for assistance), and best avoided by proper planning before data collection begins.
All steps of sampling, including justification for stratification, cluster sizes, probabilities of selection, weights at each stage of selection, and the computer program used for randomization must be communicated to WHO
STRATIFICATION
Stratification is the process by which the population is divided into subgroups. Sampling will then be conducted separately in each subgroup. Strata or subgroups are chosen because evidence is available that they are related to the outcome (e.g. health, responsiveness, mortality, coverage etc.). The strata chosen will vary by country and reflect local conditions. Some examples of factors that can be stratified on are geography (e.g. North, Central, South), level of urbanization (e.g. urban, rural), socio-economic zones, provinces (especially if health administration is primarily under the jurisdiction of provincial authorities), or presence of health facility in area. Strata to be used must be identified by each country and the reasons for selection explicitly justified.
Stratification is strongly recommended at the first stage of sampling. Once the strata have been chosen and justified, all stages of selection will be conducted separately in each stratum. We recommend stratifying on 3-5 factors. It is optimum to have half as many strata (note the difference between stratifying variables, which may be such variables as gender, socio-economic status, province/region etc. and strata, which are the combination of variable categories, for example Male, High socio-economic status, Xingtao Province would be a stratum).
Strata should be as homogenous as possible within and as heterogeneous as possible between. This means that strata should be formulated in such a way that individuals belonging to a stratum should be as similar to each other with respect to key variables as possible and as different as possible from individuals belonging to a different stratum. This maximises the efficiency of stratification in reducing sampling variance.
MULTI-STAGE CLUSTER SELECTION
A cluster is a naturally occurring unit or grouping within the population (e.g. enumeration areas, cities, universities, provinces, hospitals etc.); it is a unit for which the administrative level has clear, nonoverlapping boundaries. Cluster sampling is useful because it avoids having to compile exhaustive lists of every single person in the population. Clusters should be as heterogeneous as possible within and as homogenous as possible between (note that this is the opposite criterion as that for strata). Clusters should be as small as possible (i.e. large administrative units such as Provinces or States are not good clusters) but not so small as to be homogenous.
In cluster sampling, a number of clusters are randomly selected from a list of clusters. Then, either all members of the chosen cluster or a random selection from among them are included in the sample. Multistage sampling is an extension of cluster sampling where a hierarchy of clusters are chosen going from larger to smaller.
In order to carry out multi-stage sampling, one needs to know only the population sizes of the sampling units. For the smallest sampling unit above the elementary unit however, a complete list of all elementary units (households) is needed; in order to be able to randomly select among all households in the TSU, a list of all those households is required. This information may be available from the most recent population census. If the last census was >3 years ago or the information furnished by it was of poor quality or unreliable, the survey staff will have the task of enumerating all households in the smallest randomly selected sampling unit. It is very important to budget for this step if it is necessary and ensure that all households are properly enumerated in order that a representative sample is obtained.
It is always best to have as many clusters in the PSU as possible. The reason for this is that the fewer the number of respondents in each PSU, the lower will be the clustering effect which
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
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.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Abstract This paper contributes to the existing literature by reviewing the research methodology and the literature review with the focus on potential applications for the novelty technology of the single platform E-payment. These included, but were not restricted to the subjects, population, sample size requirement, data collection method and measurement of variables, pilot study and statistical techniques for data analysis. The reviews will shed some light and potential applications for future researchers, students and others to conceptualize, operationalize and analyze the underlying research methodology to assist in the development of their research methodology.
analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the Combined Locks population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Combined Locks across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.
Key observations
In 2023, the population of Combined Locks was 3,654, a 0.11% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Combined Locks population was 3,658, an increase of 0.83% compared to a population of 3,628 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Combined Locks increased by 1,198. In this period, the peak population was 3,658 in the year 2022. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
Data Coverage:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Combined Locks Population by Year. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Descriptive statistics for the healthy population sample (N = 40).
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
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
The dataset is a relational dataset of 8,000 households households, representing a sample of the population of an imaginary middle-income country. The dataset contains two data files: one with variables at the household level, the other one with variables at the individual level. It includes variables that are typically collected in population censuses (demography, education, occupation, dwelling characteristics, fertility, mortality, and migration) and in household surveys (household expenditure, anthropometric data for children, assets ownership). The data only includes ordinary households (no community households). The dataset was created using REaLTabFormer, a model that leverages deep learning methods. The dataset was created for the purpose of training and simulation and is not intended to be representative of any specific country.
The full-population dataset (with about 10 million individuals) is also distributed as open data.
The dataset is a synthetic dataset for an imaginary country. It was created to represent the population of this country by province (equivalent to admin1) and by urban/rural areas of residence.
Household, Individual
The dataset is a fully-synthetic dataset representative of the resident population of ordinary households for an imaginary middle-income country.
ssd
The sample size was set to 8,000 households. The fixed number of households to be selected from each enumeration area was set to 25. In a first stage, the number of enumeration areas to be selected in each stratum was calculated, proportional to the size of each stratum (stratification by geo_1 and urban/rural). Then 25 households were randomly selected within each enumeration area. The R script used to draw the sample is provided as an external resource.
other
The dataset is a synthetic dataset. Although the variables it contains are variables typically collected from sample surveys or population censuses, no questionnaire is available for this dataset. A "fake" questionnaire was however created for the sample dataset extracted from this dataset, to be used as training material.
The synthetic data generation process included a set of "validators" (consistency checks, based on which synthetic observation were assessed and rejected/replaced when needed). Also, some post-processing was applied to the data to result in the distributed data files.
This is a synthetic dataset; the "response rate" is 100%.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the Lebanon population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Lebanon across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.
Key observations
In 2023, the population of Lebanon was 182, a 0.55% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Lebanon population was 181, a decline of 0% compared to a population of 181 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Lebanon decreased by 120. In this period, the peak population was 302 in the year 2000. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).
Data Coverage:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Lebanon Population by Year. You can refer the same here
The primary data consist of allele or haplotype frequencies for N=1036 anonymized U.S. population samples. Additional files are supplements to the associated publications. Any changes to spreadsheets are listed in the "Change Log" tab within each spreadsheet. DOI numbers for associated publications are listed below, under "References".
Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. This is a mixed-methods data collection. This study used Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) methodology, which is a sampling method designed to generate unbiased estimates of population characteristics for populations where a sampling frame is not available. It is a form of snowball or link-tracing sampling, where respondents are given coupons to recruit other members of the target population, and where respondents are rewarded for both participating and for recruiting others. In addition to variables of interest, data are collected on the number of members of the target population each participant knows. Estimation methods are then applied to account for the non-random sample selection in an attempt to generate unbiased estimates for the target population. In 2010, the researchers conducted an RDS study in a rural Ugandan population where total population data were available. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether RDS could generate representative data on a rural Ugandan population by comparing estimates from an RDS survey with total-population data. The data used to define the target population (male household heads) were available from an ongoing general population cohort of 25 villages in rural Masaka, Uganda covering an area of approximately 38km. Annually, households in the study villages are mapped and after obtaining consent, a total-population household census and an individual questionnaire are administered and blood taken for HIV-1 testing. A random sample of eligible men in the target population who were not recruited during the RDS study were also interviewed, using the same RDS questionnaire. Finally, 49 qualitative interviews (of which summaries have been deposited) were conducted with a range of people (men and women) including RDS participants and non-participants, and RDS interviewers. These data can be used to evaluate the RDS sampling method, and to test new RDS estimators. Further information may be found in the documentation and in the journal articles listed in the Publications section. Special Licence access and geographic data This data collection is subject to Special Licence access conditions (see Access section for details). Data are analysable at individual village level, and GPS point data are available for the villages and interview sites. Finer detail geographic variables may be available for certain research questions. If these are required, users should request this when making their Special Licence application. Main Topics: Quantitative data: demographic characteristics of the individual, including household composition, age, HIV status, tribe, religion, relationship between target population sample member and contacts, geographic data. Qualitative interview summaries: respondents' opinions of the study, the conduct of the research and the incentives used. Respondent Driven Sampling methods were used - see Abstract and documentation for details.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
China Population: Resided more than Half Year: Floating data was reported at 384,670.000 Person th in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 375,816.759 Person th for 2020. China Population: Resided more than Half Year: Floating data is updated yearly, averaging 239,015.000 Person th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2021, with 16 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 384,670.000 Person th in 2021 and a record low of 6,709.164 Person th in 1982. China Population: Resided more than Half Year: Floating 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.
The 1961 Census Microdata Individual File for Great Britain: 5% Sample dataset was created from existing digital records from the 1961 Census under a project known as Enhancing and Enriching Historic Census Microdata Samples (EEHCM), which was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council with input from the Office for National Statistics and National Records of Scotland. The project ran from 2012-2014 and was led from the UK Data Archive, University of Essex, in collaboration with the Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research (CMIST) at the University of Manchester and the Census Offices. In addition to the 1961 data, the team worked on files from the 1971 Census and 1981 Census.
The original 1961 records preceded current data archival standards and were created before microdata sets for secondary use were anticipated. A process of data recovery and quality checking was necessary to maximise their utility for current researchers, though some imperfections remain (see the User Guide for details). Three other 1961 Census datasets have been created:
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Population: Guangdong data was reported at 133.790 Person th in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 129.642 Person th for 2022. Population: Guangdong data is updated yearly, averaging 89.429 Person th from Dec 1982 (Median) to 2023, with 29 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 126,012.510 Person th in 2020 and a record low of 70.224 Person th in 1999. Population: Guangdong 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 Region.
https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/36231/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/36231/terms
The PATH Study was launched in 2011 to inform the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory activities under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). The PATH Study is a collaboration between the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who use or do not use tobacco. 45,971 adults and youth constitute the first (baseline) wave, Wave 1, of data collected by this longitudinal cohort study. These 45,971 adults and youth along with 7,207 "shadow youth" (youth ages 9 to 11 sampled at Wave 1) make up the 53,178 participants that constitute the Wave 1 Cohort. Respondents are asked to complete an interview at each follow-up wave. Youth who turn 18 by the current wave of data collection are considered "aged-up adults" and are invited to complete the Adult Interview. Additionally, "shadow youth" are considered "aged-up youth" upon turning 12 years old, when they are asked to complete an interview after parental consent. At Wave 4, a probability sample of 14,098 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 10 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population (CNP) at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled Primary Sampling Unit (PSU)s and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 4 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 1 Cohort who were in the CNP at the time of Wave 4. This combined set of Wave 4 participants, 52,731 participants in total, forms the Wave 4 Cohort. At Wave 7, a probability sample of 14,863 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 9 to 11 was selected from the CNP at the time of Wave 7. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 or Wave 4 in the same sampled PSUs and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "second replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with the Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohorts who were at least age 15 and in the CNP at the time of Wave 7. This combined set of Wave 7 participants, 46,169 participants in total, forms the Wave 7 Cohort. Please refer to the Restricted-Use Files User Guide that provides further details about children designated as "shadow youth" and the formation of the Wave 1, Wave 4, and Wave 7 Cohorts. Dataset 0002 (DS0002) contains the data from the State Design Data. This file contains 7 variables and 82,139 cases. The state identifier in the State Design file reflects the participant's state of residence at the time of selection and recruitment for the PATH Study. Dataset 1011 (DS1011) contains the data from the Wave 1 Adult Questionnaire. This data file contains 2,021 variables and 32,320 cases. Each of the cases represents a single, completed interview. Dataset 1012 (DS1012) contains the data from the Wave 1 Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This file contains 1,431 variables and 13,651 cases. Dataset 1411 (DS1411) contains the Wave 1 State Identifier data for Adults and has 5 variables and 32,320 cases. Dataset 1412 (DS1412) contains the Wave 1 State Identifier data for Youth (and Parents) and has 5 variables and 13,651 cases. The same 5 variables are in each State Identifier dataset, including PERSONID for linking the State Identifier to the questionnaire and biomarker data and 3 variables designating the state (state Federal Information Processing System (FIPS), state abbreviation, and full name of the state). The State Identifier values in these datasets represent participants' state of residence at the time of Wave 1, which is also their state of residence at the time of recruitment. Dataset 1611 (DS1611) contains the Tobacco Universal Product Code (UPC) data from Wave 1. This data file contains 32 variables and 8,601 cases. This file contains UPC values on the packages of tobacco products used or in the possession of adult respondents at the time of Wave 1. The UPC values can be used to identify and validate the specific products used by respondents and augment the analyses of the characteristics of tobacco products used
The Demographic Sample Survey 1986/87, shortly called as DSS 1986/87 is carried out by the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) with financial support from UNFPA and technical assistance from UNDTCD.
The major objectives of the DSS are to provide intercensal estimates of some important demographic parameters such as birth, death, migration, etc. The DSS 1986/87 not only provides these parameters but also examines the factors affecting fertility, mortality and migration in more details.
National Urban/ Rural areas Ecological Zones: Mountain, Hill, Terai
Individual, Household
All private households
Sample survey data [ssd]
The DSS 1986/87 is a longitudinal study based on multi-stage national probability sample of 129 identifiable compact clusters known as ward/subwards. Ward/subwards (81 rural and 48 urban) were drawn from 35 districts (14 from Terai Zone and 18 and 3 from the Hill and Mountain zones respectively), out of a total of 75 districts in the country. The emphasis that the ultimate sampling units of DSS 1986/87 should be easily identifiable compact clusters is to ensure that the survey could be smoothly carried out in several successive rounds. The DSS 1986/87 drew samples from rural and urban areas separately in order to provide estimates of demographic and non-demographic parameters independently for each of the area.
Altogether 8640 households were eventually selected in the DSS 1986/87 for baseline and prospective study. The rural sample consisits of 6126 households while the urban sample accounts for 2514 households. The households selected in the Mountain, Hill and Terai are 675, 4179 and 3786 respectively. The urban households in the Hill and Terai are 1200 and 1314 respectively. In the Mountain there is no urban area. The sample consists of 35101 rural and 14412 urban population.
Refer to page 2 of "DSS Report" for a detailed description of the Sample Design.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The data at baseline survey were collected by using six different schedules:
Household schedule The household schedule was employed to collect information on some conventional socio-demographic measures of each usual/permanent member of the selected households.
In-migration schedule The In-migration schedule was used to collect detailed information on internal migrants and for immigrants.
Fertility and Mortality schedule The Fertility and Mortality schedule was used to collect the information on fertility anf mortality history of ever married worman in the household.
Out-migration schedule The Out-migration schedule was used to obtain detailed information on each out-migrant from the household which took place in the last five years preceding the survey.
Socio-economic status of the household schedule The Socio-economic status of the household schedule was used to obtain socio-economic characteristics of the households.
Migration survey-individual questionnaire The Migration survey-individual questionnaire was administered to internal migrants.
Refer to page 5 of "DSS Report" for detailed information on the types and contents of the questionnaires.
https://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-termshttps://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-terms
The GESIS Panel provides a probability-based mixed-mode access panel infrastructure located at GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences in Mannheim, Germany. The project offers the social science community an opportunity to collect survey data from a representative sample of the German population. Submitted study proposals are evaluated based on a scientific review process.
Panel members were initially recruited in 2013 in face-to-face interviews followed by a self-administered profile survey. The mode was chosen by the participants. All participants of the profile survey are considered as members of the panel and invited to the bi-monthly regular waves. The starting cohort encompassed 4900 panelists at the beginning of 2014.
In order to compensate for panel attrition, a refreshment sample was drawn in 2016, using the General Social Survey (ALLBUS) interview as vehicle. The initial cohort encompasses German speaking respondents aged between 18 and 70 years (at the time of recruitment) and permanently residing in Germany, whereas the second cohort includes respondents from the age of 18 without upper restriction.
In 2018 a third recruitment sample was drawn, which was integrated with the wave ge. The third cohort also includes respondents aged 18 and over without an upper limit. Retroactively, cases up to and including wave fc (third wave from 2018) were added to the data. The Data Manual (ZA5664-65_sd_data-manual) has been reissued and there is a corresponding recruitment report (ZA5664-65_mb_recruitment2018).
The ALLBUS Sample is based on a disproportional sampling of respondents from the western and eastern part of Germany. A design weight that enables integration of the two recruitment cohorts is included into the dataset. For more details, please see the methods reports of the recruitment processes and die GESIS Panel reference paper (Bosnjak et al., 2017).
In March 2020, a special GESIS panel survey was conducted on the SARS-CoV-2 resp. COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak in Germany.
In 2021, the fourth recruitment sample was drawn using the German International Social Survey Programme (ISSP), which was integrated with wave ja. The fourth cohort also includes respondents aged 18 and older with no upper limit. For more information, see the corresponding recruitment report (ZA5664-65_r_i12.pdf).
In 2023, the fifth recruitment sample was drawn using the German European Social Survey (ESS Round 11), which was integrated with the wave la. The fifth cohort includes respondents aged 18 and over with no upper limit. For more information, see the corresponding recruitment report (ZA5664-65_r_k12.pdf).
GESIS Panel Demographic Dataset Starting with version 43-0-0 the longitudinal demographic dataset became part of the dissemination package. The dataset is a longitudinal dataset (long format), with harmonized measurements on demographic variables: Respondent ID; timepoint of survey; corresponding wave; survey year; recruitment cohort; sex of respondent; year of birth; month of birth; highest level of education; personal net income; household net income; marital status; AAPOR disposition code; mode of invitation; mode of participation.
The previous review in this series introduced the notion of data description and outlined some of the more common summary measures used to describe a dataset. However, a dataset is typically only of interest for the information it provides regarding the population from which it was drawn. The present review focuses on estimation of population values from a sample.