Facebook
TwitterA 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
Facebook
TwitterThe 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.
Facebook
TwitterOverview of the population and sample population.
Facebook
TwitterThe Estimating the Size of Populations through a Household Survey (EPSHS), sought to assess the feasibility of the network scale-up and proxy respondent methods for estimating the sizes of key populations at higher risk of HIV infection and to compare the results to other estimates of the population sizes. The study was undertaken based on the assumption that if these methods proved to be feasible with a reasonable amount of data collection for making adjustments, countries would be able to add this module to their standard household survey to produce size estimates for their key populations at higher risk of HIV infection. This would facilitate better programmatic responses for prevention and caring for people living with HIV and would improve the understanding of how HIV is being transmitted in the country.
The specific objectives of the ESPHS were: 1. To assess the feasibility of the network scale-up method for estimating the sizes of key populations at higher risk of HIV infection in a Sub-Saharan African context; 2. To assess the feasibility of the proxy respondent method for estimating the sizes of key populations at higher risk of HIV infection in a Sub-Saharan African context; 3. To estimate the population size of MSM, FSW, IDU, and clients of sex workers in Rwanda at a national level; 4. To compare the estimates of the sizes of key populations at higher risk for HIV produced by the network scale-up and proxy respondent methods with estimates produced using other methods; and 5. To collect data to be used in scientific publications comparing the use of the network scale-up method in different national and cultural environments.
National
The Estimating the Size of Populations through a Household Survey (ESPHS) used a two-stage sample design, implemented in a representative sample of 2,125 households selected nationwide in which all women and men age 15 years and above where eligible for an individual interview. The sampling frame used was the preparatory frame for the Rwanda Population and Housing Census (RPHC), which was conducted in 2012; it was provided by the National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR).
The sampling frame was a complete list of natural villages covering the whole country (14,837 villages). Two strata were defined: the city of Kigali and the rest of the country. One hundred and thirty Primary Sampling Units (PSU) were selected from the sampling frame (35 in Kigali and 95 in the other stratum). To reduce clustering effect, only 20 households were selected per cluster in Kigali and 15 in the other clusters. As a result, 33 percent of the households in the sample were located in Kigali.
The list of households in each cluster was updated upon arrival of the survey team in the cluster. Once the listing had been updated, a number was assigned to each existing household in the cluster. The supervisor then identified the households to be interviewed in the survey by using a table in which the households were randomly pre-selected. This table also provided the list of households pre-selected for each of the two different definitions of what it means "to know" someone.
For further details on sample design and implementation, see Appendix A of the final report.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The Estimating the Size of Populations through a Household Survey (ESPHS) used two types of questionnaires: a household questionnaire and an individual questionnaire. The same individual questionnaire was used to interview both women and men. In addition, two versions of the individual questionnaire were developed, using two different definitions of what it means “to know” someone. Each version of the individual questionnaire was used in half of the selected households.
The processing of the ESPHS data began shortly after the fieldwork commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to the SPH office in Kigali, where they were entered and checked for consistency by data processing personnel who were specially trained for this task. Data were entered using CSPro, a programme specially developed for use in DHS surveys. All data were entered twice (100 percent verification). The concurrent processing of the data was a distinct advantage for data quality, because the School of Public Health had the opportunity to advise field teams of problems detected during data entry. The data entry and editing phase of the survey was completed in late August 2011.
A total of 2,125 households were selected in the sample, of which 2,120 were actually occupied at the time of the interview. The number of occupied households successfully interviewed was 2,102, yielding a household response rate of 99 percent.
From the households interviewed, 2,629 women were found to be eligible and 2,567 were interviewed, giving a response rate of 98 percent. Interviews with men covered 2,102 of the eligible 2,149 men, yielding a response rate of 98 percent. The response rates do not significantly vary by type of questionnaire or residence.
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made to minimize this type of error during the implementation of the Rwanda ESPHS 2011, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the ESPHS 2011 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 errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the ESPHS 2011 sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the ESPHS 2011 is a SAS program. This program uses the Taylor linearization method for variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions.
A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey report.
Facebook
TwitterThese detailed tables show sample sizes and population estimates pertaining to mental health from the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Samples sizes and population estimates are provided by age group, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, employment status, poverty level, geographic area, insurance status.
Facebook
TwitterThis TB describes how ACF will identify and finalize each cohort of youth in the NYTD follow-up population (or follow-up population sample for those States that opt to sample) for the purposes of assessing States' compliance with NYTD data collection and reporting requirements. The TB also specifies how States may opt to sample the baseline population for the purposes of collecting information on the follow-up population. Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
I explore the sample size in qualitative research that is required to reach theoretical saturation. I conceptualize a population as consisting of sub-populations that contain different types of information sources that hold a number of codes. Theoretical saturation is reached after all the codes in the population have been observed once in the sample. I delineate three different scenarios to sample information sources: “random chance,” which is based on probability sampling, “minimal information,” which yields at least one new code per sampling step, and “maximum information,” which yields the largest number of new codes per sampling step. Next, I use simulations to assess the minimum sample size for each scenario for systematically varying hypothetical populations. I show that theoretical saturation is more dependent on the mean probability of observing codes than on the number of codes in a population. Moreover, the minimal and maximal information scenarios are significantly more efficient than random chance, but yield fewer repetitions per code to validate the findings. I formulate guidelines for purposive sampling and recommend that researchers follow a minimum information scenario.
Facebook
TwitterCharacteristics of study population at the time of sampling.
Facebook
TwitterWoman, Birth, Child, Birth, Man, Household Member
Ever-married women age 15-49, Births, Children age 0-4, All persons
Demographic and Household Survey [hh/dhs]
MICRODATA SOURCE: Department of Statistics [Jordan] and Macro International.
SAMPLE UNIT: Woman SAMPLE SIZE: 10876
SAMPLE UNIT: Birth SAMPLE SIZE: 43460
SAMPLE UNIT: Child SAMPLE SIZE: 10426
SAMPLE UNIT: Member SAMPLE SIZE: 82460
Face-to-face [f2f]
Facebook
TwitterPersons, households, and dwellings
UNITS IDENTIFIED: - Dwellings: yes - Vacant Units: No - Households: yes - Individuals: yes - Group quarters: yes
UNIT DESCRIPTIONS: - Dwellings: no - Households: Yes - 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.
Residents of France, of any nationality. Does not include French citizens living in other countries, foreign tourists, or people passing through. Reintegrated persons: Persons living in group quarters or without a fixed address but having a usual home elsewhere (i.e., enumerated away from their usual residence). During data processing, most of these people are reintegrated into their usual households. Legal population refers to the population without duplicate counts (population sans double compte) and the institutional population (population comptee a part).
Population and Housing Census [hh/popcen]
MICRODATA SOURCE: INSEE (Institut National de la Statisque et des Etudes Economiques)
SAMPLE SIZE (person records): 2934758.
SAMPLE DESIGN: 1/20 sample: A 1/5 systematic sample selected from 1/4 sample. 1/4 sample: a systematic sample of every 4th dwelling (or individual from institutional households). Dwellings, either for households/quasi-households or vacant dwellings, are sorted by locality and household size (if for households/quasi-households), before sampling. Individuals from communities/quasi-communities are sorted by locality, type of community and date of birth before sampling. All individuals within households constitute the 1/4 sample. Reintegrated persons: Persons living in group quarters or without a fixed address but having a usual home elsewhere (i.e., enumerated away from their usual residence). During data processing, most of these people are reintegrated into their usual households. Legal population refers to the population without duplicate counts (population sans double compte) and the institutional population (population comptee a part).
Face-to-face [f2f]
Form 1A for dwelling consists of (1) dwelling characteristics, (2) List A. permanent occupants of the dwelling, (3) List B. household members who do not live in the dwelling of enumeration, and (4) building characteristics; Form 2B. Individual form.
Facebook
TwitterThis brief provides more information about a how a State may, for planning purposes, calculate a sample size for the NYTD follow-up population.
Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.
Facebook
TwitterDifferent 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
Facebook
Twitterhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.htmlhttps://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
The distinction between the effective size of a population (Ne) and the effective size of its neighborhoods (Nn) has sometimes become blurred. Ne reflects the effect of random sampling on the genetic composition of a population of size N, whereas Nn is a measure of within-population spatial genetic structure and depends strongly on the dispersal characteristics of a species. Although Nn is independent of Ne, the reverse is not true. Using simulations of a population of annual plants, it was found that the effect of Nn on Ne was well approximated by Ne=N/(1−FIS), where FIS (determined by Nn) was evaluated population wide. Nn only had a notable influence of increasing Ne as it became smaller (less than or equal to16). In contrast, the effect of Nn on genetic estimates of Ne was substantial. Using the temporal method (a standard two-sample approach) based on 1000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and varying sampling method, sample size (2–25% of N) and interval between samples (T=1–32 generations), estimates of Ne ranged from infinity to <0.1% of the true value (defined as Ne based on 100% sampling). Estimates were never accurate unless Nn and T were large. Three sampling techniques were tested: same-site resampling, different-site resampling and random sampling. Random sampling was the least biased method. Extremely low estimates often resulted when different-site resampling was used, especially when the population was large and the sample fraction was small, raising the possibility that this estimation bias could be a factor determining some very low Ne/N that have been published.
Facebook
TwitterNational coverage
households/individuals
survey
Quarterly
Sample size:
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Number of sampling areas, total extent sampled, number of operators and time required for fieldwork, number of operators, and time required for data entry, total time effort required, and precision of the method expressed as coefficient of variation (CV).
Facebook
TwitterThe National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) has been carrying out All-India surveys on consumer expenditure. While some of these smaller-scale surveys are spread over a full year and others over six months only, the quinquennial (full-scale) surveys have all been of a full year's duration. Household consumer expenditure is measured as the expenditure incurred by a household on domestic account during a specified period, called reference period. It includes the imputed values of goods and services, which are not purchased but procured otherwise for consumption. In other words, it is the sum total of monetary values of all the items (i.e. goods and services) consumed by the household on domestic account during the reference period. Any expenditure incurred towards the productive enterprises of the households is also excluded from household consumer expenditure. To minimise recall errors, a very detailed item classification is adopted to collect information, including items of food, items of fuel, items of clothing, bedding and footwear, items of educational and medical expenses, items of durable goods and other items. The schedule has also collected some other household particulars including age, sex and educational level etc. of each household member. The schedule design for the survey is more or less similar to that adopted in the previous rounds.
The survey covered the whole of the Indian union except (i) Ladakh and Kargil districts of Jammu & Kashmir, (ii) 786 interior villages of Nagaland (out of a total of 1119 villages) located beyond 5 kms. of a bus route and (iii) 172 villages in Andaman & Nicobar Islands (out of total of 520 villages) which are inaccessible throughout the year.
Randomly selected households based on sampling procedure and members of the household
The survey used the interview method of data collection from a sample of randomly selected households and members of the household.
Sample survey data [ssd]
A two-stage stratified design was adopted for the 49th round survey. The first-stage units(fsu) were census villages in the rural sector and U.F.S. (Urban Frame Survey) blocks in the urban sector (However, for some of the newly declared towns of 1991 census for which UFS frames were not available, census EBs were first-stage units). The second-stage units were households in both the sectors. In the central sample altogether 5072 sample villages and 2928 urban sample blocks at all-India level were selected. Sixteen households were selected per sample village/block in each of which the schedule of enquiry was canvassed. The number of sample households actually surveyed for the enquiry was 119403.
Sample frame for fsus : Mostly the 1981 census lists of villages constituted the sampling frame for rural sector. For Nagaland, the villages located within 5 kms. of a bus route constituted the sampling frame. For Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the list of accessible villages was used as the sampling frame. For the Urban sector, the lists of NSS Urban Frame Survey (UFS) blocks have been considered as the sampling frame in most cases. However, 1991 house listing EBs (Enumeration blocks) were considered as the sampling frame for some of the new towns of 1991 census, for which UFS frames were not available.
Stratification for rural sector : States have been divided into NSS regions by grouping contiguous districts similar in respect of population density and crop pattern. In Gujarat, however, some districts have been split for the purpose of region formation, considering the location of dry areas and distribution of tribal population in the state. In the rural sector, each district with 1981 / 1991 census rural population less than, 1.8 million/2 million formed a separate stratum. Districts with larger population were divided into two or more strata, by grouping contiguous tehsils.
Stratification for urban sector : In the urban sector, strata were formed, within the NSS region, according to census population size classes of towns. Each city with population 10 lakhs or more formed a separate stratum. Further, within each region, the different towns were grouped to form three different strata on the basis of their respective census population as follows : all towns with population less than 50,000 as stratum 1, those with population 50,000 to 1,99,999 as stratum-2 and those with population 2,00,000 to 9,99,999 as stratum-3.
Sample size for fsu's : The central sample comprised of 5072 villages and 2928 blocks.
Selection of first stage units : The sample villages have been selected with probability proportional to population with replacement and the sample blocks by simple random sampling without replacement. Selection was done in both the sectors in the form of two independent subsamples.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The data for this survey is collected in the NSS Schedule 1.0 used for household consumer expenditure. For this round, the schedule had 11 blocks.
Blocks 1 and 2 - are similar to the ones used in usual NSS rounds. These are used to record identification of sample households and particulars of field operations.
Block-3: Household characteristics like, household size, principal industry-occupation, social group, land possessed, primary source of energy used for cooking and lighting etc. have been recorded in this block.
Block-4: In this block detailed demographic particulars including age, sex, educational level, marital status, number of meals usually taken in a day etc. have been recorded.
Block-5: In this block cash purchase and household consumption of food, pan, tobacco, intoxicants and fuel & light during the last 30 days have been recorded.
Block-6: Household consumption of clothing during the last 30 has been recorded in this block.
Block-7: Household consumption of footwear during the last 30 has been recorded in this block.
Block-8 : Household expenditure on miscellaneous goods and services and rents and taxes during the last 30 days has been recorded in this block.
Block-9 : Household expenditure for purchase and construction (including repairs) of durable goods for domestic use during the last 30 days has been recorded here.
Block-10 : Perception of households regarding sufficiency of food has been recorded here.
Block-11 : Summary of household consumer expenditure during the last 30 days has been recorded here.
Facebook
TwitterWHO implemented a World Health Survey to collect comprehensive baseline data on the health of populations and on the outcomes associated with investment in health systemsThe Survey Programme was developed in individual countries through consultation with policymakers and participants in routine HIS in these countries. The overall aims of the survey are 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 services.
The survey has national coverage. 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.
Households and individuals
The target population includes any adult, aged 18 or older, 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 increases sample variance and effectively reduces our estimating power. WHO requires an absolute maximum of 50 respondents per PSU, and ideally would suggest 20-30. This means that for a sample size of 5000 respondents, 100- 200 PSU clusters should be taken into the sample. Calculating that, roughly, one fifth of the total number of PSU clusters in a country will be randomly selected into the survey sample, the sampling frame should consist of 500-1000 PSU clusters.
PROBABILITY SAMPLING
Probability sampling means that every single individual in the sampling frame has a known and non-zero chance of being selected into the survey sample. Non-probability methods of sampling such as quota or convenience sampling and random walk, may introduce bias into the survey, will throw survey findings into question, and are not accepted by WHO.
The probability of selection into the survey sample for each cluster will be proportional to its relative size. Systematic Sampling Systematic sampling is the ordered sampling at fixed intervals from a list, starting from a randomly chosen point. Typically, systematic sampling is not used at the first stage of sampling (selection of PSUs) because it renders the estimation of sampling error difficult.
Systematic sampling is recommended at the SSU, TSU, and household selection stages of sampling. Systematic sampling may be linear or circular.
SELECTION OF HOUSEHOLDS
The Household is a device used to get at the individual. The household is the sampling unit while the individual is the observational unit. While it would be preferable to randomly select from a list of all eligible persons in a country, such lists, with a few exceptions, are not available, so we must employ a final cluster, the household, to get at our observational units.
Households will be selected from lists of dwelling units. Non-probabilistic methods of household selection such as the random walk are not acceptable. Such lists are typically available from population registries, household listings, voter lists and census list. As it is essential to include all households in the sampling frame, an assessment of the methodology employed to select households must be made: - How much has the population changed since these lists were made? - Completeness of coverage. Are there unregistered populations (e.g. slums) - Population shifts - Changes in Registry
QUALITY
Almost all lists will suffer from routine problems. WHO recommends that survey institutions manually enumerate all the households
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset tabulates the United States 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 United States 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 2022, the population of United States was 333,287,557, a 0.38% increase year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, United States population was 332,031,554, an increase of 0.16% compared to a population of 331,511,512 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of United States increased by 51,125,146. In this period, the peak population was 333,287,557 in the year 2022. The numbers suggest that the population has not reached its peak yet and is showing a trend of further growth. 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 United States Population by Year. You can refer the same here
Facebook
TwitterThese detailed tables show standard errors for sample sizes and population estimates from the 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Standard errors for samples sizes and population estimates are provided by age group, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, employment status, geographic area, pregnancy status, college enrollment status, and probation/parole status.
Facebook
TwitterThese detailed tables show sample sizes and population estimates from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Samples sizes and population estimates are provided by age group, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, employment status, geographic area, pregnancy status, college enrollment status, and probation/parole status.
Facebook
TwitterA 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