Abstract

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

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

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

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

UPDATING OF SAMPLING FRAME

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

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

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

Cleaning operations

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

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

Response rate

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

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

Sampling error estimates

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

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

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

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

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

Data appraisal

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

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

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.

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

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

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

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

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

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

Objectives

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

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

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

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

Geographic coverage

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

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

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

Response rate

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

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

Psychological and brain science explore human behavior and the human brain by studying volunteers who participate in these studies. Given that the mind and behavior of participants are influenced by their own biological and social factors, the generalizability of findings in these fields largely depends on the representativeness of samples. However, the representativeness of samples in psychological and brain science has long been criticized as “WEIRD” (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic). In recent years, several meta-researches have surveyed the representativeness of samples in published studies from different sub-fields, but an overall understanding of the representativeness of samples in psychological and brain science is lacking. In this review, we analyze these meta-researches to provide a comprehensive perspective on the current state of sample representativeness. Two common issues emerged across these meta-researches. Firstly, the demographics of participants were incomplete in most of the published studies. Most psychological and brain science studies reported participants' gender, age, and country, but participants' race/ethnicity, education level, and socioeconomic status were far less reported. Other important demographics, such as rural/urban division, were not reported at all. Additionally, the reporting of these demographics has increased only slightly in recent years compared to decades ago. Thus, the under-reporting of demographic information in literature was largely unchanged. Secondly, based on the reported demographics, we found that samples in the field are far from being representative of the world population: most participants are young, highly educated Caucasian females in Western countries; middle-aged and older, less educated, colored people in and outside Western countries are less likely to be studied. In terms of countries, Southeast Asian, African, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries appear fewer in psychological and brain science research.These two issues may be due to the following reasons: convenience sampling dominates psychological and brain science; Western researchers dominate the field of psychology and brain science, with most of the editors-in-chief, editorial board members, and authors coming from Europe and America; psychology and brain science undervalued the effect of socioeconomic and cultural factors; and researchers mistakenly believe that findings from Western participants can be generalized to all human beings. Addressing the issue of sample representativeness in psychological and brain sciences requires a concerted effort by researchers, academic societies, journals, and funding agencies: Researchers should collect and report detailed demographic information about participants, state the limitations of generalizability, and use sampling methods that can increase representativeness whenever possible (e.g., probability sampling); academic societies should pay attention to the representativeness issues by organizing more academic symposium or workshops on this topic; journals should increase the representativeness of editorial board members and encourage more rigorous research with samples from underrepresented groups or studies that examine the generalizability of important findings; funding agencies can encourage researchers to pay more attention to study groups from underrepresented countries, and provide financial support for studying hard-to-research population. Improving sample representativeness will enhance the value of applying psychological and brain science knowledge in real-life settings and promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

About this dataset

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).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the United States is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in United States population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for United States Population by Year. You can refer the same here

Demographic distribution of the target population and the study sample.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of Malta by gender across 18 age groups. It lists the male and female population in each age group along with the gender ratio for Malta. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Malta by gender and age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group for both Men and Women in Malta. Additionally, it can be used to see how the gender ratio changes from birth to senior most age group and male to female ratio across each age group for Malta.

Key observations

Largest age group (population): Male # 35-39 years (52) | Female # 25-29 years (62). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis.

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the Malta population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the Malta is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the Malta is shown in the following column.
• Gender Ratio: Also known as the sex ratio, this column displays the number of males per 100 females in Malta for each age group.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Malta Population by Gender. You can refer the same here

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). For Wave 1 (baseline), the study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who do and 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 the Youth 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 at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) 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 civilian, noninstitutionalized population 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 civilian, noninstitutionalized population 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 Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohort who were at least age 15 and in the civilian, noninstitutionalized population 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 0001 (DS0001) contains the data from the Public-Use File Master Linkage File (PUF-MLF). This file contains 93 variables and 82,139 cases. The file provides a master list of every person's unique identification number and what type of respondent they were in each wave for data that are available in the Public-Use Files and Special Collection Public-Use Files. Dataset 0002 (DS0002) contains the data from the Restricted-Use File Master Linkage File (RUF-MLF). This file contains 202 variables and 82,139 cases. The file provides a master list of every person's unique identification number and what type of respondent they were in each wave for data that are available in the Restricted-Use Files, Special Collection Restricted-Use Files, and Biomarker Restricted-Use Files.

1980 Census data, PUMS 5% sample with an immigration extract Prepared by Donald Treiman.

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 do and 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 Units (PSUs) 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 Public-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. Wave 4.5 was a special data collection for youth only who were aged 12 to 17 at the time of the Wave 4.5 interview. Wave 4.5 was the fourth annual follow-up wave for those who were members of the Wave 1 Cohort. For those who were sampled at Wave 4, Wave 4.5 was the first annual follow-up wave.Wave 5.5, conducted in 2020, was a special data collection for Wave 4 Cohort youth and young adults ages 13 to 19 at the time of the Wave 5.5 interview. Also in 2020, a subsample of Wave 4 Cohort adults ages 20 and older were interviewed via the PATH Study Adult Telephone Survey (PATH-ATS).Wave 7.5 was a special collection for Wave 4 and Wave 7 Cohort youth and young adults ages 12 to 22 at the time of the Wave 7.5 interview. For those who were sampled at Wave 7, Wave 7.5 was the first annual follow-up wave. Dataset 1002 (DS1002) contains the data from the Wave 4.5 Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This file contains 1,395 variables and 13,131 cases. Of these cases, 11,378 are continuing youth having completed a prior Youth Interview. The other 1,753 cases are "aged-up youth" having previously been sampled as "shadow youth." Datasets 1112, 1212, and 1222, (DS1112, DS1212, and DS1222) are data files comprising the weight variables for Wave 4.5. The "all-waves" weight file contains weights for participants in the Wave 1 Cohort who completed a Wave 4.5 Youth Interview and completed interviews (if old enough to do so) or verified their information with the study (if not old enough to be interviewed) in Waves 1, 2, 3, and 4. There are two separate files with "single wave" weights: one for the Wave 1 Cohort and one for the Wave 4 Cohort. The "single-wave" weight file for the Wave 1 Cohort contains weights for youth who completed an interview in Wave 1 an

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Azusa population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Azusa. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Azusa by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Azusa.

Key observations

The largest age group in Azusa, CA was for the group of age 20 to 24 years years with a population of 4,973 (10.08%), according to the ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Azusa, CA was the 85 years and over years with a population of 407 (0.83%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Azusa is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Azusa total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Azusa Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Abstract

The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was a nationally representative sample survey conducted from March through June 1988 to collect data on fertility, family planning, and child and maternal health. A total of 9,045 households and 6,775 ever-married women aged 15 to 49 were interviewed. Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is carried out by the Institute of Population Studies (IPS) of Chulalongkorn University with the financial support from USAID through the Institute for Resource Development (IRD) at Westinghouse. The Institute of Population Studies was responsible for the overall implementation of the survey including sample design, preparation of field work, data collection and processing, and analysis of data. IPS has made available its personnel and office facilities to the project throughout the project duration. It serves as the headquarters for the survey.

The Thai Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was undertaken for the main purpose of providing data concerning fertility, family planning and maternal and child health to program managers and policy makers to facilitate their evaluation and planning of programs, and to population and health researchers to assist in their efforts to document and analyze the demographic and health situation. It is intended to provide information both on topics for which comparable data is not available from previous nationally representative surveys as well as to update trends with respect to a number of indicators available from previous surveys, in particular the Longitudinal Study of Social Economic and Demographic Change in 1969-73, the Survey of Fertility in Thailand in 1975, the National Survey of Family Planning Practices, Fertility and Mortality in 1979, and the three Contraceptive Prevalence Surveys in 1978/79, 1981 and 1984.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 15-49

Universe

The population covered by the 1987 THADHS is defined as the universe of all women Ever-married women in the reproductive ages (i.e., women 15-49). This covered women in private households on the basis of a de facto coverage definition. Visitors and usual residents who were in the household the night before the first visit or before any subsequent visit during the few days the interviewing team was in the area were eligible. Excluded were the small number of married women aged under 15 and women not present in private households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE SIZE AND ALLOCATION

The objective of the survey was to provide reliable estimates for major domains of the country. This consisted of two overlapping sets of reporting domains: (a) Five regions of the country namely Bangkok, north, northeast, central region (excluding Bangkok), and south; (b) Bangkok versus all provincial urban and all rural areas of the country. These requirements could be met by defining six non-overlapping sampling domains (Bangkok, provincial urban, and rural areas of each of the remaining 4 regions), and allocating approximately equal sample sizes to them. On the basis of past experience, available budget and overall reporting requirement, the target sample size was fixed at 7,000 interviews of ever-married women aged 15-49, expected to be found in around 9,000 households. Table A.I shows the actual number of households as well as eligible women selected and interviewed, by sampling domain (see Table i.I for reporting domains).

THE FRAME AND SAMPLE SELECTION

The frame for selecting the sample for urban areas, was provided by the National Statistical Office of Thailand and by the Ministry of the Interior for rural areas. It consisted of information on population size of various levels of administrative and census units, down to blocks in urban areas and villages in rural areas. The frame also included adequate maps and descriptions to identify these units. The extent to which the data were up-to-date as well as the quality of the data varied somewhat in different parts of the frame. Basically, the multi-stage stratified sampling design involved the following procedure. A specified number of sample areas were selected systematically from geographically/administratively ordered lists with probabilities proportional to the best available measure of size (PPS). Within selected areas (blocks or villages) new lists of households were prepared and systematic samples of households were selected. In principle, the sampling interval for the selection of households from lists was determined so as to yield a self weighting sample of households within each domain. However, in the absence of good measures of population size for all areas, these sampling intervals often required adjustments in the interest of controlling the size of the resulting sample. Variations in selection probabilities introduced due to such adjustment, where required, were compensated for by appropriate weighting of sample cases at the tabulation stage.

SAMPLE OUTCOME

The final sample of households was selected from lists prepared in the sample areas. The time interval between household listing and enumeration was generally very short, except to some extent in Bangkok where the listing itself took more time. In principle, the units of listing were the same as the ultimate units of sampling, namely households. However in a small proportion of cases, the former differed from the latter in several respects, identified at the stage of final enumeration: a) Some units listed actually contained more than one household each b) Some units were "blanks", that is, were demolished or not found to contain any eligible households at the time of enumeration. c) Some units were doubtful cases in as much as the household was reported as "not found" by the interviewer, but may in fact have existed.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The DHS core questionnaires (Household, Eligible Women Respondent, and Community) were translated into Thai. A number of modifications were made largely to adapt them for use with an ever- married woman sample and to add a number of questions in areas that are of special interest to the Thai investigators but which were not covered in the standard core. Examples of such modifications included adding marital status and educational attainment to the household schedule, elaboration on questions in the individual questionnaire on educational attainment to take account of changes in the educational system during recent years, elaboration on questions on postnuptial residence, and adaptation of the questionnaire to take into account that only ever-married women are being interviewed rather than all women. More generally, attention was given to the wording of questions in Thai to ensure that the intent of the original English-language version was preserved.

a) Household questionnaire

The household questionnaire was used to list every member of the household who usually lives in the household and as well as visitors who slept in the household the night before the interviewer's visit. Information contained in the household questionnaire are age, sex, marital status, and education for each member (the last two items were asked only to members aged 13 and over). The head of the household or the spouse of the head of the household was the preferred respondent for the household questionnaire. However, if neither was available for interview, any adult member of the household was accepted as the respondent. Information from the household questionnaire was used to identify eligible women for the individual interview. To be eligible, a respondent had to be an ever-married woman aged 15-49 years old who had slept in the household 'the previous night'.

Prior evidence has indicated that when asked about current age, Thais are as likely to report age at next birthday as age at last birthday (the usual demographic definition of age). Since the birth date of each household number was not asked in the household questionnaire, it was not possible to calculate age at last birthday from the birthdate. Therefore a special procedure was followed to ensure that eligible women just under the higher boundary for eligible ages (i.e. 49 years old) were not mistakenly excluded from the eligible woman sample because of an overstated age. Ever-married women whose reported age was between 50-52 years old and who slept in the household the night before birthdate of the woman, it was discovered that these women (or any others being interviewed) were not actually within the eligible age range of 15-49, the interview was terminated and the case disqualified. This attempt recovered 69 eligible women who otherwise would have been missed because their reported age was over 50 years old or over.

b) Individual questionnaire

The questionnaire administered to eligible women was based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire for high contraceptive prevalence countries. The individual questionnaire has 8 sections: - Respondent's background - Reproduction - Contraception - Health and breastfeeding - Marriage - Fertility preference - Husband's background and woman's work - Heights and weights of children and mothers

The questionnaire was modified to suit the Thai context. As noted above, several questions were added to the standard DHS core questionnaire not only to meet the interest of IPS researchers hut also because of their relevance to the current demographic situation in Thailand. The supplemental questions are marked with an asterisk in the individual questionnaire. Questions concerning the following items were added in the individual questionnaire: - Did the respondent ever

Descriptive statistics of sample population by study arm.

Accurately estimating effective population size (Ne) is essential for understanding evolutionary processes and guiding conservation efforts. This study investigates Ne estimation methods in spatially structured populations using a population of moor frog (Rana arvalis) as a case study. We assessed the behaviour of Ne estimates derived from the linkage disequilibrium (LD) method as we changed the spatial configuration of samples. Moor frog eggs were sampled from 25 breeding patches (i.e., separate vernal ponds, ditches or parts of larger fens) within a single population, revealing an isolation-by-distance pattern and a local spatial genetic structure. Varying buffer sizes around each patch were used to examine the impact of sampling window size on the estimation of effective number of breeders (Nb). Our results indicate a downward bias in LD Nb estimates with increasing buffer size, suggesting an underestimation of Nb. The observed bias is attributed to LD resulting from including genetically divergent individuals (mixture-LD) confounding LD due to drift. This emphasises the significance of considering even subtle spatial genetic patterns. The implications of these findings are discussed, emphasising the need to account for spatial genetic structure to accurately assess population viability and inform conservation efforts. This study contributes to our understanding of the challenges associated with Ne estimation in spatially structured populations and underscores the importance of refining methodologies to address population-specific spatial dynamics for effective conservation planning and management. Methods The study site of c. 200 ha is part of the nature reserve and military domain ‘Klein Schietveld’ in Kapellen near Antwerp, Belgium (51.358 N, 4.495 E; Fig. S1). In March 2017, heathland pools, fens and temporary ponds were screened for the presence of egg clutches possibly belonging to moor frogs. In total, eggs were sampled in 26 locations where clusters of clutches were found. These locations consisted of separate vernal ponds, ditches or parts of larger fens; they are called ‘breeding patches’ from now on. In each breeding patch, up to 50 intact and distinguishable clutches were sampled and three eggs per clutch were taken. The eggs were stored in pond water in a refrigerator until DNA-extraction (maximally a few days after sampling). DNA-extraction was performed on two eggs per clutch. The jelly coats were first removed using a scalpel. DNA was extracted from the embryo’s using DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen) with a lysis step of one hour and eluted in 70 μl AE buffer (elution performed twice). The integrity of DNA of 10 % of the samples was assessed on 1 % agarose gels, while the DNA concentration of all tissue samples was measured with Quant-iT Picogreen dsDNA Assay Kit (Invitrogen, Thermo Fisher Scientific) using a Synergy HT plate reader (BioTek). In order to make the distinction between samples from two different species, Rana arvalis and R. temporaria, DNA from one egg per clutch and from all larvae was analysed with the RFLP method of Palo and Merilä (2003). The Rana arvalis eggs were genotyped at 19 microsatellite markers via multiplex PCR and genotyping analysis on an ABI 3500 Genetic Analyzer. Allele calls were scored using the GeneMapper v4.1 software with fragment sizes based on GeneScan 600 LIZ Size Standard. Negative controls were included in each 96‐well PCR to allow for detection of reagent contamination. Reproducibility was evaluated using 3 % blindly replicated samples, two to five times within and across well plates. One reference sample was further added to each well plate. Samples with genotypes for less than 50 % of the loci were reanalysed or replaced with genotypes of eggs of the same clutch where possible. The average error rate per locus was 1%. Three markers, Rtempμ4, Rtempμ5 and Rt2Ca2-22, showed no polymorphism and alleles of locus Rtempµ9 could not be identified unambiguously. Locus RECALQ showed deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in 5 breeding patches and proportions of null alleles higher than 0.20 in at least 10 breeding patches. Also, RlatCa41 deviated from HWE in 7 breeding patches and null alleles in at least 6 patches. Both markers were excluded from further analysis.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Excel population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Excel. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Excel by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Excel.

Key observations

The largest age group in Excel, AL was for the group of age 5 to 9 years years with a population of 77 (15.28%), according to the ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Excel, AL was the 85 years and over years with a population of 2 (0.40%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Excel is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Excel total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Excel Population by Age. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Dudley 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 Dudley 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 Dudley was 100, a 0.00% decrease year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, Dudley population was 100, a decline of 0.99% compared to a population of 101 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of Dudley decreased by 190. In this period, the peak population was 297 in the year 2005. 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).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Dudley is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Dudley population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Dudley Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Dayton town 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 Dayton town 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 Dayton town was 1,671, a 0.42% decrease year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, Dayton town population was 1,678, a decline of 0.53% compared to a population of 1,687 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of Dayton town decreased by 278. In this period, the peak population was 1,949 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).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Dayton town is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Dayton town population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Dayton town Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Two Rivers town 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 Two Rivers town 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 Two Rivers town was 1,676, a 0.30% decrease year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, Two Rivers town population was 1,681, an increase of 0.48% compared to a population of 1,673 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of Two Rivers town decreased by 251. In this period, the peak population was 1,928 in the year 2001. 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).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Two Rivers town is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Two Rivers town population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Two Rivers town Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Marshall town 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 Marshall town 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 Marshall town was 1,930, a 0.82% decrease year-by-year from 2021. Previously, in 2021, Marshall town population was 1,946, a decline of 0.66% compared to a population of 1,959 in 2020. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2022, population of Marshall town decreased by 178. In this period, the peak population was 2,170 in the year 2008. 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).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2022

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2022)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Marshall town is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Marshall town population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

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.

Inspiration

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Marshall town Population by Year. You can refer the same here