It is commonly believed that if a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is carried out in R, then reported p-values are correct. This article shows that this is not always the case. Results can vary from non-significant to highly significant, depending on the choice of options. The user must know exactly which options result in correct p-values, and which options do not. Furthermore, it is commonly supposed that analyses in SAS and R of simple balanced experiments using mixed-effects models result in correct p-values. However, the simulation study of the current article indicates that frequency of Type I error deviates from the nominal value. The objective of this article is to compare SAS and R with respect to correctness of results when analyzing small experiments. It is concluded that modern functions and procedures for analysis of mixed-effects models are sometimes not as reliable as traditional ANOVA based on simple computations of sums of squares.

analyze the survey of income and program participation (sipp) with r if the census bureau's budget was gutted and only one complex sample survey survived, pray it's the survey of income and program participation (sipp). it's giant. it's rich with variables. it's monthly. it follows households over three, four, now five year panels. the congressional budget office uses it for their health insurance simulation . analysts read that sipp has person-month files, get scurred, and retreat to inferior options. the american community survey may be the mount everest of survey data, but sipp is most certainly the amazon. questions swing wild and free through the jungle canopy i mean core data dictionary. legend has it that there are still species of topical module variables that scientists like you have yet to analyze. ponce de león would've loved it here. ponce. what a name. what a guy. the sipp 2008 panel data started from a sample of 105,663 individuals in 42,030 households. once the sample gets drawn, the census bureau surveys one-fourth of the respondents every four months, over f our or five years (panel durations vary). you absolutely must read and understand pdf pages 3, 4, and 5 of this document before starting any analysis (start at the header 'waves and rotation groups'). if you don't comprehend what's going on, try their survey design tutorial. since sipp collects information from respondents regarding every month over the duration of the panel, you'll need to be hyper-aware of whether you want your results to be point-in-time, annualized, or specific to some other period. the analysis scripts below provide examples of each. at every four-month interview point, every respondent answers every core question for the previous four months. after that, wave-specific addenda (called topical modules) get asked, but generally only regarding a single prior month. to repeat: core wave files contain four records per person, topical modules contain one. if you stacked every core wave, you would have one record per person per month for the duration o f the panel. mmmassive. ~100,000 respondents x 12 months x ~4 years. have an analysis plan before you start writing code so you extract exactly what you need, nothing more. better yet, modify something of mine. cool? this new github repository contains eight, you read me, eight scripts: 1996 panel - download and create database.R 2001 panel - download and create database.R 2004 panel - download and create database.R 2008 panel - download and create database.R since some variables are character strings in one file and integers in anoth er, initiate an r function to harmonize variable class inconsistencies in the sas importation scripts properly handle the parentheses seen in a few of the sas importation scripts, because the SAScii package currently does not create an rsqlite database, initiate a variant of the read.SAScii function that imports ascii data directly into a sql database (.db) download each microdata file - weights, topical modules, everything - then read 'em into sql 2008 panel - full year analysis examples.R< br /> define which waves and specific variables to pull into ram, based on the year chosen loop through each of twelve months, constructing a single-year temporary table inside the database read that twelve-month file into working memory, then save it for faster loading later if you like read the main and replicate weights columns into working memory too, merge everything construct a few annualized and demographic columns using all twelve months' worth of information construct a replicate-weighted complex sample design with a fay's adjustment factor of one-half, again save it for faster loading later, only if you're so inclined reproduce census-publish ed statistics, not precisely (due to topcoding described here on pdf page 19) 2008 panel - point-in-time analysis examples.R define which wave(s) and specific variables to pull into ram, based on the calendar month chosen read that interview point (srefmon)- or calendar month (rhcalmn)-based file into working memory read the topical module and replicate weights files into working memory too, merge it like you mean it construct a few new, exciting variables using both core and topical module questions construct a replicate-weighted complex sample design with a fay's adjustment factor of one-half reproduce census-published statistics, not exactly cuz the authors of this brief used the generalized variance formula (gvf) to calculate the margin of error - see pdf page 4 for more detail - the friendly statisticians at census recommend using the replicate weights whenever possible. oh hayy, now it is. 2008 panel - median value of household assets.R define which wave(s) and spe cific variables to pull into ram, based on the topical module chosen read the topical module and replicate weights files into working memory too, merge once again construct a replicate-weighted complex sample design with a...

The Semantic Artist Similarity dataset consists of two datasets of artists entities with their corresponding biography texts, and the list of top-10 most similar artists within the datasets used as ground truth. The dataset is composed by a corpus of 268 artists and a slightly larger one of 2,336 artists, both gathered from Last.fm in March 2015. The former is mapped to the MIREX Audio and Music Similarity evaluation dataset, so that its similarity judgments can be used as ground truth. For the latter corpus we use the similarity between artists as provided by the Last.fm API. For every artist there is a list with the top-10 most related artists. In the MIREX dataset there are 188 artists with at least 10 similar artists, the other 80 artists have less than 10 similar artists. In the Last.fm API dataset all artists have a list of 10 similar artists. There are 4 files in the dataset.mirex_gold_top10.txt and lastfmapi_gold_top10.txt have the top-10 lists of artists for every artist of both datasets. Artists are identified by MusicBrainz ID. The format of the file is one line per artist, with the artist mbid separated by a tab with the list of top-10 related artists identified by their mbid separated by spaces.artist_mbid \t artist_mbid_top10_list_separated_by_spaces mb2uri_mirex and mb2uri_lastfmapi.txt have the list of artists. In each line there are three fields separated by tabs. First field is the MusicBrainz ID, second field is the last.fm name of the artist, and third field is the DBpedia uri.artist_mbid \t lastfm_name \t dbpedia_uri There are also 2 folders in the dataset with the biography texts of each dataset. Each .txt file in the biography folders is named with the MusicBrainz ID of the biographied artist. Biographies were gathered from the Last.fm wiki page of every artist.Using this datasetWe would highly appreciate if scientific publications of works partly based on the Semantic Artist Similarity dataset quote the following publication:Oramas, S., Sordo M., Espinosa-Anke L., & Serra X. (In Press). A Semantic-based Approach for Artist Similarity. 16th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference.We are interested in knowing if you find our datasets useful! If you use our dataset please email us at mtg-info@upf.edu and tell us about your research. https://www.upf.edu/web/mtg/semantic-similarity

analyze the health and retirement study (hrs) with r the hrs is the one and only longitudinal survey of american seniors. with a panel starting its third decade, the current pool of respondents includes older folks who have been interviewed every two years as far back as 1992. unlike cross-sectional or shorter panel surveys, respondents keep responding until, well, death d o us part. paid for by the national institute on aging and administered by the university of michigan's institute for social research, if you apply for an interviewer job with them, i hope you like werther's original. figuring out how to analyze this data set might trigger your fight-or-flight synapses if you just start clicking arou nd on michigan's website. instead, read pages numbered 10-17 (pdf pages 12-19) of this introduction pdf and don't touch the data until you understand figure a-3 on that last page. if you start enjoying yourself, here's the whole book. after that, it's time to register for access to the (free) data. keep your username and password handy, you'll need it for the top of the download automation r script. next, look at this data flowchart to get an idea of why the data download page is such a righteous jungle. but wait, good news: umich recently farmed out its data management to the rand corporation, who promptly constructed a giant consolidated file with one record per respondent across the whole panel. oh so beautiful. the rand hrs files make much of the older data and syntax examples obsolete, so when you come across stuff like instructions on how to merge years, you can happily ignore them - rand has done it for you. the health and retirement study only includes noninstitutionalized adults when new respondents get added to the panel (as they were in 1992, 1993, 1998, 2004, and 2010) but once they're in, they're in - respondents have a weight of zero for interview waves when they were nursing home residents; but they're still responding and will continue to contribute to your statistics so long as you're generalizing about a population from a previous wave (for example: it's possible to compute "among all americans who were 50+ years old in 1998, x% lived in nursing homes by 2010"). my source for that 411? page 13 of the design doc. wicked. this new github repository contains five scripts: 1992 - 2010 download HRS microdata.R loop through every year and every file, download, then unzip everything in one big party impor t longitudinal RAND contributed files.R create a SQLite database (.db) on the local disk load the rand, rand-cams, and both rand-family files into the database (.db) in chunks (to prevent overloading ram) longitudinal RAND - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'import longitudinal RAND contributed files' program create tw o database-backed complex sample survey object, using a taylor-series linearization design perform a mountain of analysis examples with wave weights from two different points in the panel import example HRS file.R load a fixed-width file using only the sas importation script directly into ram with < a href="http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2012/07/importing-public-data-with-sas-instructions-into-r.html">SAScii parse through the IF block at the bottom of the sas importation script, blank out a number of variables save the file as an R data file (.rda) for fast loading later replicate 2002 regression.R connect to the sql database created by the 'import longitudinal RAND contributed files' program create a database-backed complex sample survey object, using a taylor-series linearization design exactly match the final regression shown in this document provided by analysts at RAND as an update of the regression on pdf page B76 of this document . click here to view these five scripts for more detail about the health and retirement study (hrs), visit: michigan's hrs homepage rand's hrs homepage the hrs wikipedia page a running list of publications using hrs notes: exemplary work making it this far. as a reward, here's the detailed codebook for the main rand hrs file. note that rand also creates 'flat files' for every survey wave, but really, most every analysis you c an think of is possible using just the four files imported with the rand importation script above. if you must work with the non-rand files, there's an example of how to import a single hrs (umich-created) file, but if you wish to import more than one, you'll have to write some for loops yourself. confidential to sas, spss, stata, and sudaan users: a tidal wave is coming. you can get water up your nose and be dragged out to sea, or you can grab a surf board. time to transition to r. :D

This package contains two files designed to help read individual level DHS data into Stata. The first file addresses the problem that versions of Stata before Version 7/SE will read in only up to 2047 variables and most of the individual files have more variables than that. The file will read in the .do, .dct and .dat file and output new .do and .dct files with only a subset of the variables specified by the user. The second file deals with earlier DHS surveys in which .do and .dct file do not exist and only .sps and .sas files are provided. The file will read in the .sas and .sps files and output a .dct and .do file. If necessary the first file can then be run again to select a subset of variables.

analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D

Along track temperature, Salinity, backscatter, Chlorophyll Fluoresence, and normalized water leaving radiance (nLw).

On the bow of the R/V Roger Revelle was a Satlantic SeaWiFS Aircraft Simulator (MicroSAS) system, used to estimate water-leaving radiance from the ship, analogous to to the nLw derived by the SeaWiFS and MODIS satellite sensors, but free from atmospheric error (hence, it can provide data below clouds).

The system consisted of a down-looking radiance sensor and a sky-viewing radiance sensor, both mounted on a steerable holder on the bow. A downwelling irradiance sensor was mounted at the top of the ship's meterological mast, on the bow, far from any potentially shading structures. These data were used to estimate normalized water-leaving radiance as a function of wavelength. The radiance detector was set to view the water at 40deg from nadir as recommended by Mueller et al. [2003b]. The water radiance sensor was able to view over an azimuth range of ~180deg across the ship's heading with no viewing of the ship's wake. The direction of the sensor was adjusted to view the water 90-120deg from the sun's azimuth, to minimize sun glint. This was continually adjusted as the time and ship's gyro heading were used to calculate the sun's position using an astronomical solar position subroutine interfaced with a stepping motor which was attached to the radiometer mount (designed and fabricated at Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences). Protocols for operation and calibration were performed according to Mueller [Mueller et al., 2003a; Mueller et al., 2003b; Mueller et al., 2003c]. Before 1000h and after 1400h, data quality was poorer as the solar zenith angle was too low. Post-cruise, the 10Hz data were filtered to remove as much residual white cap and glint as possible (we accept the lowest 5% of the data). Reflectance plaque measurements were made several times at local apparent noon on sunny days to verify the radiometer calibrations.

Within an hour of local apparent noon each day, a Satlantic OCP sensor was deployed off the stern of the R/V Revelle after the ship oriented so that the sun was off the stern. The ship would secure the starboard Z-drive, and use port Z-drive and bow thruster to move the ship ahead at about 25cm s-1. The OCP was then trailed aft and brought to the surface ~100m aft of the ship, then allowed to sink to 100m as downwelling spectral irradiance and upwelling spectral radiance were recorded continuously along with temperature and salinity. This procedure ensured there were no ship shadow effects in the radiometry.

Instruments include a WETLabs wetstar fluorometer, a WETLabs ECOTriplet and a SeaBird microTSG.
Radiometry was done using a Satlantic 7 channel microSAS system with Es, Lt and Li sensors.

Chl data is based on inter calibrating surface discrete Chlorophyll measure with the temporally closest fluorescence measurement and applying the regression results to all fluorescence data.

Data have been corrected for instrument biofouling and drift based on weekly purewater calibrations of the system. Radiometric data has been processed using standard Satlantic processing software and has been checked with periodic plaque measurements using a 2% spectralon standard.

Lw is calculated from Lt and Lsky and is "what Lt would be if the
sensor were looking straight down". Since our sensors are mounted at
40o, based on various NASA protocols, we need to do that conversion.

Lwn adds Es to the mix. Es is used to normalize Lw. Nlw is related to Rrs, Remote Sensing Reflectance

Techniques used are as described in:
Balch WM, Drapeau DT, Bowler BC, Booth ES, Windecker LA, Ashe A (2008) Space-time variability of carbon standing stocks and fixation rates in the Gulf of Maine, along the GNATS transect between Portland, ME, USA, and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada. J Plankton Res 30:119-139

Objective: To close gaps between research and clinical practice, tools are needed for efficient pragmatic trial recruitment and patient-reported outcome(PROM) collection. The objective was to assess feasibility and process measures for patient-reported outcome collection in a randomized trial comparing electronic health record(EHR) patient portal questionnaires to telephone interview among adults with epilepsy and anxiety or depression symptoms. Results: Participants were 60% women, 77% White/non-Hispanic, with mean age 42.5 years. Among 15 individuals randomized to EHR portal, 10(67%, CI 41.7-84.8%) met the 6-month retention endpoint, versus 100%(CI 79.6-100%) in the telephone group(p=0.04). EHR outcome collection at 6 months required 11.8 minutes less research staff time per participant than telephone (5.9, CI 3.3-7.7 vs. 17.7, CI 14.1-20.2). Subsequent telephone contact after unsuccessful EHR attempts enabled near complete data collection and still saved staff time. Discussion: Data from this randomized pilot study of pragmatic outcome collection methods for patients with anxiety or depression symptoms in epilepsy includes baseline participant characteristics, recruitment flow resulting from a novel EHR-based, care-embedded recruitment process, and data on retention along with various process measures at 6-months. Methods The dataset was collected via a combination of the following: 1. manual extraction of EHR-based data followed by entry into REDCap and then analysis and further processing in SAS 9.4; 2. Data pull of Epic EHR-based data from Clarity database using standard programming techniques, followed by processing in SAS 9.4 and merging with data from REDCap; 3. Collection of data directly from participants via telephone with entry into REDCap and further processing in SAS 9.4; 4. Collection of process measures from study team tracking records followed by entry into REDCap and further processing in SAS 9.4. One file in the dataset contains aggregate data generated following merging of Clarity data pull-origin dataset with a REDCap dataset and further manual processing. Recruitment for the randomized trial began at an epilepsy clinic visit, with EHR-embedded validated anxiety and depression instruments, followed by automated EHR-based research screening consent and eligibility assessment. Fully eligible individuals later completed telephone consent, enrollment and randomization. Thirty total participants were randomized 1:1 to EHR portal versus telephone outcome assessment, and patient-reported and process outcomes were collected at 3- and 6-months, with primary outcome 6-month retention in EHR arm(feasibility target: ≥11 participants retained). Variables in this dataset include recruitment flow diagram data, baseline participant sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, retention (successful PROM collection at 6 months), and process measures. The process measures included research staff time to collect outcomes, research staff time to collect outcomes and enter data, time from initial outcome collection reminder to outcome collection, and number of reminders sent to participants for outcome collection. PROMs were collected via the randomized method only at 3 months. At 6 months, if the criteria for retention was not met by the randomized method (failure to return outcomes by 1 week after 5 post-due date reminders for outcome collection), up to 3 additional attempts were made to collect outcomes by the alternative method, and process measures were also collected during this hybrid outcome collection method approach.

analyze the consumer expenditure survey (ce) with r the consumer expenditure survey (ce) is the primo data source to understand how americans spend money. participating households keep a running diary about every little purchase over the year. those diaries are then summed up into precise expenditure categories. how else are you gonna know that the average american household spent $34 (±2) on bacon, $826 (±17) on cellular phones, and $13 (±2) on digital e-readers in 2011? an integral component of the market basket calculation in the consumer price index, this survey recently became available as public-use microdata and they're slowly releasing historical files back to 1996. hooray! for a t aste of what's possible with ce data, look at the quick tables listed on their main page - these tables contain approximately a bazillion different expenditure categories broken down by demographic groups. guess what? i just learned that americans living in households with $5,000 to $9,999 of annual income spent an average of $283 (±90) on pets, toys, hobbies, and playground equipment (pdf page 3). you can often get close to your statistic of interest from these web tables. but say you wanted to look at domestic pet expenditure among only households with children between 12 and 17 years old. another one of the thirteen web tables - the consumer unit composition table - shows a few different breakouts of households with kids, but none matching that exact population of interest. the bureau of labor statistics (bls) (the survey's designers) and the census bureau (the survey's administrators) have provided plenty of the major statistics and breakouts for you, but they're not psychic. if you want to comb through this data for specific expenditure categories broken out by a you-defined segment of the united states' population, then let a little r into your life. fun starts now. fair warning: only analyze t he consumer expenditure survey if you are nerd to the core. the microdata ship with two different survey types (interview and diary), each containing five or six quarterly table formats that need to be stacked, merged, and manipulated prior to a methodologically-correct analysis. the scripts in this repository contain examples to prepare 'em all, just be advised that magnificent data like this will never be no-assembly-required. the folks at bls have posted an excellent summary of what's av ailable - read it before anything else. after that, read the getting started guide. don't skim. a few of the descriptions below refer to sas programs provided by the bureau of labor statistics. you'll find these in the C:\My Directory\CES\2011\docs directory after you run the download program. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2010-2011 - download all microdata.R lo op through every year and download every file hosted on the bls's ce ftp site import each of the comma-separated value files into r with read.csv depending on user-settings, save each table as an r data file (.rda) or stat a-readable file (.dta) 2011 fmly intrvw - analysis examples.R load the r data files (.rda) necessary to create the 'fmly' table shown in the ce macros program documentation.doc file construct that 'fmly' table, using five quarters of interviews (q1 2011 thru q1 2012) initiate a replicate-weighted survey design object perform some lovely li'l analysis examples replicate the %mean_variance() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of calculating descriptive statistics using unimputed variables replicate the %compare_groups() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of performing t -tests using unimputed variables create an rsqlite database (to minimize ram usage) containing the five imputed variable files, after identifying which variables were imputed based on pdf page 3 of the user's guide to income imputation initiate a replicate-weighted, database-backed, multiply-imputed survey design object perform a few additional analyses that highlight the modified syntax required for multiply-imputed survey designs replicate the %mean_variance() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of calculating descriptive statistics using imputed variables repl icate the %compare_groups() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of performing t-tests using imputed variables replicate the %proc_reg() and %proc_logistic() macros found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of regressions and logistic regressions using both unimputed and imputed variables replicate integrated mean and se.R match each step in the bls-provided sas program "integr ated mean and se.sas" but with r instead of sas create an rsqlite database when the expenditure table gets too large for older computers to handle in ram export a table "2011 integrated mean and se.csv" that exactly matches the contents of the sas-produced "2011 integrated mean and se.lst" text file click here to view these three scripts for...

These data were gathered to provide information on Kahn and Antonucci's life-span developmental model, "convoys of social support," which explores interpersonal relationships over time. Older adults (aged 50+) were interviewed on their health status, labor force status, and other demographic characteristics, and on the composition and degree of closeness of members of their current support network (e.g., spouses, children, friends). Three concentric circles of closeness were defined, varying in terms of transcendence of the relationship beyond role requirements, stability over the life span, and exchange of many different types of support (confiding, reassurance, respect, care when ill, discussion when upset, and talk about health). The principal respondents named a total of 6,341 network members, ranging in age from 18 to 96 years. Detailed structural and functional characteristics were collected from the principal respondents on the first ten named members of each support network. Similar interviews were then conducted with one to three network members of those 259 principal respondents who were 70+ years old. Two data files are provided: Part 1 contains merged data from the interviews of both the principal respondents aged 70+ and their network members, and Part 2 contains data from the principal respondents aged 50+. Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS2: Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS3: SAS Proc Format Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS4: SAS Input Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS5: SAS Format Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS6: SAS Label Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS7: SAS Missing Value Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS8: SPSS Data List Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS9: SPSS Variable Label Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS10: SPSS Value Label Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS11: SPSS Missing Value Statements for Principals, Aged 70+/Network Data DS12: SAS Proc Format Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS13: SAS Input Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS14: SAS Format Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS15: SAS Label Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS16: SAS Missing Value Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS17: SPSS Data List Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS18: SPSS Variable Label Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS19: SPSS Value Label Statements for Principals, Aged 50+ Data DS20: SPSS Missing Value Statements for Principals, Aged 50 Data Multistage national probability sample of households with at least one member aged 50 years or older and an oversampling of all household members aged 70 years or older. Additionally, up to three network members were interviewed for each of the respondents aged 70+ (as well as one child and one grandchild if not already named), for a total of 497 network members. There was some overlap between principal respondents and network members: 102 network members were also principal respondents, and 40 were named by more than one principal respondent. The age distribution of the 718 principal respondents was 50-64 years (N = 333), 65-74 years (N = 227), and 75-95 years (N = 158). Persons 50 years and older in households of the United States.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The School Health Center Healthy Adolescent Relationship Program (SHARP) was a school health center (SHC) provider-delivered multi-level intervention to reduce adolescent relationship abuse (ARA) among adolescents ages 14-19 seeking care in SHCs. This study tested the effectiveness of a brief relationship abuse education and counseling intervention in SHCs.

The SHARP intervention consisted of three levels of integrated intervention:

A brief clinical intervention on healthy and unhealthy relationships for SHC (cisgender and transgender) male and female patients delivered by SHC providers during all clinic visits (evaluated via client pre- and post-surveys and chart review) Development of an ARA-informed SHC staff and clinic environment (evaluated via provider pre and post-training surveys and interviews) SHC-based youth-led outreach activities within the school to promote healthy relationships and improve student safety (evaluated by focus groups with youth leaders and measures of school climate)

The collection consists of:

3 SAS data files

sharp_abuse_data_archive.sas7bdat (n=1,011; 272 variables) sharp_blt2exit_long_data_archive.sas7bdat (n=1,949; 259 variables) sharp_chart_data_archive_icpsr.sas7bdat (n=936; 24 variables)

2 Stata data files

SHARP_Provider Immediate Post_0829 and 0905 training_final-ICPSR.dta (n=38; 21 variables) SHARP_Provider Pre and Followup_final.dta-ICPSR.dta (n=66; 102 variables)

5 SAS syntax files

NIJ SHARP - Analyses.sas NIJ SHARP - DataMgmt_Final.sas NIJ SHARP - Formats.sas SHARP - Chart Extraction Data-MASKED.sas SHARP - Chart Extraction Formats.sas

3 Stata syntax files

code-for-SHARP-dating-violence-analyses-deidentified-MASKED.do SHARP_Provider Data to Archive-MASKED.do SHARP-analyses-deidentified-MASKED.do

3 PI provided codebooks

SHARP Codebook_Client Chart Data.xlsx (1 worksheet) SHARP Codebook_Client Survey Data.xlsx (3 worksheets) SHARP Codebook_Provider Survey Data.xlsx (1 worksheet)

For confidentiality reasons, qualitative data from focus groups are not currently available. Focus groups were conducted with each student outreach team following the conclusion of data collection. Discussions focused on awareness about ARA, the school-wide campaign, using the SHC as a resource, and what else can be done to prevent ARA in schools.

Abstract

The main objective of the new agricultural statistics program is to provide timely, accurate, credible and comprehensive agricultural statistics to describe the structure of agriculture in Rwanda in terms of land use, crop production and livestock; which can be used for food and agriculture policy formulation and planning, and for the compilation of national accounts statistics.

In this regard, the National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR) conducted the Seasonal Agriculture Survey (SAS) from November 2015 to October 2016 to gather up-to-date information for monitoring progress on agriculture programs and policies in Rwanda, including the Second Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS II) and Vision 2020. This 2016 RSAS covered three agricultural seasons (A, B and C) and provides data on background characteristics of the agricultural operators, farm characteristics (area, yield and production), agricultural practices, agricultural equipments, use of crop production by agricultural operators and by large scale farmers.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Agricultural holdings

Universe

The 2016 RSAS targeted agricultural operators and large scale farmers operating in Rwanda.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Seasonal Agriculture Survey (SAS) sample is composed of two categories of respondents: agricultural operators1 and large-scale farmers (LSF).

For the 2016 SAS, NISR used as the sampling method a dual frame sampling design combining selected area frame sample3 segments and a list of large-scale farmers.

NISR used also imagery from RNRA with a very high resolution of 25 centimeters to divide the total land of the country into twelve strata. A total number of 540 segments were spread throughout the country as coverage of the survey with 25,346 and 23,286 agricultural operators in Season A and Season B respectively. From these numbers of agricultural operators, sub-samples were selected during the second phases of Seasons A and B.

It is important to note that in each of agricultural season A and B, data collection was undertaken in two phases. Phase I was mainly used to collect data on demographic and social characteristics of interviewees, area under crops, crops planted, rainfall, livestock, etc. Phase II was mainly devoted to the collection of data on yield and production of crops.

Phase I serves at collecting data on area under different types of crops in the screening process, whereas the Phase II is mainly devoted to the collection of data on demographic, social characteristics of interviewees, together with yields of the different crops produced. Enumerated large-scale farmers (LSF) were 558 in both 2015 Season A and B. The LSF were engaged in either crop farming activities only, livestock farming activities only, or both crop and livestock farming activities.

Agricultural operators are the small scale farmers within the sample segments. Every selected segment was firstly screened using the appropriate materials such as the segment maps, GIS devices and the screening form. Using these devices, the enumerators accounted for every plot inside the sample segments. All Tracts6 were classified as either agricultural (cultivated land, pasture, and fallow land) or non-agricultural land (water, forests, roads, rocky and bare soils, and buildings).

During Phase I, a complete enumeration of all farmers having agricultural land and operating within the 540 selected segments was undertaken and a total of 25,495 and 24,911 agricultural operators were enumerated respectively in Seasons A and B. Season C considered only 152 segments, involving 3,445 agricultural operators.

In phase II, 50% of the large-scale farmers were undertaking crop farming activities only and 50% of the large-scale farmers were undertaking both crop and livestock farming and were selected for interview. A sample of 199 and 194 large-scale farmers were interviewed in Seasons A and B, respectively, using a farm questionnaire.

From the agricultural operators enumerated in the sample segments during Phase I, a sample of the agricultural operators was designed for Phase II as follows: 5,502 for Season A, 5,337 for Season B and 644 for Season C. The method of probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling at the national level was used. Furthermore, the total number of enumerated large-scale farmers was 774 in 2016 Season A and 622 in Season B.

The Season C considered 152 segments counting 8,987 agricultural operators from which 963 agricultural operators were selected for survey interviews.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face paper [f2f]

Research instrument

There were two types of questionnaires used for this survey namely Screening questionnaire and farm questionnaires.

A Screening Questionnaire was used to collect information that enabled identification of an Agricultural Operator or Large Scale Farmer and his or her land use.
Farm questionnaires were of two types: a) Phase I Farm Questionnaire was used to collect data on characteristics of Agricultural Operators, crop identification and area, inputs (seeds, fertilizers, labor, …) for Agricultural Operators and large scale farmers. b) Phase 2 Farm questionnaire was used in the collection of data on crop production and use of production.

It is important to mention that all these Farm Questionnaires were subjected to two/three rounds of data quality checking. The first round was conducted by the enumerator and the second round was conducted by the team leader to check if questionnaires had been well completed by enumerators. For season C, after screening, an interview was conducted for each selected tract/Agricultural Operator using one consolidated Farm questionnaire. All the surveys questionnaires used were published in both English and Kinyarwanda languages.

Cleaning operations

Data editing took place at different stage. Firstly, the filled questionnaires were repatriated at NISR for office editing and coding before data entry started. Data entry of the completed and checked questionnaires was undertaken at the NISR office by 20 staff trained in using the CSPro software. To ensure appropriate matching of data in the completed questionnaires and plot area measurements from the GIS unit, a LOOKUP file was integrated in the CSPro data entry program to confirm the identification of each agricultural operator or LSF before starting data entry. Thereafter, data were entered in computers, edited and summarized in tables using SPSS and Excel.

Response rate

The response rate for Seasonal Agriculture Survey is 98%.

Data appraisal

All Farm questionnaires were subjected to two/three rounds of data quality checking. The first round was conducted by the enumerator and the second round was conducted by the team leader to check if questionnaires had been well completed by enumerators. And in most cases, questionnaires completed by one enumerator were peer-reviewed by another enumerator before being checked by the Team leader.

Abstract

The millions of farmers of India have made significant contributions in providing food and nutrition to the entire nation and provided livelihood to millions of people of the country. During the five decades of planned economic development, India has moved from food-shortage and imports to self-sufficiency and exports. Food security and well being of the farmer appears to be major areas of concern of the planners of Indian agriculture. In order to have a snapshot picture of the farming community at the commencement of the third millennium and to analyze the impact of the transformation induced by public policy, investments and technological change on the farmers' access to resources and income as well as well-being of the farmer households at the end of five decades of planned economic development, Ministry of Agriculture have decided to collect information on Indian farmers through “Situation Assessment Survey” (SAS) on Indian farmers and entrusted the job of conducting the survey to National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO).

The Situation Assessment Survey of Farmers is the first of its kind to be conducted by NSSO. Though information on a majority of items to be collected through SAS have been collected in some round or other of NSS, an integrated schedule, viz., Schedule 33, covering some basic characteristics of farmer households and their access to basic and modern farming resources will be canvassed for the first time in SAS. Moreover, information on consumption of various goods and services in an abridged form are also to be collected to have an idea about the pattern of consumption expenditure of the farmer households.

Schedule 33 is designed for collection of information on aspects relating to farming and other socio-economic characteristics of farmer households. The information will be collected in two visits to the same set of sample households. The first visit will be made during January to August 2003 and the second, during September to December 2003. The survey will be conducted in rural areas only. It will be canvassed in the Central Sample except for the States of Maharashtra and Meghalaya where it will be canvassed in both State and Central samples.

Geographic coverage

The survey covered rural sector of Indian Union except (i) Leh (Ladakh) and Kargil districts of Jammu & Kashmir, (ii) interior villages of Nagaland situated beyond five kilometres of the bus route and (iii) villages in Andaman and Nicobar Islands which remain inaccessible throughout the year.

Analysis unit

Household (farmer)

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample Design

Outline of sample design: A stratified multi-stage design has been adopted for the 59th round survey. The first stage unit (FSU) is the census village in the rural sector and UFS block in the urban sector. The ultimate stage units (USUs) will be households in both the sectors. Hamlet-group / sub-block will constitute the intermediate stage if these are formed in the selected area.

Sampling Frame for First Stage Units: For rural areas, the list of villages (panchayat wards for Kerala) as per Population Census 1991 and for urban areas the latest UFS frame, will be used as sampling frame. For stratification of towns by size class, provisional population of towns as per Census 2001 will be used.

Stratification

Rural sector: Two special strata will be formed at the State/ UT level, viz.

• Stratum 1: all FSUs with population between 0 to 50 and
• Stratum 2: FSUs with population more than 15,000.

Special stratum 1 will be formed if at least 50 such FSU's are found in a State/UT. Similarly, special stratum 2 will be formed if at least 4 such FSUs are found in a State/UT. Otherwise, such FSUs will be merged with the general strata.

From FSUs other than those covered under special strata 1 & 2, general strata will be formed and its numbering will start from 3. Each district of a State/UT will be normally treated as a separate stratum. However, if the census rural population of the district is greater than or equal to 2 million as per population census 1991 or 2.5 million as per population census 2001, the district will be split into two or more strata, by grouping contiguous tehsils to form strata. However, in Gujarat, some districts are not wholly included in an NSS region. In such cases, the part of the district falling in an NSS region will constitute a separate stratum.

Urban sector: In the urban sector, strata will be formed within each NSS region on the basis of size class of towns as per Population Census 2001. The stratum numbers and their composition (within each region) are given below. - stratum 1: all towns with population less than 50,000 - stratum 2: all towns with population 50,000 or more but less than 2 lakhs - stratum 3: all towns with population 2 lakhs or more but less than 10 lakhs - stratum 4, 5, 6, ...: each city with population 10 lakhs or more The stratum numbers will remain as above even if, in some regions, some of the strata are not formed.

Total sample size (FSUs): 10736 FSUs have been allocated at all-India level on the basis of investigator strength in different States/UTs for central sample and 11624 for state sample.

Allocation of total sample to States and UTs: The total number of sample FSUs is allocated to the States and UTs in proportion to provisional population as per Census 2001 subject to the availability of investigators ensuring more or less uniform work-load.

Allocation of State/UT level sample to rural and urban sectors: State/UT level sample is allocated between two sectors in proportion to provisional population as per Census 2001 with 1.5 weightage to urban sector subject to the restriction that urban sample size for bigger states like Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu etc. should not exceed the rural sample size. Earlier practice of giving double weightage to urban sector has been modified considering the fact that two main topics (sch. 18.1 and sch 33) are rural based and there has been considerable growth in urban population. More samples have been allocated to rural sector of Meghalaya state sample at the request of the DES, Meghalaya. The sample sizes by sector and State/UT are given in Table 1 at the end of this Chapter.

Allocation to strata: Within each sector of a State/UT, the respective sample size will be allocated to the different strata in proportion to the stratum population as per census 2001. Allocations at stratum level will be adjusted to a multiple of 2 with a minimum sample size of 2. However, attempt will be made to allocate a multiple of 4 FSUs to a stratum as far as possible. Selection of FSUs: FSUs will be selected with Probability Proportional to Size with replacement (PPSWR), size being the population as per population census 1991 in all the strata for rural sector except for stratum 1. In stratum 1 of rural sector and in all the strata of urban sector, selection will be done using Simple Random Sampling without replacement (SRSWOR). Samples will be drawn in the form of two independent sub-samples.

Note: Detail sampling procedure is provided as external resource.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Schedule 33 (Situation Assessment Survey) has been split into several blocks to obtain detailed information on various aspects of farmer households.

Block 0- Descriptive identification of sample household: This block is meant for recording descriptive identification particulars of a sample household.

Block 1- Identification of sample household: items 1 to 12: The identification particulars for items 1, 6 - 11 will be copied from the corresponding items of block 1 of listing schedule (Sch.0.0). The particulars to be recorded in items 2, 3, 4 and 5 have already been printed in the schedule.

Block 2- Particulars of field operation: The identity of the Investigator, Assistant Superintendent and Superintendent associated, date of survey/inspection/scrutiny of schedules, despatch, etc., will be recorded in this block against the appropriate items in the relevant columns.

Block 3- Household characteristics: Characteristics which are mainly intended to be used to classify the households for tabulation will be recorded in this block.

Block 4- Demographic and other particulars of household members: All members of the sample household will be listed in this block. Demographic particulars (viz., relation to head, sex, age, marital status and general education), nature of work, current weekly status, wage and salary earnings etc. will be recorded for each member using one line for one member.

Block 5- Perception of household regarding sufficiency of food: This block will record information about perception of households regarding sufficiency of food.

Block 6- Perceptions regarding some general aspects of farming: In this block some information regarding perception of the farmer household about some general aspects of farming are to be recorded.

Block 7- Particulars of land possessed during Kharif/Rabi: This block is designed to record information regarding the land on which farming activities are carried out by the farmer household during Kharif/Rabi.

Block 8- Area under irrigation during Kharif/Rabi: In this block information regarding the area under irrigation during last 365 days for different crops will be recorded according to the source of irrigation.

Block 9- Some particulars of farming resources used for cultivation during Kharif / Rabi: Information regarding farming resources used for cultivation during the last 365 days will be ascertained from the farmer households and will be recorded in this block.

Block 10- Use of energy during last 365 days: This block will be