Facebook
TwitterThe latest estimates from the 2010/11 Taking Part adult survey produced by DCMS were released on 30 June 2011 according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.
30 June 2011
**
April 2010 to April 2011
**
National and Regional level data for England.
**
Further analysis of the 2010/11 adult dataset and data for child participation will be published on 18 August 2011.
The latest data from the 2010/11 Taking Part survey provides reliable national estimates of adult engagement with sport, libraries, the arts, heritage and museums & galleries. This release also presents analysis on volunteering and digital participation in our sectors and a look at cycling and swimming proficiency in England. The Taking Part survey is a continuous annual survey of adults and children living in private households in England, and carries the National Statistics badge, meaning that it meets the highest standards of statistical quality.
These spreadsheets contain the data and sample sizes for each sector included in the survey:
The previous Taking Part release was published on 31 March 2011 and can be found online.
This release is published in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics (2009), as produced by the http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/">UK Statistics Authority (UKSA). The UKSA has the overall objective of promoting and safeguarding the production and publication of official statistics that serve the public good. It monitors and reports on all official statistics, and promotes good practice in this area.
The document below contains a list of Ministers and Officials who have received privileged early access to this release of Taking Part data. In line with best practice, the list has been kept to a minimum and those given access for briefing purposes had a maximum of 24 hours.
The responsible statistician for this release is Neil Wilson. For any queries please contact the Taking Part team on 020 7211 6968 or takingpart@culture.gsi.gov.uk.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The average environmental and occupational physiologist may find statistics are difficult to interpret and use since their formal training in statistics is limited. Unfortunately, poor statistical practices can generate erroneous or at least misleading results and distorts the evidence in the scientific literature. These problems are exacerbated when statistics are used as thoughtless ritual that is performed after the data are collected. The situation is worsened when statistics are then treated as strict judgements about the data (i.e., significant versus non-significant) without a thought given to how these statistics were calculated or their practical meaning. We propose that researchers should consider statistics at every step of the research process whether that be the designing of experiments, collecting data, analysing the data or disseminating the results. When statistics are considered as an integral part of the research process, from start to finish, several problematic practices can be mitigated. Further, proper practices in disseminating the results of a study can greatly improve the quality of the literature. Within this review, we have included a number of reminders and statistical questions researchers should answer throughout the scientific process. Rather than treat statistics as a strict rule following procedure we hope that readers will use this review to stimulate a discussion around their current practices and attempt to improve them. The code to reproduce all analyses and figures within the manuscript can be found at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BQGDH.
Facebook
TwitterTEMPO-Online provides the following functions and services: Free access to statistical information.Export of tables in .csv and .xls formats and its printing. What is the content of TEMPO-Online? The National Institute of Statistics offers a statistical database, TEMPO-Online, that gives the possibility to access a large range of information.The content of the above-mentioned database consists of:Approximately 1100 statistical indicators, divided in socio-economical fields and sub-fields; Metadata associated to the statistical indicators (definition, starting and ending year of the time series, the last period of data loading, statistical methodology, the last updating); Detailed indicators at statistical characteristics group and/or sub-group level ( ex. The total number of employees at the end of the year by employee category, activities of the national economy - sections, sexes, areas and counties); Time series starting with 1990 - till today: With a monthly, quarterly, semi-annual and annual frequency; At national level, development region level, county and commune level. Search according to key words The search key words allows the finding of various objects (tables with statistical variables divided on time series). The search will give back results based on the matrix code and on the key words in the title or in the definition of a matrix. The result of the search will show on a list with specific objects. For a key word, one can use the searching section from the menu bar on the left.Tables As a whole, the tables that result following an interrogation have a flexible structure. For instance, the user may select the variables and attributes with the help of the interrogation interface, according to his needs.The user can save the table that results following an interrogation in .csv and .xls formats and its printingNote: in order to access tables at place level (very large), the user has to select each county with the respective places, so that the access be faster and avoid technical blocks.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
ABSTRACT Experimental statistical procedures used in almost all scientific papers are fundamental for clearer interpretation of the results of experiments conducted in agrarian sciences. However, incorrect use of these procedures can lead the researcher to incorrect or incomplete conclusions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of the experiments and quality of the use of statistical procedures in soil science in order to promote better use of statistical procedures. For that purpose, 200 articles, published between 2010 and 2014, involving only experimentation and studies by sampling in the soil areas of fertility, chemistry, physics, biology, use and management were randomly selected. A questionnaire containing 28 questions was used to assess the characteristics of the experiments, the statistical procedures used, and the quality of selection and use of these procedures. Most of the articles evaluated presented data from studies conducted under field conditions and 27 % of all papers involved studies by sampling. Most studies did not mention testing to verify normality and homoscedasticity, and most used the Tukey test for mean comparisons. Among studies with a factorial structure of the treatments, many had ignored this structure, and data were compared assuming the absence of factorial structure, or the decomposition of interaction was performed without showing or mentioning the significance of the interaction. Almost none of the papers that had split-block factorial designs considered the factorial structure, or they considered it as a split-plot design. Among the articles that performed regression analysis, only a few of them tested non-polynomial fit models, and none reported verification of the lack of fit in the regressions. The articles evaluated thus reflected poor generalization and, in some cases, wrong generalization in experimental design and selection of procedures for statistical analysis.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Sheet 1 (Raw-Data): The raw data of the study is provided, presenting the tagging results for the used measures described in the paper. For each subject, it includes multiple columns: A. a sequential student ID B an ID that defines a random group label and the notation C. the used notation: user Story or use Cases D. the case they were assigned to: IFA, Sim, or Hos E. the subject's exam grade (total points out of 100). Empty cells mean that the subject did not take the first exam F. a categorical representation of the grade L/M/H, where H is greater or equal to 80, M is between 65 included and 80 excluded, L otherwise G. the total number of classes in the student's conceptual model H. the total number of relationships in the student's conceptual model I. the total number of classes in the expert's conceptual model J. the total number of relationships in the expert's conceptual model K-O. the total number of encountered situations of alignment, wrong representation, system-oriented, omitted, missing (see tagging scheme below) P. the researchers' judgement on how well the derivation process explanation was explained by the student: well explained (a systematic mapping that can be easily reproduced), partially explained (vague indication of the mapping ), or not present.
Tagging scheme:
Aligned (AL) - A concept is represented as a class in both models, either
with the same name or using synonyms or clearly linkable names;
Wrongly represented (WR) - A class in the domain expert model is
incorrectly represented in the student model, either (i) via an attribute,
method, or relationship rather than class, or
(ii) using a generic term (e.g., user'' instead ofurban
planner'');
System-oriented (SO) - A class in CM-Stud that denotes a technical
implementation aspect, e.g., access control. Classes that represent legacy
system or the system under design (portal, simulator) are legitimate;
Omitted (OM) - A class in CM-Expert that does not appear in any way in
CM-Stud;
Missing (MI) - A class in CM-Stud that does not appear in any way in
CM-Expert.
All the calculations and information provided in the following sheets
originate from that raw data.
Sheet 2 (Descriptive-Stats): Shows a summary of statistics from the data collection,
including the number of subjects per case, per notation, per process derivation rigor category, and per exam grade category.
Sheet 3 (Size-Ratio):
The number of classes within the student model divided by the number of classes within the expert model is calculated (describing the size ratio). We provide box plots to allow a visual comparison of the shape of the distribution, its central value, and its variability for each group (by case, notation, process, and exam grade) . The primary focus in this study is on the number of classes. However, we also provided the size ratio for the number of relationships between student and expert model.
Sheet 4 (Overall):
Provides an overview of all subjects regarding the encountered situations, completeness, and correctness, respectively. Correctness is defined as the ratio of classes in a student model that is fully aligned with the classes in the corresponding expert model. It is calculated by dividing the number of aligned concepts (AL) by the sum of the number of aligned concepts (AL), omitted concepts (OM), system-oriented concepts (SO), and wrong representations (WR). Completeness on the other hand, is defined as the ratio of classes in a student model that are correctly or incorrectly represented over the number of classes in the expert model. Completeness is calculated by dividing the sum of aligned concepts (AL) and wrong representations (WR) by the sum of the number of aligned concepts (AL), wrong representations (WR) and omitted concepts (OM). The overview is complemented with general diverging stacked bar charts that illustrate correctness and completeness.
For sheet 4 as well as for the following four sheets, diverging stacked bar
charts are provided to visualize the effect of each of the independent and mediated variables. The charts are based on the relative numbers of encountered situations for each student. In addition, a "Buffer" is calculated witch solely serves the purpose of constructing the diverging stacked bar charts in Excel. Finally, at the bottom of each sheet, the significance (T-test) and effect size (Hedges' g) for both completeness and correctness are provided. Hedges' g was calculated with an online tool: https://www.psychometrica.de/effect_size.html. The independent and moderating variables can be found as follows:
Sheet 5 (By-Notation):
Model correctness and model completeness is compared by notation - UC, US.
Sheet 6 (By-Case):
Model correctness and model completeness is compared by case - SIM, HOS, IFA.
Sheet 7 (By-Process):
Model correctness and model completeness is compared by how well the derivation process is explained - well explained, partially explained, not present.
Sheet 8 (By-Grade):
Model correctness and model completeness is compared by the exam grades, converted to categorical values High, Low , and Medium.
Facebook
TwitterThe Project for Statistics on Living standards and Development was a countrywide World Bank Living Standards Measurement Survey. It covered approximately 9000 households, drawn from a representative sample of South African households. The fieldwork was undertaken during the nine months leading up to the country's first democratic elections at the end of April 1994. The purpose of the survey was to collect statistical information about the conditions under which South Africans live in order to provide policymakers with the data necessary for planning strategies. This data would aid the implementation of goals such as those outlined in the Government of National Unity's Reconstruction and Development Programme.
National
Households
All Household members. Individuals in hospitals, old age homes, hotels and hostels of educational institutions were not included in the sample. Migrant labour hostels were included. In addition to those that turned up in the selected ESDs, a sample of three hostels was chosen from a national list provided by the Human Sciences Research Council and within each of these hostels a representative sample was drawn on a similar basis as described above for the households in ESDs.
Sample survey data [ssd]
(a) SAMPLING DESIGN
Sample size is 9,000 households. The sample design adopted for the study was a two-stage self-weighting design in which the first stage units were Census Enumerator Subdistricts (ESDs, or their equivalent) and the second stage were households. The advantage of using such a design is that it provides a representative sample that need not be based on accurate census population distribution in the case of South Africa, the sample will automatically include many poor people, without the need to go beyond this and oversample the poor. Proportionate sampling as in such a self-weighting sample design offers the simplest possible data files for further analysis, as weights do not have to be added. However, in the end this advantage could not be retained, and weights had to be added.
(b) SAMPLE FRAME
The sampling frame was drawn up on the basis of small, clearly demarcated area units, each with a population estimate. The nature of the self-weighting procedure adopted ensured that this population estimate was not important for determining the final sample, however. For most of the country, census ESDs were used. Where some ESDs comprised relatively large populations as for instance in some black townships such as Soweto, aerial photographs were used to divide the areas into blocks of approximately equal population size. In other instances, particularly in some of the former homelands, the area units were not ESDs but villages or village groups. In the sample design chosen, the area stage units (generally ESDs) were selected with probability proportional to size, based on the census population. Systematic sampling was used throughout that is, sampling at fixed interval in a list of ESDs, starting at a randomly selected starting point. Given that sampling was self-weighting, the impact of stratification was expected to be modest. The main objective was to ensure that the racial and geographic breakdown approximated the national population distribution. This was done by listing the area stage units (ESDs) by statistical region and then within the statistical region by urban or rural. Within these sub-statistical regions, the ESDs were then listed in order of percentage African. The sampling interval for the selection of the ESDs was obtained by dividing the 1991 census population of 38,120,853 by the 300 clusters to be selected. This yielded 105,800. Starting at a randomly selected point, every 105,800th person down the cluster list was selected. This ensured both geographic and racial diversity (ESDs were ordered by statistical sub-region and proportion of the population African). In three or four instances, the ESD chosen was judged inaccessible and replaced with a similar one. In the second sampling stage the unit of analysis was the household. In each selected ESD a listing or enumeration of households was carried out by means of a field operation. From the households listed in an ESD a sample of households was selected by systematic sampling. Even though the ultimate enumeration unit was the household, in most cases "stands" were used as enumeration units. However, when a stand was chosen as the enumeration unit all households on that stand had to be interviewed.
Face-to-face [f2f]
All the questionnaires were checked when received. Where information was incomplete or appeared contradictory, the questionnaire was sent back to the relevant survey organization. As soon as the data was available, it was captured using local development platform ADE. This was completed in February 1994. Following this, a series of exploratory programs were written to highlight inconsistencies and outlier. For example, all person level files were linked together to ensure that the same person code reported in different sections of the questionnaire corresponded to the same person. The error reports from these programs were compared to the questionnaires and the necessary alterations made. This was a lengthy process, as several files were checked more than once, and completed at the beginning of August 1994. In some cases, questionnaires would contain missing values, or comments that the respondent did not know, or refused to answer a question.
These responses are coded in the data files with the following values: VALUE MEANING -1 : The data was not available on the questionnaire or form -2 : The field is not applicable -3 : Respondent refused to answer -4 : Respondent did not know answer to question
The data collected in clusters 217 and 218 should be viewed as highly unreliable and therefore removed from the data set. The data currently available on the web site has been revised to remove the data from these clusters. Researchers who have downloaded the data in the past should revise their data sets. For information on the data in those clusters, contact SALDRU http://www.saldru.uct.ac.za/.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Public health-related decision-making on policies aimed at controlling the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak depends on complex epidemiological models that are compelled to be robust and use all relevant available data. This data article provides a new combined worldwide COVID-19 dataset obtained from official data sources with improved systematic measurement errors and a dedicated dashboard for online data visualization and summary. The dataset adds new measures and attributes to the normal attributes of official data sources, such as daily mortality, and fatality rates. We used comparative statistical analysis to evaluate the measurement errors of COVID-19 official data collections from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Chinese CDC), World Health Organization (WHO) and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). The data is collected by using text mining techniques and reviewing pdf reports, metadata, and reference data. The combined dataset includes complete spatial data such as countries area, international number of countries, Alpha-2 code, Alpha-3 code, latitude, longitude, and some additional attributes such as population. The improved dataset benefits from major corrections on the referenced data sets and official reports such as adjustments in the reporting dates, which suffered from a one to two days lag, removing negative values, detecting unreasonable changes in historical data in new reports and corrections on systematic measurement errors, which have been increasing as the pandemic outbreak spreads and more countries contribute data for the official repositories. Additionally, the root mean square error of attributes in the paired comparison of datasets was used to identify the main data problems. The data for China is presented separately and in more detail, and it has been extracted from the attached reports available on the main page of the CCDC website. This dataset is a comprehensive and reliable source of worldwide COVID-19 data that can be used in epidemiological models assessing the magnitude and timeline for confirmed cases, long-term predictions of deaths or hospital utilization, the effects of quarantine, stay-at-home orders and other social distancing measures, the pandemic’s turning point or in economic and social impact analysis, helping to inform national and local authorities on how to implement an adaptive response approach to re-opening the economy, re-open schools, alleviate business and social distancing restrictions, design economic programs or allow sports events to resume.
Facebook
TwitterThis page lists ad-hoc statistics released during the period April - June 2019. These are additional analyses not included in any of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s standard publications.
If you would like any further information please contact evidence@culture.gov.uk.
MS Excel Spreadsheet, 239 KB
MS Excel Spreadsheet, 36.9 KB
Facebook
TwitterThe Taking Part survey has run since 2005 and is the key evidence source for DCMS. It is a continuous face to face household survey of adults aged 16 and over in England and children aged 5 to 15 years old. This latest release presents rolling estimates incorporating data from the first two quarters of year 9 of the survey.
As detailed in the last statistical release and on our consultation pages in March 2013, the responsibility for reporting Official Statistics on adult sport participation now falls entirely with Sport England. Sport participation data are reported on by Sport England in the Active People Survey.
12 December 2013
October 2012 to September 2013
National and Regional level data for England.
A release of rolling annual estimates for adults is scheduled for March 2014.
The latest data from the 2013/14 Taking Part survey provides reliable national estimates of adult and child engagement with archives, arts, heritage, libraries and museums & galleries. This release builds on the data previously published from quarters 3 and 4 in 2012 to 2013 to look at a number of areas in depth and present measures that begin to consider broader definitions of participation in our sectors.
The report also looks at some of the other measures in the survey that provide estimates of volunteering and charitable giving and civic engagement.
The Taking Part survey is a continuous annual survey of adults and children living in private households in England, and carries the National Statistics badge, meaning that it meets the highest standards of statistical quality.
These spreadsheets contain the data and sample sizes to support the material in this release.
The meta-data describe the Taking Part data and provides terms and definitions. This document provides a stand-alone copy of the meta-data which are also included as annexes in the statistical report.
The previous adult Taking Part release was published on 26 September 2013. It also provides spreadsheets containing the data and sample sizes for each sector included in the survey.
The document above contains a list of ministers and officials who have received privileged early access to this release of Taking Part data. In line with best practice, the list has been kept to a minimum and those given access for briefing purposes had a maximum of 24 hours.
This release is published in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics (2009), as produced by the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA). The UKSA has the overall objective of promoting and safeguarding the production and publication of official statistics that serve the public good. It monitors and reports on all official statistics, and promotes good practice in this area.
The latest figures in this release are based on data that was first published on 12 December 2013. Details on the pre-release access arrangements for this dataset are available in the accompanying material for the previous release.
The responsible statistician for this release is Tom Knight (020 7211 6021), Penny Allen (020 7211 6106) or Sam Tuckett (020 7211 2382). For any queries please contact them or the Taking Part team at takingpart@culture.gsi.gov.uk.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Compositional data, which is data consisting of fractions or probabilities, is common in many fields including ecology, economics, physical science and political science. If these data would otherwise be normally distributed, their spread can be conveniently represented by a multivariate normal distribution truncated to the non-negative space under a unit simplex. Here this distribution is called the simplex-truncated multivariate normal distribution. For calculations on truncated distributions, it is often useful to obtain rapid estimates of their integral, mean and covariance; these quantities characterising the truncated distribution will generally possess different values to the corresponding non-truncated distribution.
In the paper Adams, Matthew (2022) Integral, mean and covariance of the simplex-truncated multivariate normal distribution. PLoS One, 17(7), Article number: e0272014. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/233964/, three different approaches that can estimate the integral, mean and covariance of any simplex-truncated multivariate normal distribution are described and compared. These three approaches are (1) naive rejection sampling, (2) a method described by Gessner et al. that unifies subset simulation and the Holmes-Diaconis-Ross algorithm with an analytical version of elliptical slice sampling, and (3) a semi-analytical method that expresses the integral, mean and covariance in terms of integrals of hyperrectangularly-truncated multivariate normal distributions, the latter of which are readily computed in modern mathematical and statistical packages. Strong agreement is demonstrated between all three approaches, but the most computationally efficient approach depends strongly both on implementation details and the dimension of the simplex-truncated multivariate normal distribution.
This dataset consists of all code and results for the associated article.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Vitamin D insufficiency appears to be prevalent in SLE patients. Multiple factors potentially contribute to lower vitamin D levels, including limited sun exposure, the use of sunscreen, darker skin complexion, aging, obesity, specific medical conditions, and certain medications. The study aims to assess the risk factors associated with low vitamin D levels in SLE patients in the southern part of Bangladesh, a region noted for a high prevalence of SLE. The research additionally investigates the possible correlation between vitamin D and the SLEDAI score, seeking to understand the potential benefits of vitamin D in enhancing disease outcomes for SLE patients. The study incorporates a dataset consisting of 50 patients from the southern part of Bangladesh and evaluates their clinical and demographic data. An initial exploratory data analysis is conducted to gain insights into the data, which includes calculating means and standard deviations, performing correlation analysis, and generating heat maps. Relevant inferential statistical tests, such as the Student’s t-test, are also employed. In the machine learning part of the analysis, this study utilizes supervised learning algorithms, specifically Linear Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF). To optimize the hyperparameters of the RF model and mitigate the risk of overfitting given the small dataset, a 3-Fold cross-validation strategy is implemented. The study also calculates bootstrapped confidence intervals to provide robust uncertainty estimates and further validate the approach. A comprehensive feature importance analysis is carried out using RF feature importance, permutation-based feature importance, and SHAP values. The LR model yields an RMSE of 4.83 (CI: 2.70, 6.76) and MAE of 3.86 (CI: 2.06, 5.86), whereas the RF model achieves better results, with an RMSE of 2.98 (CI: 2.16, 3.76) and MAE of 2.68 (CI: 1.83,3.52). Both models identify Hb, CRP, ESR, and age as significant contributors to vitamin D level predictions. Despite the lack of a significant association between SLEDAI and vitamin D in the statistical analysis, the machine learning models suggest a potential nonlinear dependency of vitamin D on SLEDAI. These findings highlight the importance of these factors in managing vitamin D levels in SLE patients. The study concludes that there is a high prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency in SLE patients. Although a direct linear correlation between the SLEDAI score and vitamin D levels is not observed, machine learning models suggest the possibility of a nonlinear relationship. Furthermore, factors such as Hb, CRP, ESR, and age are identified as more significant in predicting vitamin D levels. Thus, the study suggests that monitoring these factors may be advantageous in managing vitamin D levels in SLE patients. Given the immunological nature of SLE, the potential role of vitamin D in SLE disease activity could be substantial. Therefore, it underscores the need for further large-scale studies to corroborate this hypothesis.
Facebook
TwitterThis page lists ad-hoc statistics released during the period April - June 2022. These are additional analyses not included in any of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s standard publications.
If you would like any further information please contact evidence@dcms.gov.uk
This is an ad-hoc release that provides an estimate of Welsh employment (number of filled jobs) in the Creative Wales Creative Industries for the 2019 and 2020 calendar years. The estimates provide the overall level of employment, and breakdowns by the following characteristics:
These employment statistics were produced in response to a Creative Wales request for Welsh employment estimates according to their definition of the Creative Industries. Due to this specification, users should not attempt to make comparisons to previously published DCMS estimates.
The Creative Wales Creative Industries do not align with the standard DCMS definition of the Creative Industries.
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata"><span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute"><abbr title="OpenDocument Spreadsheet" class="gem-c-attachment_abbr">ODS</abbr></span>, <span class="gem-c-attachment_attribute">58.4 KB</span></p>
<p class="gem-c-attachment_metadata">
This file is in an <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/using-open-document-formats-odf-in-your-organisation" target="_self" class="govuk-link">OpenDocument</a> format
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format. If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email <a href="mailto:enquiries@dcms.gov.uk" target="_blank" class="govuk-link">enquiries@dcms.gov.uk</a>. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
These ad-hoc tables provide estimates of employment (number of filled jobs) in the Civil Society sector, broken down by local authority. It uses data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Annual Population Survey (APS), pooled a
Facebook
TwitterThe Taking Part survey has run since 2005 and is the key evidence source for DCMS. It is a continuous face to face household survey of adults aged 16 and over in England and children aged 5 to 15 years old.
As detailed in the last statistical release and on our consultation pages in March 2013, the responsibility for reporting Official Statistics on adult sport participation now falls entirely with Sport England. Sport participation data are reported on by Sport England in the Active People Survey.
Amendment on 27 January 2016: This publication has been updated in January 2016 to correct data in the Taking Part 2015/16 Quarter 2 statistical release published on 17 December 2015. The only changes relate to figures presented in Figure 7.1. No other figures in the statistical release (or associated data tables) have been affected.
17th December 2015
October 2014 to September 2015
National and regional level data for England.
A series of “Taking Part, Focus on…” reports will be published in April 2016. Each ‘short story’ in this series will look at a specific topic in more detail, providing more in-depth analysis of the 2014/15 Taking Part data.
The latest data from October 2014 to September 2015. Taking Part survey provides reliable national estimates of adult engagement with the arts, heritage, museums, archives and libraries.
The report also looks at some of the other measures in the survey that provide estimates of volunteering and charitable giving and digital engagement.
The Taking Part survey is a continuous annual survey of adults and children living in private households in England, and carries the National Statistics badge, meaning that it meets the highest standards of statistical quality.
These spreadsheets contain the data and sample sizes to support the material in this release.
Metadata The meta-data describe the Taking Part data and provides terms and definitions. This document provides a stand-alone copy of the meta-data which are also included as annexes in the statistical report.
The previous adult quarterly Taking Part release was published on 25th June 2015 and the previous child Taking Part annual release was published on 23rd July 2015. Both releases also provide spreadsheets containing the data and sample sizes for each sector included in the survey. A series of short reports relating to the 2014/15 annual adult data was also released on 12th November 2015.
The document above contains a list of ministers and officials who have received privileged early access to this release of Taking Part data. In line with best practice, the list has been kept to a minimum and those given access for briefing purposes had a maximum of 24 hours.
This release is published in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics (2009), as produced by the UK Statistics Authority. The Authority has the overall objective of promoting and safeguarding the production and publication of official statistics that serve the public good. It monitors and reports on all official statistics, and promotes good practice in this area.
The latest figures in this release are based on data that was first published on 17th December 2015. Details on the pre-release access arrangements for this dataset are available in the accompanying material for the previous release.
The responsible statistician for this release is Helen Miller-Bakewell. For enquiries on this release, contact Helen Miller-Bakewell on 020 7211 6355 or Mary Gregory 020 7211 2377.
For any queries contact them or the Taking Part team at takingpart@culture.gov.uk
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
The validity of empirical research often relies upon the accuracy of self-reported behavior and beliefs. Yet, eliciting truthful answers in surveys is challenging especially when studying sensitive issues such as racial prejudice, corruption, and support for militant groups. List experiments have attracted much attention recently as a potential solution to this measurement problem. Many researchers, however, have used a simple difference-in-means estimator without being able to efficiently examine multivariate relationships between respondents' characteristics and their answers to sensitive items. Moreover, no systematic means exist to investigate role of underlying assumptions. We fill these gaps by developing a set of new statistical methods for list experiments. We identify the commonly invoked assumptions, propose new multivariate regression estimators, and develop methods to detect and adjust for potential violations of key assumptions. For empirical illustrations, we analyze list experiments concerning racial prejudice. Open-source software is made available to implement the proposed methodology.
Facebook
TwitterThis dataset includes spreadsheets with statistical data (mean and median absolute error) used in deciding which interpolation method best fit the corresponding dataset. All statistical data were paired with a visual inspection of the interpolation prior to determining the final raster product. All spreadsheets were generated using an automated Python script (Jahn, 2020).
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
A set of data includes resources containing statistical data included in the forms of 8-n(year) "Report on the activities of the museum", 7-NC "Report on the activities of club establishments", 7-NC "Consolidated report on the activities of club establishments", 6-nk "Report on the activities of state, public libraries, centralized library systems (CBS), which are classified in the sphere of management of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Ukraine", 80-a-RVC "Consolidated Reporting, State, Public and Other Libraries", 1-MSh (annual summary) "Consolidated report of art schools, specialized art schools (boarding schools) of the Ministry of Culture of Ukraine", as well as statistical forms K-2-RVK(2) "Consolidated report on the presence and activities of film demonstrators", 1-PKC (annual) "Report on immovable monuments and objects of cultural heritage (PKC)", 4-f "Report on precious metals and precious stones contained in museum objects"
Facebook
TwitterThe df and P values from the photosynthetic pathway and the plant functional type differences in the maximum leaf net CO2 assimilation rate (Amax, μmol m-2 s-1), the mean leaf net CO2 assimilation rate (Mean A, μmol m-2 s-1), maximum stomatal conductance (gsmax, mol m-2 s-1), mean ratio of leaf internal to ambient CO2 concentration (Mean Ci/Ca), nighttime mean respiration rate (Mean R, μmol m-2 s-1), magnitude of nocturnal shift in δ13CR (Variation in δ13CR), and respiratory apparent 13C/12C fractionation (‰) comparative to biomass (ΔR, biomass), soluble carbohydrates (ΔR, sugar), starch (ΔR, starch) and lipids (ΔR, lipid) at 8 pm and 4 am, respectively.
Facebook
TwitterThis dataset includes spreadsheets with statistical data (mean and median absolute error) used in deciding which interpolation method best fit the corresponding dataset. All statistical data were paired with a visual inspection of the interpolation prior to determining the final raster product. All spreadsheets were generated using an automated Python script (Jahn, 2020).
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The Journal of Physiology and British Journal of Pharmacology jointly published an editorial series in 2011 to improve standards in statistical reporting and data analysis. It is not known whether reporting practices changed in response to the editorial advice. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of reporting practices in a random sample of research papers published in these journals before (n = 202) and after (n = 199) publication of the editorial advice. Descriptive data are presented. There was no evidence that reporting practices improved following publication of the editorial advice. Overall, 76-84% of papers with written measures that summarized data variability used standard errors of the mean, and 90-96% of papers did not report exact p-values for primary analyses and post-hoc tests. 76-84% of papers that plotted measures to summarize data variability used standard errors of the mean, and only 2-4% of papers plotted raw data used to calculate variability. Of papers that reported p-values between 0.05 and 0.1, 56-63% interpreted these as trends or statistically significant. Implied or gross spin was noted incidentally in papers before (n = 10) and after (n = 9) the editorial advice was published. Overall, poor statistical reporting, inadequate data presentation and spin were present before and after the editorial advice was published. While the scientific community continues to implement strategies for improving reporting practices, our results indicate stronger incentives or enforcements are needed.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Data in social and behavioral sciences are routinely collected using questionnaires, and each domain of interest is tapped by multiple indicators. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is one of the most widely used methods to analyze such data. However, conventional methods for SEM face difficulty when the number of variables (p) is large even when the sample size (N) is also rather large. This article addresses the issue of model inference with the likelihood ratio statistic Tml. Using the method of empirical modeling, mean-and-variance corrected statistics for SEM with many variables are developed. Results show that the new statistics not only perform much better than Tml but also are substantial improvements over other corrections to Tml. When combined with a robust transformation, the new statistics also perform well with non-normally distributed data.
Facebook
TwitterThe latest estimates from the 2010/11 Taking Part adult survey produced by DCMS were released on 30 June 2011 according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.
30 June 2011
**
April 2010 to April 2011
**
National and Regional level data for England.
**
Further analysis of the 2010/11 adult dataset and data for child participation will be published on 18 August 2011.
The latest data from the 2010/11 Taking Part survey provides reliable national estimates of adult engagement with sport, libraries, the arts, heritage and museums & galleries. This release also presents analysis on volunteering and digital participation in our sectors and a look at cycling and swimming proficiency in England. The Taking Part survey is a continuous annual survey of adults and children living in private households in England, and carries the National Statistics badge, meaning that it meets the highest standards of statistical quality.
These spreadsheets contain the data and sample sizes for each sector included in the survey:
The previous Taking Part release was published on 31 March 2011 and can be found online.
This release is published in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics (2009), as produced by the http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/">UK Statistics Authority (UKSA). The UKSA has the overall objective of promoting and safeguarding the production and publication of official statistics that serve the public good. It monitors and reports on all official statistics, and promotes good practice in this area.
The document below contains a list of Ministers and Officials who have received privileged early access to this release of Taking Part data. In line with best practice, the list has been kept to a minimum and those given access for briefing purposes had a maximum of 24 hours.
The responsible statistician for this release is Neil Wilson. For any queries please contact the Taking Part team on 020 7211 6968 or takingpart@culture.gsi.gov.uk.