Abstract

The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys program, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The BDHS is intended to serve as a source of population and health data for policymakers and the research community. In general, the objectives of the BDHS are to: - assess the overall demographic situation in Bangladesh, - assist in the evaluation of the population and health programs in Bangladesh, and - advance survey methodology.

More specifically, the objective of the BDHS is to provide up-to-date information on fertility and childhood mortality levels; nuptiality; fertility preferences; awareness, approval, and use of family planning methods; breastfeeding practices; nutrition levels; and maternal and child health. This information is intended to assist policymakers and administrators in evaluating and designing programs and strategies for improving health and family planning services in the country.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 10-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

Bangladesh is divided into six administrative divisions, 64 districts (zillas), and 490 thanas. In rural areas, thanas are divided into unions and then mauzas, a land administrative unit. Urban areas are divided into wards and then mahallas. The 1996-97 BDHS employed a nationally-representative, two-stage sample that was selected from the Integrated Multi-Purpose Master Sample (IMPS) maintained by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Each division was stratified into three groups: 1 ) statistical metropolitan areas (SMAs), 2) municipalities (other urban areas), and 3) rural areas. 3 In the rural areas, the primary sampling unit was the mauza, while in urban areas, it was the mahalla. Because the primary sampling units in the IMPS were selected with probability proportional to size from the 1991 Census frame, the units for the BDHS were sub-selected from the IMPS with equal probability so as to retain the overall probability proportional to size. A total of 316 primary sampling units were utilized for the BDHS (30 in SMAs, 42 in municipalities, and 244 in rural areas). In order to highlight changes in survey indicators over time, the 1996-97 BDHS utilized the same sample points (though not necessarily the same households) that were selected for the 1993-94 BDHS, except for 12 additional sample points in the new division of Sylhet. Fieldwork in three sample points was not possible (one in Dhaka Cantonment and two in the Chittagong Hill Tracts), so a total of 313 points were covered.

Since one objective of the BDHS is to provide separate estimates for each division as well as for urban and rural areas separately, it was necessary to increase the sampling rate for Barisal and Sylhet Divisions and for municipalities relative to the other divisions, SMAs and rural areas. Thus, the BDHS sample is not self-weighting and weighting factors have been applied to the data in this report.

Mitra and Associates conducted a household listing operation in all the sample points from 15 September to 15 December 1996. A systematic sample of 9,099 households was then selected from these lists. Every second household was selected for the men's survey, meaning that, in addition to interviewing all ever-married women age 10-49, interviewers also interviewed all currently married men age 15-59. It was expected that the sample would yield interviews with approximately 10,000 ever-married women age 10-49 and 3,000 currently married men age 15-59.

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

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the BDHS: a Household Questionnaire, a Women's Questionnaire, a Men' s Questionnaire and a Community Questionnaire. The contents of these questionnaires were based on the DHS Model A Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with relatively high levels of contraceptive use. These model questionnaires were adapted for use in Bangladesh during a series of meetings with a small Technical Task Force that consisted of representatives from NIPORT, Mitra and Associates, USAID/Bangladesh, the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (ICDDR,B), Population Council/Dhaka, and Macro International Inc (see Appendix D for a list of members). Draft questionnaires were then circulated to other interested groups and were reviewed by the BDHS Technical Review Committee (see Appendix D for list of members). The questionnaires were developed in English and then translated into and printed in Bangla (see Appendix E for final version in English).

The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including his/her age, sex, education, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire was to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. In addition, information was collected about the dwelling itself, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used to construct the house, and ownership of various consumer goods.

The Women's Questionnaire was used to collect information from ever-married women age 10-49. These women were asked questions on the following topics: - Background characteristics (age, education, religion, etc.), - Reproductive history, - Knowledge and use of family planning methods, - Antenatal and delivery care, - Breastfeeding and weaning practices, - Vaccinations and health of children under age five, - Marriage, - Fertility preferences, - Husband's background and respondent's work, - Knowledge of AIDS, - Height and weight of children under age five and their mothers.

The Men's Questionnaire was used to interview currently married men age 15-59. It was similar to that for women except that it omitted the sections on reproductive history, antenatal and delivery care, breastfeeding, vaccinations, and height and weight. The Community Questionnaire was completed for each sample point and included questions about the existence in the community of income-generating activities and other development organizations and the availability of health and family planning services.

Response rate

A total of 9,099 households were selected for the sample, of which 8,682 were successfully interviewed. The shortfall is primarily due to dwellings that were vacant or in which the inhabitants had left for an extended period at the time they were visited by the interviewing teams. Of the 8,762 households occupied, 99 percent were successfully interviewed. In these households, 9,335 women were identified as eligible for the individual interview (i.e., ever-married and age 10-49) and interviews were completed for 9,127 or 98 percent of them. In the half of the households that were selected for inclusion in the men's survey, 3,611 eligible ever-married men age 15-59 were identified, of whom 3,346 or 93 percent were interviewed.

The principal reason for non-response among eligible women and men was the failure to find them at home despite repeated visits to the household. The refusal rate was low.

Note: See summarized response rates by residence (urban/rural) in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the BDHS to minimize this type of error, non-sampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the BDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the BDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the BDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module used the Taylor

In 1991, the National Task Force on Health Information cited a number of issues and problems with the health information system. To respond to these issues, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), Statistics Canada and Health Canada joined forces to create a Health Information Roadmap. From this mandate, the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) was conceived. The CCHS is a cross-sectional survey that collects information related to health status, health care utilization and health determinants for the Canadian population. The survey is offered in both official languages. It relies upon a large sample of respondents and is designed to provide reliable estimates at the health region level every 2 years. The primary use of the CCHS data is for health surveillance and population health research. The data presented here is by age group and sex, for Canada, provinces, territories and health regions (2017 boundaries).

Abstract

The 1999 Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey has as its primary objectives: • To provide up-to-date information for assessing the situation of children and women in Nigeria at the end of the decade and for looking forward to the next decade; • To furnish data needed for monitoring progress toward goals established at the World Summit for Children and a basis for future action; • To contribute to the improvement of data and monitoring systems in Nigeria and to strengthen technical expertise in the design, implementation, and analysis of such systems.

The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) is conceptualized to monitor the progress of Child Survival, Development, Protection and Participation (CSPPD) Programmes as well as goals set at the World Summit for Children in 1990. Also, at the World Summit for Social Development in 1995, the need was stressed for better social statistics if social development had to move to centre stage for the cause of the children of the world. In 1995, Federal Office of Statistics (FOS) with technical and funding assistance from UNICEF, institutionalized the Multiple Indicator Survey within the National Integrated Survey of Households (NISH) as a process of collection of regular, reliable and timely social statistics. A technical team, the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey Intersectoral Task Force (MIT), consisting of all stakeholders was put in place for the 1999 survey to plan, conduct and monitor the survey with FOS providing the leadership. This was an innovation over the previous survey, which greatly enhanced the quality of the work and coverage of programmes.

Nevertheless, this report would have been impossible without the commitments of the following organizations and individuals. Firstly, members of the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey Inter-sectoral Taskforce (MIT) which facilitated the conduct and over-seeing of the survey. UNICEF Nigeria which gave technical support in the areas of data processing and analysis and report writing through hiring of consultants that worked closely with FOS teams.

This report is another dream to match deeds with words. This report is also unique in the sense that the findings will allow comparison of performance at sub-national (state) and inter national levels. The report will additionally serve as statistical input into future editions of Progress of Nigerian Children Report and UNICEF's State of the World's Children. It is hoped that it will be widely used by various levels of government, Federal and State for programmes and projects monitoring and evaluation on social development and reengineering for the development of the cause of Nigerian Children. It is also an excellent report for top policy formulators and programme managers in the key social sectors.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) 1999 was run as a module of the National Integrated Survey of Households (NISH) design. NISH is the Nigerian version of the United Nations National Household Survey Capability Programme and is a multi-subject household based survey system. It is an ongoing programme of household based surveys enquiring into various aspects of households, including housing, health, education and employment. The programme started in 1981 after a pilot study in 1980. The design utilizes a probability sample drawn using a random sampling method at the national and sub-national levels.

The main features of the NISH design are: Multi-Phase Sampling: In each state 800 EAs were selected with equal probability as first phase samples. A second phase sample of 200 EAs was selected with probability proportional to size. Multi-Stage Sampling Design: A two-stage design was used. Enumeration Areas were used as the first stage sampling units and Housing Units (HUs) as the second stage sampling units. Replicated Rotatable Design: Two hundred EAs were selected in each state in 10 independent replicates of 20 EAs per replicate. A rotation was imposed which ensured 6 replicates to be studied each survey year but in subsequent year a replicate is dropped for a new one, that is, a rotation of 1/6 was applied. This means in a survey year, 120 EAs will be covered in each state. In the Federal Capital Territory (Abuja), 60 EAs are covered.

Master Sample

The EAs and HUs selected constitute the Master Sample and subsets were taken for various surveys depending on the nature of the survey and the sample size desired. In any one-year, the 120 EAs are randomly allocated to the 12 months of the year for the survey. The General Household Survey (GHS) is the core module of NISH. Thus, every month 10 EAs are covered for the GHS. For other supplemental modules of NISH, subsets of the master sample are used.

Sample Size

The global MICS design anticipated a sample of 300-500 households per district (domain). This was based on the assumption of a cluster design with design effect of about 2, an average household size of 6, children below the age of 5 years constituting 15 percent of the population and a diarrhoea prevalence of 25 percent. Such a sample would give estimates with an error margin of about 0.1 at the district level. Such a sample would usually come from about 10 clusters of 40 to 50 households per cluster. In Nigeria, the parameters are similar to the scenario described above. Average household size varied from 3.0 to 5.6 among the states, with a national average of about 5.5. Similarly, children below 5 years constituted between 15-16 percent of total population. Diarrhoea prevalence had been estimated at about 15 percent. These figures have led to sample sizes of between 450 and 660 for each state.

It was decided that a uniform sample of 600 households per state be chosen for the survey. Although non-response, estimated at about 5 percent from previous surveys reduced the sample further, most states had 550 or more households.

The MICS sample was drawn from the National Master Sample for the 1998/99 NISH programme implemented by the Federal Office of Statistics (FOS). The sample was drawn from 30 EAs in each state with a sub-sample of 20 households selected per EA. The design was more efficient than the global MICS design which anticipated a cluster sub-sample size of 40-50 households per cluster. Usually, when the sub-sample size was reduced by half and the number of clusters doubled, a reduction of at least 20 percent in the design effect was achieved. This was derived from DEFF = 1 + (m-1) rho where m is sub-sample size and rho is intra-class correlation. Therefore, the design effect for the Nigerian MICS was about 1.6 instead of 2. This means that for the same size of 600 households, the error margin was reduced by about 10 percent, but where the sample was less than 600 the expected error margin would be achieved. It should be noted that sampling was based on the former 30 states plus a Federal Capital Territory administrative structure [there are now 36 states and a Federal Capital Territory].

Selection of Households

The global design anticipated either the segmenting of clusters into small areas of approximate 40-45 households and randomly selecting one so that all households within such area was covered or using the random walk procedure in the cluster to select the 40-45 households. Neither of the two procedures was employed. For the segmentation method, it was not difficult to see that the clustering effect could be increased, since, in general, the smaller the cluster the greater the design effect. With such a system, DEFF would be higher than 2, even if minimally. The random walk method, on the other hand, could be affected by enumerator bias, which would be difficult to control and not easily measurable. For NISH surveys, the listing of all housing units in the selected EAs was first carried out to provide a frame for the sub-sampling. Systematic random sampling was thereafter used to select the sample of housing units. The GHS used a sub-sample of 10 housing units but since the MICS required 20 households, another supplementary sample of 10 housing units was selected and added to the GHS sample. All households in the sample housing units were interviewed, as previous surveys have shown that a housing unit generally contained one household.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

"The aim for the 2016 AES is to further streamline and improve the data collection on adult participation in lifelong learning by both focusing on priority topics and adapting the current content to new policy needs.[...] According to the European statistical programme 2013-2017, the development of statistics provided on education and training includes a 'rationalisation and modernisation of the Adult Education Survey'. The setting up of the Task Force on the 2016 AES was an essential element to define the requirements for the 2016 AES data collection in a way that takes changes and new developments in lifelong learning into account while keeping coherence with 2011 AES where appropriate. The final Commission Regulation was adopted and released in October 2014."
(Eurostat (2017): 2016 AES manual - Annexes. Version 2)

Abstract

The need for comprehensive economic statistics has been recently growing rapidly in most developing countries in view of the use of such statistics in formulating socio-economic development plans in general, and to assess the socio-economic situation at the household level such as the one obained from Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey, on a regular basis are the major sources of these data. The survey provides valuable data, especially for assessment of the impact of policies on the conditions and levels of living of houeholds. It is a well known fact that surveys of Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure usually have the major goal of providing basic data needed for the purpose of designing socio-economic policy as well as other related issues that might arise at the micro level.

The major objectives of the survey are to: - Provide data on the levels, distribution and pattern of household income, consumption and expenditure that will be used for analysis of changes in the levels of living standards of households over time in various socio-economic groups and geographical areas. - Obtained information for the formulation of socio-economic plans and policies. - Furnish bench mark data for assessing the impact of existing or proposed socio-economic programs on household living conditions. - Provide data for compiling household accounts in the system of national accounts, especially in the estimation of private consumption expenditure. - Obtain weights and other useful information for the construction of consumer price indices at various levels.

Geographic coverage

The 1999-2000 Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey covered all parts of the country on sample basis except the non sedentary population in Afar and Somali regions.

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Consumption expenditure commodities/ services

Universe

The survey covered all households in the selected sample areas excluding residents of collective quarters, homeless persons and foreigners.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLE DESIGN

The 1999-2000 Household Income, Consumption, and Expenditure Survey covered both the urban the sedentary rural parts of the country. The survey has not covered six zones in Somalia Region and two zones in Afar Region that are inhabited mainly by nomadic population. For the purpose of the survey, the country was divided into three categories. That is, the rural parts of the country and the urban areas that were divided into two broad categories taking into account sizes of their population.

Category I: Rural parts of nine Regional States and two administrative regions were grouped in this category each of which was the survey domains (reporting levels). These regions are Tigray, Afar, Amhara, Oromia, Somalia, Benishangul-Gumuz, SNNPR, Gambela, Harari, Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa.

Category II: All regional capitals and five major urban centers of the country were grouped in this category. Each of the urban centers in this category was the survey domain (reporting level) for which separate survey results for major survey characteristics were reported.

Category III: Urban centers in the country other than the urban centers in category II were grouped in this category and formed a single reporting level.

Other than the reporting levels defined in the category II and category III one additional domain, namely total urban (country level) can be constructed by combining the basic domains defined in the two categories. All in all 35 basic rural and urban domains (reporting levels) were defined for the survey. In addition to the above urban and rural domains, survey results are to be reported at regional and country levels by aggregating the survey results for the corresponding urban and rural areas. Definition of the survey domains was based on both technical and resource considerations. More specifically, sample size for the domains were determined to enable provision of major indicators with reasonable precision subject to the resources that were available for the survey.

SELECTION SCHEME AND SAMPLE SIZE IN EACH CATEGORY: 1) Category I: A stratified two-stage sample design was used to select the sample in which the primary sampling units (PSUs) were EAs. Sample enumeration areas (EAs) from each domain were selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to size; size being number of households obtained from the rural parts of the country. Within each sample EA a fresh list of households was prepared at the beginning of the survey's field work and for the administration of the survey questionnaire 12 households per sample EA for rural areas were systematically selected.

2) Category II: In this category also, a stratified two-stage sample design was used to select the sample. Here a strata constitutes all the "Region State Capitals" and the five "Major Urban Centers" in the country and are grouped as a strata in this category. The primary sampling units (PSUs) are the EA's in the Regional State Capitals and the five major urban centers and excludes the special EAs (non-conventional households). Sample enumeration areas (EAs) from each stratum were selected using systematic sampling probability proportional to size, size being number of houesholds obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. A total of 373 EAs were selected from this domain of study. Within each sample EAs a fresh list of households was prepared at the beginning of the survey's field work and for the administration of the questionnaire 16 houeholds per sample EA were systematically selected.

3) Category III: Three-stage stratified sample design was adopted to select the sample from domains in category III. The PSUs were other urban centers selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to size; size begin number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. The secondary sampling units (SSUs) were EAs which were selected using systematic sampling that is probability proportional to size; size being number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing census. A total of 169 sample EAs were selected from the sample of other urban centers and was determined by proportional allocation to their size of households from the 1994 census. Ultimately, 16 households within each of the sample EAs were selected systematically from a fresh list of households prepared at the beginning of the survey's fieldwork for the administrator of the survey questionnaire.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey questionnaire contains the following forms: - Form 1: Area Identification and Household Characteristics - Form 2A: Quantity and value of weekly consumption of food and drinks consumed at home and tobacco/including quantity purchased, own produced, obtained, etc for first and second week. - Form 2B: Quantity and value of weekly consumption of food and drinks consumed at home and tobacco/including quantity purchased, own produced, obtained, etc for third and fourth week . - Form 3A: All transaction (income, expenditure and consumption) for the first and second weeks except what is collected in Forms 2A and 2B - Form 3B: All transaction (income, expenditure and consumption) for the third and fourth weeks except what is collected in Forms 2A and 2B - Form 4: All transaction (expenditure and consumption) for last 6 months for Household expenditure on some selected item groups - Form 5: Cash income and receipts received by household and type of tenure. The survey questionnaire is provided as external resource.

Cleaning operations

Due to complex nature and magnitude of the survey, CSA has given special attention to the data processing activity. Thus, a task force comprising of subject matter specialists and data processing experts was formed to oversee the data processing and analysis activities of the HIES starting from August 1999. After the completion of the first round of the survey data collected operation, the filled-in questionnaires were retrieved from the field, the task force embarked on the first stage of data processing activities, i.e. manual editing, coding and verification. Experienced editors-coders and verifiers have been deployed for this activities. Considering the complication of the data collected in this survey the editing, coding and verification of the questionnaires have taken the most part of the three months after which data entry was started.

For the data entry activity, the Integrated Microcomputer Processing System (IMPS) software was used throughout. To speed up this process, experienced data entry operators were used and the data entry activity was completed in December 1999. The survey data collected during the second round (January 1999 - February 2000) have also passed through all the data processing activities stated above for the first round.

After the data entry of both rounds of the survey has been completed, the next step in the data processing activity was to merge the data from the first and the second rounds of the survey. Unlike the 1995-1996 Household Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey, which was done with the help of a short term consultancy services provided by Statistics Norway, the merging operation of these surveys was successfully completed in October 2000 by the programmers in the Data Processing Department of the CSA, after which data cleaning, detailed and through consistency checking were done. In fact, the data cleaning and the consistency

The 2014 Survey of State Attorneys General (SAG) collected information on jurisdiction, sources and circumstances of case referrals, and the participation of attorneys general offices in federal or state white-collar crime task forces in 2014. White-collar crime was defined by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) as: "any violation of law committed through non-violent means, involving lies, omissions, deceit, misrepresentation, or violation of a position of trust, by an individual or organization for personal or organizational benefit." SAG sought to analyze how attorneys general offices as an organization in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories respond to white-collar offenses in their jurisdiction. BJS asked respondents to focus on the following criminal and civil offenses: bank fraud, consumer fraud, insurance fraud, medical fraud, securities fraud, tax fraud, environmental offenses, false claims and statements, illegal payments to governmental officials (giving or receiving), unfair trade practices, and workplace-related offenses (e.g., unsafe working conditions). Variables included whether or not offices handled criminal or civil cases in the above categories, estimated number of cases in each category, and what types of criminal or civil sanctions were imposed on white-collar offenders. Researchers also assessed collaboration with partners outside of state attorneys offices, whether cases were referred for federal or local prosecution, and what circumstances lead to referring cases to state regulatory agencies. The extent to which state attorneys offices maintain white-collar crime data was also recorded.

In 1991, the National Task Force on Health Information cited a number of issues and problems with the health information system. To respond to these issues, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), Statistics Canada and Health Canada joined forces to create a Health Information Roadmap. From this mandate, the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) was conceived. The CCHS is a cross-sectional survey that collects information related to health status, health care utilization and health determinants for the Canadian population. The survey is offered in both official languages. It relies upon a large sample of respondents and is designed to provide reliable estimates at the health region level every 2 years. The CCHS has the following objectives: - Support health surveillance programs by providing health data at the national, provincial and intra-provincial levels; - Provide a single data source for health research on small populations and rare characteristics; - Timely release of information easily accessible to a diverse community of users; - Create a flexible survey instrument that includes a rapid response option to address emerging issues related to the health of the population. The CCHS produces an annual microdata file and a file combining two years of data. The CCHS collection years can also be combined by users to examine populations or rare characteristics. The primary use of the CCHS data is for health surveillance and population health research. Federal and provincial departments of health and human resources, social service agencies, and other types of government agencies use the information collected from respondents to monitor, plan, implement and evaluate programs to improve the health of Canadians. Researchers from various fields use the information to conduct research to improve health. Non-profit health organizations and the media use the CCHS results to raise awareness about health, an issue of concern to all Canadians. The survey began collecting data in 2001 and was repeated every two years until 2005. Starting in 2007, data for the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) were collected annually instead of every two years. While a sample of approximately 130,000 respondents were interviewed during the reference periods of 2001, 2003 and 2005, the sample size was changed to 65,000 respondents each year starting in 2007. In 2012, CCHS began work on a major redesign project that was completed and implemented for the 2015 cycle. The objectives of the redesign were to review the sampling methodology, adopt a new sample frame, modernize the content and review the target population. Consultations were held with federal, provincial and territorial share partners, health region authorities and academics. As a result of the redesign, the current CCHS has a new collection strategy, is drawing the sample from two different frames and has undergone major content revisions. With all these factors taken together, caution should be taken when comparing data from previous cycles to data released for the 2015 cycle onwards.

Abstract

This report presents the results of the first national Labour Force Survey (LFS) to be conducted in Timor-Leste since the country gained its full independence in 2002.

The survey provides data on a variety of key employment issues: - the labour force, in terms of age, sex, and education; - the employed population, in terms of occupation, economic sector and multiple job-holding; - employment conditions, in terms of job permanency, public/private sector, hours worked, underemployment, and net monthly earnings;- informal sector and informal employment, in terms of contractual conditions, size of establishment, benefits of employment, etc.; - the unemployed, including duration of unemployment, and methods of seeking work; and - persons not in the labour force, their reasons for not being available to work, and their previous work experience.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Households Individuals

Universe

Household members ages 10 and over. Excludes institutional population: persons living in military installations, correctional and penal institutions, dormitories of schools and universities, religious institutions, hospitals, and so forth. In the case of the armed forces, this means that they were included if they lived as members of a private household, but they were excluded if they lived in dormitories, barracks or similar accommodation.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

DNE made use of the sample of 300 census enumeration areas (EAs) that had been selected for the Timor-Leste Survey of Living Standards 2007 (SLS 2007). Those EAs had been selected with probability proportional to size (PPS), where the measure of size was the 2004 EA census count. The actual number of EAs covered in SLS 2007 was in fact 269 instead of 300, because some large EAs were selected twice (or occasionally three or more times) and therefore received the corresponding number of workloads.

For SLS 2007, an up-to-date listing of households in the selected EAs was prepared in the field, and 24 households were selected in each EA, using a random start. These 24 households were then divided up into three 'tasks' (A, B and C), one for each of the three interviewers in the team. Task A received the first eight named households, Task B the next eight, and Task C the last eight. Each interviewer was required to interview five households, but they had a reserve list of three households in case they could not contact or interview any of the first five households on their list.

For LFS 2010, attempts were made to cover exactly the same EAs as was done in SLS 2007. Occasionally an EA was missed, and in a few cases the number of workloads covered in an EA was greater than the number covered in SLS 2007. Table 1.1 shows the number of urban and rural EA workloads covered in each district, and the expected number of households. Exactly the same listing sheets were used as had been used in SLS 2007, with the same names of household heads from SLS 2007 shown on the lists.

Based on the information provided on the cover sheet of each questionnaire, the sample of 4665 households contained 12,088 males and 12,000 females, giving an average household size of 5.2 (unweighted). Among these households there were 8,610 males aged 10 and over and 8,538 females aged 10 and over; these were the people to whom most of the survey questions were directed, after the basic household listing information had been collected.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaires were carefully designed by the ILO team that visited Dili in March 2009. The questions were worded in the correct fashion, allowing the calculation of many statistical indicators that are fully in line with current international standards in labour statistics. Two questionnaires were used - a household questionnaire and an individual questionnaire.

DNE had organized the translation of the questionnaires into Tetum and the final questionnaires were in booklet form.

Response rate

It is difficult to measure the true response rate on this survey because of the method used for selecting the households to be interviewed. Three interviewers were working in each EA. Each interviewer had five specific households to visit, and kept three households in reserve. If any of those five households could not be located, or had moved, or was out at the time of the interviewer’s visits (even after repeated visits), or refused, or was otherwise not available, the interviewer was allowed to take the first replacement household. There was officially zero nonresponse, with all quotas successfully filled and all household questionnaires being marked with code 1 (‘completed - fully responding household’).

Sampling error estimates

Because the LFS is a sample survey, all estimates are subject to sampling error. Sampling errors have not been included in this report, but all reported figures have been rounded to the nearest thousand in order to make some allowance for the effects of sampling error.

BackgroundReporting quality of aromatherapy-focused research in humans is inconsistent and often incomplete yet there are no (North American or American) nationally or internationally agreed upon core criteria for aromatherapy-focused research. The Aromatic Research Quality Appraisal Task Force developed the Transparent Reporting for Essential oil and Aroma Therapeutic Studies (TREATS) checklist as initial steps toward developing a reporting guideline. The purpose of this Delphi study is to engage with an international community of aromatherapy researchers to reach consensus on which items should be included in reports of aromatherapy-focused studies in humans. The result of the consensus process will be to publish an aromatherapy research reporting guideline that can be used as an extension to existing research reporting guidelines for various studies such as randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case reports.MethodsA modified Delphi consensus study will be used. The consensus study, approved by the West Virginia University Institutional Review Board, will consist of up to four rounds of an online survey. To improve understanding and buy-in, experts attending a large international aromatherapy-focused conference will take part in a four-hour in-person/virtual hybrid introductory meeting where they can learn the study process and ask questions. The 48-item survey is divided into categories covering study products, processes, aromatherapy intervention, safety, sustainability, and olfactory ability and aroma preference. Participants will be asked to rate each checklist item for relevance on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “of little importance” to “extremely important”. During the Delphi study, participants can provide comments and, in the first and second rounds, may suggest additional items or modifications to existing items. An item will be automatically included in the final guidelines if it is rated as "very important" or "extremely important" by at least ≥80% of the participants in Rounds 1–3, and automatically excluded if > 50% of participants rate the item as “not important” or “of little importance”. Aggregated ratings will be statistically analyzed for response rates, level of agreement, medians, and interquartile ranges.DiscussionThis protocol supports conducting a Delphi consensus that will add to the current knowledge of items considered necessary for complete and consistent reporting of aromatherapy-focused research in humans. This is of international significance as world-wide use and research of aromatherapy and essential oils in humans has continued to increase, currently without consistent and clear reporting. The Delphi method is appropriate for developing consensus between diverse experts, researchers, and practitioners as it offers anonymity and minimizes bias. Findings will contribute to creating an extension to primary reporting guidelines.

In 2023, the most common state of AI according to CEOs within their organization was hiring new talent with AI skills. ** percent of respondents stated this as their answer when it came to the completion of this action. The most common state of AI that had not yet been started amongst CEOs was an established AI task force with a direct line to the C-suite.

Abstract

The 2006 Tanzania Service Provision Assessment (TSPA 2006) is a facility-based survey designed to extract information about the general performance of facilities that offer maternal, child, and reproductive health services as well as services for specific infectious diseases, including sexually transmitted infections (STIs), HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis (TB), and malaria.

Unlike previous facility-based surveys which concentrated on maternal and child health (MCH), the TSPA 2006 covers both MCH and HIV/AIDS services. Information to provide a comprehensive picture of the strengths and weaknesses of the service delivery environment for each assessed service was collected from a representative sample of facilities managed by the public sector, the private sector, parastatals, and faith-based organisations (FBOs) in all twenty-six regions of the country.

The TSPA 2006 provides national- and zonal-level representative information for hospitals, health centres, dispensaries, and stand-alone facilities offering HIV/AIDS-related services. Findings can supplement household-based health information from the Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) conducted in 2004-05, which provides information on health and the utilisation of services by the overall population.

The TSPA 2006 was implemented by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) in collaboration with the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW – Mainland and Zanzibar) and the Office of the Chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar. The survey received technical support from Macro International Inc. under the Measure DHS Project. Financial support for the survey was received from the Poverty Eradication Division (Ministry of Planning, Economy and Empowerment) under the pooled fund arrangement. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funded the technical support from Macro International Inc.

The objectives of the 2006 TSPA were to: • Describe how well prepared facilities are to provide good quality reproductive and child health services and services for some infectious diseases (HIV/AIDS, STIs, malaria, and TB); • Provide a comprehensive body of information on the performance of the full range of public and private health care facilities that provide reproductive, child health, and HIV/AIDS services; • Help identify strengths and weaknesses in the delivery of reproductive, child health, and HIV/AIDS services at health care facilities, producing information that can be used to better target service delivery improvement interventions and to improve on-going supervisory systems; • Describe the processes used in providing child, maternal, and reproductive health services and the extent to which accepted standards for good quality service provision are followed; • Provide information for periodically monitoring progress in improving the delivery of reproductive, child health, and HIV/AIDS services at Tanzanian health facilities; • Provide input into the evolution of a system of accreditation of health facilities in Tanzania; and • Provide baseline information on the capacity of health facilities to provide basic and advanced level HIV/AIDS care and support services, and on the recordkeeping systems in place for monitoring HIV/AIDS preventive, diagnostic, care, and support services.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Health service facilities
• Individuals

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Data were collected from a representative sample of facilities, a sample of health service providers at each facility, and a sample of sick children, family planning, ANC, and STI clients.

Sample of Facilities The sample used for the TSPA 2006 was obtained from a list of 5,663 health facilities in Tanzania. The list included hospitals, health centres, dispensaries, and stand-alone facilities, with different managing authorities, including government, private for-profit, parastatal, and faith-based organisations. A sample size of 612 facilities was selected for the survey, based on logistic considerations as well as the minimum sample size required for the desired analysis (margin of error of 10 percent). The sample allows for national and zonal estimates for key indicators for Mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. All national referral hospitals, regional general hospitals, and district/district-designated hospitals were purposely included in the sample. The rest of the facilities (health centres, dispensaries, stand-alone facilities, and other private hospitals) were sampled in such a way as to provide national and zonal-level representation. Thus, the TSPA final sample covered approximately 10 percent of all facilities in the Mainland and approximately 36 percent in Zanzibar. This sample size is not large enough to present findings at the regional level.

Sample of Health Service Providers A health service provider is defined as one who provides consultation services, counselling, health education, or laboratory services to clients. For example, health workers were not eligible for observation or interview if they only take measurements or complete registers and never provide any type of professional client services. The sample of health service providers was selected from providers who were present in the facility on the day of the survey and who provided services that were assessed by the TSPA. The idea was to interview an average of eight providers in a facility. In facilities with fewer than eight health providers, all of the providers present on the day of the visit were interviewed. In facilities with more than eight providers, an average of eight providers was interviewed, including all providers whose work was observed. If interviewers observed fewer than eight providers, then they also interviewed a random selection of the remaining health providers to obtain an average of eight provider interviews.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Four main types of data collection tools were used: 1. Using the Facility Audit Questionnaires, interviewers collected information on the availability of resources, support systems, and facility infrastructure elements necessary to provide a level of service that generally meets accepted national and international standards. The support services assessed were those that are commonly acknowledged as essential management tools for maintaining health services. The facility audit questionnaires include MCH, HIV/AIDS, laboratory, and pharmacy sections. The HIV/AIDS section assessed how clients with HIV/AIDS were handled, from counselling and testing through treatment, referral, and follow up. Interviewers also collected information on health facility policies and practises related to collecting and reporting HIV/AIDS-related records and statistics for services provided to clients through the health facility.

1. The Observation Protocol was tailored to the service being provided. For sick child, antenatal care, family planning, and STI consultations, the observer assessed the extent to which service providers adhered to standards of care, based on generally accepted practices for good quality service delivery. The observations included both the process used in conducting specific procedures and examinations, and also the content of information (including history, symptoms, and advice) exchanged between the provider and the client.

2. After clients were observed receiving a service, they were asked to participate in an Exit Interview as they left the facility. The exit interview included questions on the client’s understanding of the consultation or examination, as well as his/her recall of instructions received about treatment or preventive behaviour. The interviewer also elicited the client’s perception of the service delivery environment.

3. In the Health Worker/Provider Interview, service providers were interviewed regarding their qualifications (training, experience, and continued in-service training), the supervision they had received, and their perceptions of the service delivery environment.

Cleaning operations

Management of questionnaires in the field: After completing data collection in each facility, the interviewers reviewed the questionnaires before handing them over to the team leader who reviewed them a second time. Staff from headquarters picked up the questionnaire when visiting the teams. Sometimes team leaders posted the questionnaires to headquarters by courier services.

Data sorting and editing at headquarters: Once the questionnaires from each facility were received at headquarters, they were first sorted to ensure that they were in the correct order and none were missing. They were then edited to eliminate any mistakes that would prevent the computer from accepting information during data entry. In cases where there was a problem with the questionnaires from a facility, the data collection team was consulted so that the problem could be rectified.

Data processing:The design of the tabulation plan and the preparation of the programs for producing statistical tables were carried out from August through September 2006. Data analysis, including clarification of unclear information, was carried out from October 2006 through February 2007. During data analysis, the analysis plan was revised on the basis of feedback from the TSPA Task Force to ensure that the analysis was appropriate for the Tanzanian health system.