Knowing the racial and ethnic composition of a community is often one of the first steps in understanding, serving, and advocating for various groups. This information can help enforce laws, policies, and regulations against discrimination based on race and ethnicity. These statistics can also help tailor services to accommodate cultural differences.This multi-scale map shows the most common race/ethnicity living within an area. Map opens at tract-level in Los Angeles, CA but has national coverage. Zoom out to see counties and states.This map uses these hosted feature layers containing the most recent American Community Survey data. These layers are part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas, and are updated every year when the American Community Survey releases new estimates, so values in the map always reflect the newest data available. The data on race were derived from answers to the question on race that was asked of individuals in the United States. The Census Bureau collects racial data in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and these data are based on self-identification. The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically. The categories represent a social-political construct designed for collecting data on the race and ethnicity of broad population groups in this country, and are not anthropologically or scientifically based. Learn more here.

The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) series (formerly titled National Household Survey on Drug Abuse) primarily measures the prevalence and correlates of drug use in the United States. The surveys are designed to provide quarterly, as well as annual, estimates. Information is provided on the use of illicit drugs, alcohol, and tobacco among members of United States households aged 12 and older. Questions included age at first use as well as lifetime, annual, and past-month usage for the following drug classes: marijuana, cocaine (and crack), hallucinogens, heroin, inhalants, alcohol, tobacco, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs, including pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives. The survey covered substance abuse treatment history and perceived need for treatment, and included questions from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of Mental Disorders that allow diagnostic criteria to be applied. The survey included questions concerning treatment for both substance abuse and mental health-related disorders. Respondents were also asked about personal and family income sources and amounts, health care access and coverage, illegal activities and arrest record, problems resulting from the use of drugs, and needle-sharing. Questions introduced in previous administrations were retained in the 2014 survey, including questions asked only of respondents aged 12 to 17. These "youth experiences" items covered a variety of topics, such as neighborhood environment, illegal activities, drug use by friends, social support, extracurricular activities, exposure to substance abuse prevention and education programs, and perceived adult attitudes toward drug use and activities such as school work. Several measures focused on prevention-related themes in this section. Also retained were questions on mental health and access to care, perceived risk of using drugs, perceived availability of drugs, driving and personal behavior, and cigar smoking. Questions on the tobacco brand used most often were introduced with the 1999 survey. For the 2008 survey, adult mental health questions were added to measure symptoms of psychological distress in the worst period of distress that a person experienced in the past 30 days and suicidal ideation. In 2008, a split-sample design also was included to administer separate sets of questions (WHODAS vs. SDS) to assess impairment due to mental health problems. Beginning with the 2009 NSDUH, however, all of the adults in the sample received only the WHODAS questions. Background information includes gender, race, age, ethnicity, marital status, educational level, job status, veteran status, and current household composition.

Abstract

The World Values Survey (www.worldvaluessurvey.org) is a global network of social scientists studying changing values and their impact on social and political life, led by an international team of scholars, with the WVS association and secretariat headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden.

The survey, which started in 1981, seeks to use the most rigorous, high-quality research designs in each country. The WVS consists of nationally representative surveys conducted in almost 100 countries which contain almost 90 percent of the world’s population, using a common questionnaire. The WVS is the largest non-commercial, cross-national, time series investigation of human beliefs and values ever executed, currently including interviews with almost 400,000 respondents. Moreover the WVS is the only academic study covering the full range of global variations, from very poor to very rich countries, in all of the world’s major cultural zones.

The WVS seeks to help scientists and policy makers understand changes in the beliefs, values and motivations of people throughout the world. Thousands of political scientists, sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists and economists have used these data to analyze such topics as economic development, democratization, religion, gender equality, social capital, and subjective well-being. These data have also been widely used by government officials, journalists and students, and groups at the World Bank have analyzed the linkages between cultural factors and economic development.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Household Individual

Universe

National Population, Both sexes,18 and more years.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample size: 841

a. A random sample of 2000 people was drawn from the New Zealand Electoral Roll; Permanent Residents and Citizens of NZ are required by law to place themselves on the Electoral Roll. The roll contains name, address, electorate, age, gender, occupation, and a Maori identifier.

b. Excluded from the sample were overseas addresses and people over 90 years of age (following past NZSV surveys).

c. People identifying as Maori on the roll were oversampled (as in past NZ Values Surveys) because Maori, as a group, tend to have a lower response rate to such surveys. About 13.6% of the people on the Roll identified as Maori, while the sample that was drawn is about 22.5% identifying as Maori on the Roll. In the results of the survey for the ethnicity question, 16.3% indicated they identified as Maori. They may also have selected other ethnicities, and saying “Maori” in the survey does not necessarily mean they are listed as Maori on the Electoral Roll.

Mode of data collection

Mail Questionnaire [mail]

Research instrument

For each wave, suggestions for questions are solicited by social scientists from all over the world and a final master questionnaire is developed in English. Since the start in 1981 each successive wave has covered a broader range of societies than the previous one. Analysis of the data from each wave has indicated that certain questions tapped interesting and important concepts while others were of little value. This has led to the more useful questions or themes being replicated in future waves while the less useful ones have been dropped making room for new questions.

The questionnaire is translated into the various national languages and in many cases independently translated back to English to check the accuracy of the translation. In most countries, the translated questionnaire is pre-tested to help identify questions for which the translation is problematic. In some cases certain problematic questions are omitted from the national questionnaire.

WVS requires implementation of the common questionnaire fully and faithfully, in all countries included into one wave. Any alteration to the original questionnaire has to be approved by the EC. Omission of no more than a maximum of 12 questions in any given country can be allowed.

Response rate

44.22%

Sampling error estimates

Estimated error: 3.4

The data on relationship to householder were derived from answers to Question 2 in the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS), which was asked of all people in housing units. The question on relationship is essential for classifying the population information on families and other groups. Information about changes in the composition of the American family, from the number of people living alone to the number of children living with only one parent, is essential for planning and carrying out a number of federal programs.

The responses to this question were used to determine the relationships of all persons to the householder, as well as household type (married couple family, nonfamily, etc.). From responses to this question, we were able to determine numbers of related children, own children, unmarried partner households, and multi-generational households. We calculated average household and family size. When relationship was not reported, it was imputed using the age difference between the householder and the person, sex, and marital status.

Household – A household includes all the people who occupy a housing unit. (People not living in households are classified as living in group quarters.) A housing unit is a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied (or if vacant, is intended for occupancy) as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live separately from any other people in the building and which have direct access from the outside of the building or through a common hall. The occupants may be a single family, one person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or unrelated people who share living arrangements.

Average Household Size – A measure obtained by dividing the number of people in households by the number of households. In cases where people in households are cross-classified by race or Hispanic origin, people in the household are classified by the race or Hispanic origin of the householder rather than the race or Hispanic origin of each individual.

Average household size is rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Comparability – The relationship categories for the most part can be compared to previous ACS years and to similar data collected in the decennial census, CPS, and SIPP. With the change in 2008 from “In-law” to the two categories of “Parent-in-law” and “Son-in-law or daughter-in-law,” caution should be exercised when comparing data on in-laws from previous years. “In-law” encompassed any type of in-law such as sister-in-law. Combining “Parent-in-law” and “son-in-law or daughter-in-law” does not represent all “in-laws” in 2008.

The same can be said of comparing the three categories of “biological” “step,” and “adopted” child in 2008 to “Child” in previous years. Before 2008, respondents may have considered anyone under 18 as “child” and chosen that category. The ACS includes “foster child” as a category. However, the 2010 Census did not contain this category, and “foster children” were included in the “Other nonrelative” category. Therefore, comparison of “foster child” cannot be made to the 2010 Census. Beginning in 2013, the “spouse” category includes same-sex spouses.

Relative concentration of the Central California region's Asian American population. The variable ASIANALN records all individuals who select Asian as their SOLE racial identity in response to the Census questionnaire, regardless of their response to the Hispanic ethnicity question. Both Hispanic and non-Hispanic in the Census questionnaire are potentially associated with the Asian race alone. "Relative concentration" is a measure that compares the proportion of population within each Census block group data unit that identify as ASIANALN alone to the proportion of all people that live within the 4,961 block groups in the Central California RRK region that identify as ASIANALN alone. Example: if 5.2% of people in a block group identify as HSPBIPOC, the block group has twice the proportion of ASIANALN individuals compared to the Central California RRK region (2.6%), and more than three times the proportion compared to the entire state of California (1.6%). If the local proportion is twice the regional proportion, then ASIANALN individuals are highly concentrated locally.

Release Date: 2023-10-26.The Census Bureau has reviewed this data product for unauthorized disclosure of confidential information and has approved the disclosure avoidance practices applied (Approval ID: CBDRB-FY23-0479)...Release Schedule:.Data in this file come from estimates of business ownership by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status from the 2022 Annual Business Survey (ABS) collection. Data are also obtained from administrative records, the 2017 Economic Census, and other economic surveys...Note: The collection year is the year in which the data are collected. A reference year is the year that is referenced in the questions on the survey and in which the statistics are tabulated. For example, the 2022 ABS collection year produces statistics for the 2021 reference year. The "Year" column in the table is the reference year...For more information about ABS planned data product releases, see Tentative ABS Schedule...Key Table Information:.This is the only table in the ABS series to provide information on select economic and demographic characteristics of business owners (CBO) for U.S. employer firms that reported the sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status for up to four persons owning the largest percentage(s) of the business. The data include estimates for owners of U.S. respondent firms with paid employees operating during the reference year with receipts of $1,000 or more, which are classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), Sectors 11 through 99, except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered. Owners of employer firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which the firm operates, but only once in the U.S. and state totals for all sectors. Firms are asked to report their employees as of the March 12 pay period...Data Items and Other Identifying Records:.Data include estimates on:.Number of owners of respondent employer firms. Percent of number of owners of respondent employer firms (%)...These data are aggregated at the owner level for up to four persons owning the largest percentages of the business by the following demographic classifications:.All owners of respondent firms. Sex. Female. Male. . . Ethnicity. Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. . . Race. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Minority (Firms classified as any race and ethnicity combination other than non-Hispanic and White). Nonminority (Firms classified as non-Hispanic and White). . . Veteran Status (defined as having served in any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces). Veteran. Nonveteran. . . ...Data Notes:.. Data are tabulated at the owner level.. Respondents are informed that Hispanic origins are not races and are instructed to answer both the Hispanic origin and race questions.. An owner can be tabulated in more than one racial group. This can result because:. The sole owner was reported to be of more than one race.. The majority owner was reported to be of more than one race.. A majority combination of owners was reported to be of more than one race.. . An owner cannot be tabulated with two mutually exclusive demographic classifications (e.g. both as a veteran and a nonveteran.). CBO data are not designed to produce estimates for all U.S. business owners as information was only collected for up to four owners per firm. Researchers analyzing data to create their own estimates are responsible for the validity of those estimates and should cite the Census Bureau as the source of the original data only.. Percent values may exceed 100 due to noise....Owner Characteristics:.The ABS asked for information for up to four persons owning the largest percentage(s) of the business. Respondent firms include all firms that responded to the characteristics tabulated in this dataset and that reported sex, ethnicity, race, or veteran status for at least one business owner so that the classification of owners of respondent firms by sex, ethnicity, race, and veteran status could be determined. Furthermore, the ABS was designed to include select questions about owner characteristics from multiple reference periods and to incorporate new content each survey year based on topics of relevance. Percentages are for owners of respondent firms only and are not recalculated when the dataset is resorted. Percentages are always based on total reporting (defined above) within a sex, ethnicity, race, veteran status, and/or industry group for the characteristics tabulated in this dataset...Owner characteristic topics for the 2022 ABS included in this table are the following: ..Year Acquired Ownership of Business (YRACQBUS).Primary Source of Income...

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE), led by the University of Manchester with the Universities of St Andrews, Sussex, Glasgow, Edinburgh, LSE, Goldsmiths, King's College London and Manchester Metropolitan University, designed and carried out the Evidence for Equality National Survey (EVENS), with Ipsos as the survey partner. EVENS documents the lives of ethnic and religious minorities in Britain during the coronavirus pandemic and is, to date, the largest and most comprehensive survey to do so.
EVENS used online and telephone survey modes, multiple languages, and a suite of recruitment strategies to reach the target audience. Words of Colour coordinated the recruitment strategies to direct participants to the survey, and partnerships with 13 voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations[1] helped to recruit participants for the survey.
The ambition of EVENS was to better represent ethnic and religious minorities compared to existing data sources regarding the range and diversity of represented minority population groups and the topic coverage. Thus, the EVENS survey used an 'open' survey approach, which requires participants to opt-in to the survey instead of probability-based approaches that invite individuals to participate following their identification within a pre-defined sampling frame. This 'open' approach sought to overcome some of the limitations of probability-based methods in order to reach a large number and diverse mix of people from religious and ethnic minorities.
EVENS included a wide range of research and policy questions, including education, employment and economic well-being, housing, social, cultural and political participation, health, and experiences of racism and discrimination, particularly with respect to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Crucially, EVENS covered a full range of racial, ethnic and religious groups, including those often unrepresented in such work (such as Chinese, Jewish and Traveller groups), resulting in the participation of 14,215 participants, including 9,702 ethnic minority participants and a general population sample of 4,513, composed of White people who classified themselves as English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, and British. Data collection covered the period between 16 February 2021 and 14 August 2021.
Further information about the study can be found on the EVENS project website.
A teaching dataset based on the main EVENS study is available from the UKDS under SN 9249.
[1] The VCSE organisations included Business in the Community, BEMIS (Scotland), Ethnic Minorities and Youth Support Team (Wales), Friends, Families and Travellers, Institute for Jewish Policy Research, Migrants' Rights Networks, Muslim Council Britain, NHS Race and Health Observatory, Operation Black Vote, Race Equality Foundation, Runnymede Trust, Stuart Hall Foundation, and The Ubele Initiative.
Main Topics:

Ethnic minorities, religious minorities, ethnicity, inequality, education, employment and economic well-being, housing, social participation, cultural participation, political participation, health, experiences of racism, experiences of discrimination, impact of COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (formerly known as the ONS Opinions Survey or Omnibus) is an omnibus survey that began in 1990, collecting data on a range of subjects commissioned by both the ONS internally and external clients (limited to other government departments, charities, non-profit organisations and academia).Data are collected from one individual aged 16 or over, selected from each sampled private household. Personal data include data on the individual, their family, address, household, income and education, plus responses and opinions on a variety of subjects within commissioned modules. The questionnaire collects timely data for research and policy analysis evaluation on the social impacts of recent topics of national importance, such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the cost of living, on individuals and households in Great Britain. From April 2018 to November 2019, the design of the OPN changed from face-to-face to a mixed-mode design (online first with telephone interviewing where necessary). Mixed-mode collection allows respondents to complete the survey more flexibly and provides a more cost-effective service for customers. In March 2020, the OPN was adapted to become a weekly survey used to collect data on the social impacts of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on the lives of people of Great Britain. These data are held in the Secure Access study, SN 8635, ONS Opinions and Lifestyle Survey, Covid-19 Module, 2020-2022: Secure Access. From August 2021, as coronavirus (COVID-19) restrictions were lifting across Great Britain, the OPN moved to fortnightly data collection, sampling around 5,000 households in each survey wave to ensure the survey remains sustainable. The OPN has since expanded to include questions on other topics of national importance, such as health and the cost of living. For more information about the survey and its methodology, see the ONS OPN Quality and Methodology Information webpage.Secure Access Opinions and Lifestyle Survey dataOther Secure Access OPN data cover modules run at various points from 1997-2019, on Census religion (SN 8078), cervical cancer screening (SN 8080), contact after separation (SN 8089), contraception (SN 8095), disability (SNs 8680 and 8096), general lifestyle (SN 8092), illness and activity (SN 8094), and non-resident parental contact (SN 8093). See Opinions and Lifestyle Survey: Secure Access for details. Main Topics:Each month's questionnaire consists of two elements: core questions, covering demographic information, are asked each month together with non-core questions that vary from month to month. The non-core questions for this month were: Hearing and subtitles (Module 204): this module was asked on behalf of the BBC. It was asked of all household members aged nine or over who had hearing difficulties or difficulty hearing the TV at normal volume. Internet access (Module 264): this module is being asked on behalf of a number of government departments, but primarily the Office for National Statistics and the E-Envoy's Office (part of the Cabinet Office). Designed to monitor internet use, which is currently a high profile government policy. E-Health (Module 270): this module was asked on behalf of Citizens Online, a charity set up to monitor and improve access to the internet. These questions are about health information on the internet and asked only of those who have used the internet for private/personal use. Smoking (Module 130): this module is being asked on behalf of the Department of Health. The questions relate to smoking. New ethnic question (Module 272): this question was asked on behalf of Social Survey Division and Socio-Economic Division of ONS and may be adopted as the new harmonised ethnicity question. Multi-stage stratified random sample Face-to-face interview

This map shows the percentage of people who identify as something other than non-Hispanic white throughout the US according to the most current American Community Survey. The pattern is shown by states, counties, and Census tracts. Zoom or search for anywhere in the US to see a local pattern. Click on an area to learn more. Filter to your area and save a new version of the map to use for your own mapping purposes.The Arcade expression used was: 100 - B03002_calc_pctNHWhiteE, which is simply 100 minus the percent of population who identifies as non-Hispanic white. The data is from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS). The figures in this map update automatically annually when the newest estimates are released by ACS. For more detailed metadata, visit the ArcGIS Living Atlas Layer: ACS Race and Hispanic Origin Variables - Boundaries.The data on race were derived from answers to the question on race that was asked of individuals in the United States. The Census Bureau collects racial data in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and these data are based on self-identification. The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically. The categories represent a social-political construct designed for collecting data on the race and ethnicity of broad population groups in this country, and are not anthropologically or scientifically based. Learn more here.Other maps of interest:American Indian or Alaska Native Population in the US (Current ACS)Asian Population in the US (Current ACS)Black or African American Population in the US (Current ACS)Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Population in the US (Current ACS)Hispanic or Latino Population in the US (Current ACS) (some people prefer Latinx)Population who are Some Other Race in the US (Current ACS)Population who are Two or More Races in the US (Current ACS) (some people prefer mixed race or multiracial)White Population in the US (Current ACS)Race in the US by Dot DensityWhat is the most common race/ethnicity?

This collection contains a cumulative datafile for The Los Angeles County Social Survey (LACSS) comprised of participants from years 1992 and 1994-1998. The LACSS continues the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Studies (LAMAS) and the Southern California Social Surveys (SCSS). The Los Angeles County Social Survey (LACSS) is part of a continuing annual research project supported by the Institute for Social Science Research at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Each year a University of California researcher is given an opportunity to be principal investigator and to use a segment of the LACSS for his or her own research. Data for this collection represents the LACSS conducted between February 1992 and June 1998. No data was included for the year 1993. Each year, Los Angeles County residents were asked questions concerning ethnic relations, social dominance, social distance, immigration, affirmative action, employment, and government. A split ballot methodology was utilized concerning the topics of immigration and affirmative action. Respondents were randomly selected to answer a series of questions from one of three ballots. In addition, a different series of social distance questions were asked depending on the respondent's ethnicity. Demographic information collected includes race, gender, religion, age, education level, occupation, birth place, political party affiliation and ideology, and origin of ancestry.

Survey was conducted before and after the parliamentary election in Romania on 11 December 2016 as a case study on the effect of ethnic party campaigns in communities with different ethnic compositions: ethnic Romanians living in predominantly Hungarian counties, ethnic Romanians in the rest of the country where they are in the majority, and ethnic Hungarians especially from central and western Romania. Respondents were interviewed a first time five to six weeks before the election and another time four to five weeks after the election. The questionnaire consisted of questions on ethnic belonging, trust in individuals and institutions, perceptions of electoral integrity, opinions on parties, and items on life satisfaction and assessments of the current social and political conditions of Romania. While, due to questionnaire constraints, some questions were asked in only one of the interviews, others were recorded in both waves, allowing for analyses of changes over time.

The political mobilisation of ethnicity has led to tensions between ethnic groups in, for example, Belgium and Canada, and to violent conflict with disastrous consequences in such diverse cases as Cyprus, Rwanda, and Sri Lanka. Some observers point to the particularistic politics of ethnic parties as fomenting ethnic tensions and call for their regulation. Others argue that ethnic parties may be valuable vehicles in solving such tensions because they contribute to the integration of diverse ethnic groups. However, both views are so far based on assumptions rather than empirical evidence; to date, the effect of ethnic parties on ordinary people within society has not been examined directly. The project fills this gap, contributing to a better understanding of the links between ethnic parties and national unity within the population: Does the presence of ethnic parties affect the way people perceive the ethnic "other" or the nation? Is this effect positive, because ethnic parties as emancipatory vehicles increase the inclusion of ethnic minorities within the population? Or is it negative, because ethnic parties raise awareness of ethnic differences? To answer these questions, the project first conducts a global comparative analysis of 105 diverse countries, using a new multilevel dataset. It will then conduct in-depth studies of two countries to examine the nature of these links. Both the quantitative and in-depth analyses are needed to better understand whether there are general links between the presence of ethnic parties and diminished national unity throughout different contexts and to identify the nature of this link in important cases.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of Sacramento by gender, including both male and female populations. This dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Sacramento across both sexes and to determine which sex constitutes the majority.

Key observations

There is a slight majority of female population, with 50.61% of total population being female. Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates.

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis. No further analysis is done on the data reported from the Census Bureau.

Variables / Data Columns

• Gender: This column displays the Gender (Male / Female)
• Population: The population of the gender in the Sacramento is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each gender as a proportion of Sacramento total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Sacramento Population by Race & Ethnicity. You can refer the same here

The survey studied several themes, including the use of media, social trust, political participation and interest, political trust, political orientation and commitment, satisfaction with own circumstances and certain public services, perceptions of own well-being, religious views, experiences of discrimination, and national and ethnic identity. These themes are recurring in different ESS rounds. Themes for the rotating modules in this collection round included welfare attitudes and ageism. The self-administered follow-up questionnaire included the Schwartz Human Values Scale as well as test questions controlling the main questionnaire. Questions about the use of social security benefits and globalisation were also asked. The respondents' socio-demographics were widely charted, including, among others, household composition, gender, age, type of neighbourhood, education, occupation, background information on spouse and parents, trade union membership, household income, and marital status.

Purpose: To determine if medical students of different races/ethnicities or genders have different perceptions of bias in the United States (US). Methods: An IRB-approved, anonymous survey was sent to US medical students from November 2022 through February 2024. Students responded to statements regarding perceptions of bias toward them from attendings, patients, and classmates. Chi-square tests, or Fisher’s exact tests, when appropriate, were used to calculate if significant differences exist among genders or races/ethnicities in response to these statements. Results: 370 students responded to this survey. Most respondents were women (n=259, 70%), and nearly half were White (n=164, 44.3%). 8.5% of women agreed that they felt excluded by attendings due to their gender, compared to 2.9% of men (p=0.018). 87.5% and 73.3% of Hispanic and Black students agreed that bias due to race negatively impacted research opportunities compared to 37.2% of White students (p<0.001). 87% and 85.7% of W..., This data was collected through Google Forms, and respondents were asked to log in with their email addresses to make sure that they could only submit their responses once. Data was processed in R studio., , # Experiences of US medical students - a national survey

https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.cz8w9gjbq

This dataset contains responses to an anonymous, IRB-approved survey sent to medical students across the country. The survey included demographic information and students' responses to various questions regarding their medical school experience.Â

Description of the data and file structure

The data is structured so that each row is an individual response. A researcher could analyze the data to see what demographic factors are related to various survey responses.Â

There are certain questions on the survey that respondents could respond "NA" to if the question did not apply to them. For example, the last question on the survey asks,

If you are an MS4, do you feel ready to be a doctor and take care of patients next year as an intern?

...

Annual Resident Population Estimates by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin; for the United States, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019 // Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division // The contents of this file are released on a rolling basis from December through June. // Note: 'In combination' means in combination with one or more other races. The sum of the five race-in-combination groups adds to more than the total population because individuals may report more than one race. Hispanic origin is considered an ethnicity, not a race. Hispanics may be of any race. Responses of 'Some Other Race' from the 2010 Census are modified. This results in differences between the population for specific race categories shown for the 2010 Census population in this file versus those in the original 2010 Census data. The estimates are based on the 2010 Census and reflect changes to the April 1, 2010 population due to the Count Question Resolution program and geographic program revisions. // Current data on births, deaths, and migration are used to calculate population change since the 2010 Census. An annual time series of estimates is produced, beginning with the census and extending to the vintage year. The vintage year (e.g., Vintage 2019) refers to the final year of the time series. The reference date for all estimates is July 1, unless otherwise specified. With each new issue of estimates, the entire estimates series is revised. Additional information, including historical and intercensal estimates, evaluation estimates, demographic analysis, research papers, and methodology is available on website: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html.

The General Household Survey (GHS) was a continuous national survey of people living in private households conducted on an annual basis, by the Social Survey Division of the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The main aim of the survey was to collect data on a range of core topics, covering household, family and individual information. This information was used by government departments and other organisations for planning, policy and monitoring purposes, and to present a picture of households, family and people in Great Britain. From 2008, the General Household Survey became a module of the Integrated Household Survey (IHS). In recognition, the survey was renamed the General Lifestyle Survey (GLF). The GLF closed in 2011.

Secure Access GLF
The Secure Access version includes additional, detailed variables not included in either the standard 'End User Licence' (EUL) version (see under GN 33090). Not all variables are available for all years, but extra variables that can typically be found in the Secure Access version but not in the EUL version relate to:

• geography: postcodes (anonymised prior to 2009)
• employment details, including economic status, self-employment, number of employees
• employment and training schemes
• reason for reduction in income
• looking for work
• benefits
• borrowing money and bill arrears
• nationality
• migration, including when arrived in UK and previous country of residence
• ethnicity
• religious identity

Prospective users of the Secure Access version of the GLF will need to fulfil additional requirements, commencing with the completion of an extra application form to demonstrate to the data owners exactly why they need access to the extra, more detailed variables, in order to obtain permission to use that version. Secure Access users must also complete face-to-face training and agree to Secure Access' User Agreement and Breaches Penalties Policy (see 'Access' section below). Therefore, users are encouraged to download and inspect the EUL version of the data prior to ordering the Secure Access version. Further details and links for all GLF studies available from the UK Data Archive can be found via the General Lifestyle Survey series web page.

Geographical references: postcodes
The postcodes available in the Secure Access version of the data prior to 2009 are pseudo-anonymised postcodes. The real postcodes were not available due to the potential risk of identification of the observations. However, these replacement postcodes retain the inherent nested characteristics of real postcodes, and will allow researchers to aggregate observations to other geographic units, e.g. wards, super output areas, etc. In the dataset, the variable of the replacement postcode is 'new_PC'.

History
The GHS started in 1971 and has been carried out continuously since then, except for breaks in 1997-1998 when the survey was reviewed, and in 1999-2000 when the survey was redeveloped. Following the 1997 review, the survey was relaunched from April 2000 with a different design. The relevant development work and the changes made are fully described in the Living in Britain report for the 2000-2001 survey. Following its review, the GHS was changed to comprise two elements: the continuous survey and extra modules, or 'trailers'. The continuous survey remained unchanged from 2000 to 2004, apart from essential adjustments to take account of, for example, changes in benefits and pensions. The GHS retained its modular structure and this allowed a number of different trailers to be included for each of those years, to a plan agreed by sponsoring government departments.

Further changes to the GHS methodology from 2005
From April 1994 to 2005, the GHS was conducted on a financial year basis, with fieldwork spread evenly from April of one year to March the following year. However, in 2005 the survey period reverted to a calendar year and the whole of the annual sample was surveyed in the nine months from April to December 2005. Future surveys will run from January to December each year, hence the title date change to single year from 2005 onwards. Since the 2005 GHS (EUL version held under SN 5640) does not cover the January-March quarter, this affects annual estimates for topics which are subject to seasonal variation. To rectify this, where the questions were the same in 2005 as in 2004-2005, the final quarter of the latter survey was added (weighted in the correct proportion) to the nine months of the 2005 survey. Furthermore, in 2005, the European Union (EU) made a legal obligation (EU-SILC) for member states to collect additional statistics on income and living conditions. In addition to this the EU-SILC data cover poverty and social exclusion. These statistics are used to help plan and monitor European social policy by comparing poverty indicators and changes over time across the EU. The EU-SILC requirement has been integrated into the GHS, leading to large-scale changes in the 2005 survey questionnaire. The trailers on 'Views of your Local Area' and 'Dental Health' were removed. Other changes were made to many of the standard questionnaire sections, details of which may be found in the GHS 2005 documentation.

Further changes to the GLF methodology from 2008
As noted above, the General Household Survey (GHS) was renamed the General Lifestyle Survey (GLF) in 2008. The sample design is the same as the GHS before, and the questionnaire remains largely the same. The main change is that the GLF then included the IHS core questions, which are common to all of the separate modules that together comprise the IHS. Some of these core questions are simply questions that were previously asked in the same or a similar format on all of the IHS component surveys (including the GLF). The core questions cover employment, smoking prevalence, general health, ethnicity, citizenship and national identity. These questions are asked by proxy if an interview is not possible with the selected respondent (that is a member of the household can answer on behalf of other respondents in the household). This is a departure from the GHS which did not ask smoking prevalence and general health questions by proxy, whereas the GLF does from 2008. For details on other changes to the GLF questionnaire, please see the GLF 2008 documentation.

Changes to the drinking section
There have been a number of revisions to the methodology that is used to produce the alcohol consumption estimates. In 2006, the average number of units assigned to the different drink types and the assumption around the average size of a wine glass was updated, resulting in significantly increased consumption estimates. In addition to the revised method, a new question about wine glass size was included in the survey in 2008. Respondents were asked whether they have consumed small (125 ml), standard (175 ml) or large (250 ml) glasses of wine. The data from this question are used when calculating the number of units of alcohol consumed by the respondent. It is assumed that a small glass contains 1.5 units, a standard glass contains 2 units and a large glass contains 3 units. (In 2006 and 2007 it was assumed that all respondents drank from a standard 175 ml glass containing 2 units.) The datasets contain the original set of variables based on the original methodology, as well as those based on the revised and (for 2008 onwards) updated methodologies. Further details on these changes are provided in the GHS 2006 and GLF/GLS 2008 documentation.

Further information may be found on the ONS GLF webpages.

Correction of erroneous variables in individual 2008 data file
The 'source of income' variables (SrcInc01-14 and SrcIncT1-T5) in the individual file for 2008 have been revised in October 2011 to correct erroneous values in the previous version.

Change in household serial number variable
The household serial number variable 'Hserial' has been replaced by the variable 'HholdId' in the 2008 individual and household files.

The second edition (September 2013) includes data for 2009-2010. Data for 2011 were added in 2017, after the ONS withdrawal of the Special Licence version.

Sample data for participants who were volunteers, runners/walkers who volunteer and runners/walkers.

Association between Vit-D intake (Q.9—see S1 File) and age, gender, ethnicity, BMI, skin type, sun exposure and skin coverage.

Relative concentration of the Northern California region's American Indian population. The variable AIANALN records all individuals who select American Indian or Alaska Native as their SOLE racial identity in response to the Census questionnaire, regardless of their response to the Hispanic ethnicity question. Both Hispanic and non-Hispanic in the Census questionnaire are potentially associated with American Indian / Alaska Native race alone. IMPORTANT: this self reported ancestry and Tribal membership are distinct identities and one does not automatically imply the other. These data should not be interpreted as a distribution of "Tribal people." Numerous Rancherias in the Northern California region account for the wide distribution of very to extremely high concentrations of American Indians outside the San Francisco Bay Area.

"Relative concentration" is a measure that compares the proportion of population within each Census block group data unit that identify as American Indian / Alaska Native alone to the proportion of all people that live within the 1,207 block groups in the Northern California RRK region that identify as American Indian / Alaska native alone. Example: if 5.2% of people in a block group identify as AIANALN, the block group has twice the proportion of AIANALN individuals compared to the Northern California RRK region (2.6%), and more than three times the proportion compared to the entire state of California (1.6%). If the local proportion is twice the regional proportion, then AIANALN individuals are highly concentrated locally.

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines were key to controlling the pandemic and vaccination has been discussed extensively by the media and the public since 2020. We aimed to explore parents’ attitudes towards routine childhood vaccination since COVID-19 and how the pandemic impacted their experiences of getting their child vaccinated.MethodsWe used a mixed-methods approach—involving a questionnaire survey followed by focus groups. We partnered with The Mosaic Community Trust, an ethnic minority women’s group based in a deprived area of North-West London, United Kingdom (UK) with historically low childhood vaccine uptake. Descriptive findings from the questionnaires were reported and chi-square analyses performed to examine differences by ethnicity. Thematic analysis of the free-text questionnaire responses and focus groups was undertaken, guided by the COM-B model of Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation.ResultsBetween Jun-Oct 2022, 518 parents completed the questionnaire (25% from ethnic minorities). Between March-May 2023 we held four focus groups with 22 parents (45% from ethnic minorities). Most parents (>90%) thought routine childhood vaccines for children were important. Over a third (38%) of all parents reported having more questions about childhood vaccines since COVID-19, though among parents belonging to an ethnicity group other than white, 59% said they had more questions compared to those of any white ethnicity group (30%, (p =