Abstract

The 2022 Philippines National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS) was implemented by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). Data collection took place from May 2 to June 22, 2022.

The primary objective of the 2022 NDHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the NDHS collected information on fertility, fertility preferences, family planning practices, childhood mortality, maternal and child health, nutrition, knowledge and attitudes regarding HIV/AIDS, violence against women, child discipline, early childhood development, and other health issues.

The information collected through the NDHS is intended to assist policymakers and program managers in designing and evaluating programs and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population. The 2022 NDHS also provides indicators anchored to the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the new Philippine Development Plan for 2023 to 2028.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49, and all children aged 0-4 resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling scheme provides data representative of the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas separately, and for each of the country’s administrative regions. The sample selection methodology for the 2022 NDHS was based on a two-stage stratified sample design using the Master Sample Frame (MSF) designed and compiled by the PSA. The MSF was constructed based on the listing of households from the 2010 Census of Population and Housing and updated based on the listing of households from the 2015 Census of Population. The first stage involved a systematic selection of 1,247 primary sampling units (PSUs) distributed by province or HUC. A PSU can be a barangay, a portion of a large barangay, or two or more adjacent small barangays.

In the second stage, an equal take of either 22 or 29 sample housing units were selected from each sampled PSU using systematic random sampling. In situations where a housing unit contained one to three households, all households were interviewed. In the rare situation where a housing unit contained more than three households, no more than three households were interviewed. The survey interviewers were instructed to interview only the preselected housing units. No replacements and no changes of the preselected housing units were allowed in the implementing stage in order to prevent bias. Survey weights were calculated, added to the data file, and applied so that weighted results are representative estimates of indicators at the regional and national levels.

All women age 15–49 who were either usual residents of the selected households or visitors who stayed in the households the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Among women eligible for an individual interview, one woman per household was selected for a module on women’s safety.

For further details on sample design, see APPENDIX A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used for the 2022 NDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire. The questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s model questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to the Philippines. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government agencies, academe, and international agencies. The survey protocol was reviewed by the ICF Institutional Review Board.

After all questionnaires were finalized in English, they were translated into six major languages: Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocano, Bikol, Hiligaynon, and Waray. The Household and Woman’s Questionnaires were programmed into tablet computers to allow for computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) for data collection purposes, with the capability to choose any of the languages for each questionnaire.

Cleaning operations

Processing the 2022 NDHS data began almost as soon as fieldwork started, and data security procedures were in place in accordance with confidentiality of information as provided by Philippine laws. As data collection was completed in each PSU or cluster, all electronic data files were transferred securely via SyncCloud to a server maintained by the PSA Central Office in Quezon City. These data files were registered and checked for inconsistencies, incompleteness, and outliers. The field teams were alerted to any inconsistencies and errors while still in the area of assignment. Timely generation of field check tables allowed for effective monitoring of fieldwork, including tracking questionnaire completion rates. Only the field teams, project managers, and NDHS supervisors in the provincial, regional, and central offices were given access to the CAPI system and the SyncCloud server.

A team of secondary editors in the PSA Central Office carried out secondary editing, which involved resolving inconsistencies and recoding “other” responses; the former was conducted during data collection, and the latter was conducted following the completion of the fieldwork. Data editing was performed using the CSPro software package. The secondary editing of the data was completed in August 2022. The final cleaning of the data set was carried out by data processing specialists from The DHS Program in September 2022.

Response rate

A total of 35,470 households were selected for the 2022 NDHS sample, of which 30,621 were found to be occupied. Of the occupied households, 30,372 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 99%. In the interviewed households, 28,379 women age 15–49 were identified as eligible for individual interviews. Interviews were completed with 27,821 women, yielding a response rate of 98%.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and in 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 2022 Philippines National Demographic and Health Survey (2022 NDHS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling 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 2022 NDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical 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% 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 2022 NDHS sample was the result of a multistage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearization method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables

• Household age distribution
• Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
• Age displacement at age 14/15
• Age displacement at age 49/50
• Pregnancy outcomes by years preceding the survey
• Completeness of reporting
• Observation of handwashing facility
• School attendance by single year of age
• Vaccination cards photographed
• Population pyramid
• Five-year mortality rates

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the final report.

This table contains 76416 series, with data for years 2000 - 2000 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (199 items: Canada; Health and Community Services St. John's Region; Newfoundland and Labrador (Peer group H); Newfoundland and Labrador; Health and Community Services Eastern Region; Newfoundland and Labrador (Peer group D) ...) Age group (8 items: Total; 40 years and over; 40 to 44 years; 45 to 64 years; 45 to 54 years ...) Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test (6 items: Total; prostate-specific antigen test; Prostate-specific antigen test; 1 year to less than 2 years ago; Prostate-specific antigen test; 2 or more years ago; Prostate-specific antigen test; less than one year ago ...) Characteristics (8 items: Number of persons; Low 95% confidence interval; number of persons; High 95% confidence interval; number of persons; Coefficient of variation for number of persons ...).

These datasets are derived from the boundaries of the Barangays as observed at the end of April 2016 as per the Philippine Geographic Standard Code (PSGC) dataset. It has been generated on the basis of the layer created by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) in the context of the 2015 population census. These datasets have been vetted by staff at The Carl Vinson Institute of Government's Office of Information Technology Outreach Services (ITOS) according to their COD assessment protocol found in the COD Technical Support Package (https://sites.google.com/site/commonoperationaldataset/geodata-preparation-manual/itos-process).
Acknowledge PSA and NAMRIA as the sources. LMB is still the source of official administrative boundaries of the Philippines. In the absence of available official administrative boundary, the IMTWG have agreed to clean and use the PSA administrative boundaries which are used to facilitate data collection of surveys and censuses. The dataset can only be considered as indicative boundaries and not official. * For administrative level 4 (Barangay) please contact the contributor (OCHA Philippines) via this page. This COD replaces https://data.humdata.org/dataset/philippines-administrative-boundaries

Philippines administrative levels:

(0) Country

(1) Region (Filipino: rehiyon)

(2) Provinces (Filipino: lalawigan, probinsiya) and independent cities (Filipino: lungsod, siyudad/ciudad, dakbayan, lakanbalen)

(3) Municipalities (Filipino: bayan, balen, bungto, banwa, ili) and component cities (Filipino: lungsod, siyudad/ciudad, dakbayan, dakbanwa, lakanbalen)

These shapefiles are suitable for database or ArcGIS joins to the sex and age disaggregated population statistics found on HDX here.

ObjectiveUsing the latest cohort study of prostate cancer patients, explore the epidemiological trend and prognostic factors, and develop a new nomogram to predict the specific survival rate of prostate cancer patients.MethodsPatients with prostate cancer diagnosed from January 1, 1975 to December 31, 2019 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database were extracted by SEER stat software for epidemiological trend analysis. General clinical information and follow-up data were also collected from 105 135 patients with pathologically diagnosed prostate cancer from January 1, 2010 to December 1, 2019. The factors affecting patient-specific survival were analyzed by Cox regression, and the factors with the greatest influence on specific survival were selected by stepwise regression method, and nomogram was constructed. The model was evaluated by calibration plots, ROC curves, Decision Curve Analysis and C-index.ResultsThere was no significant change in the age-adjusted incidence of prostate cancer from 1975 to 2019, with an average annual percentage change (AAPC) of 0.45 (95% CI:-0.87~1.80). Among the tumor grade, the most significant increase in the incidence of G2 prostate cancer was observed, with an AAPC of 2.99 (95% CI:1.47~4.54); the most significant decrease in the incidence of G4 prostate cancer was observed, with an AAPC of -10.39 (95% CI:-13.86~-6.77). Among the different tumor stages, the most significant reduction in the incidence of localized prostate cancer was observed with an AAPC of -1.83 (95% CI:-2.76~-0.90). Among different races, the incidence of prostate cancer was significantly reduced in American Indian or Alaska Native and Asian or Pacific Islander, with an AAPC of -3.40 (95% CI:-3.97~-2.82) and -2.74 (95% CI:-4.14~-1.32), respectively. Among the different age groups, the incidence rate was significantly increased in 15-54 and 55-64 age groups with AAPC of 4.03 (95% CI:2.73~5.34) and 2.50 (95% CI:0.96~4.05), respectively, and significantly decreased in ≥85 age group with AAPC of -2.50 (95% CI:-3.43~-1.57). In addition, age, tumor stage, race, PSA and gleason score were found to be independent risk factors affecting prostate cancer patient-specific survival. Age, tumor stage, PSA and gleason score were most strongly associated with prostate cancer patient-specific survival by stepwise regression screening, and nomogram prediction model was constructed using these factors. The Concordance indexes are 0.845 (95% CI:0.818~0.872) and 0.835 (95% CI:0.798~0.872) for the training and validation sets, respectively, and the area under the ROC curves (AUC) at 3, 6, and 9 years was 0.7 or more for both the training and validation set samples. The calibration plots indicated a good agreement between the predicted and actual values of the model.ConclusionsAlthough there was no significant change in the overall incidence of prostate cancer in this study, significant changes occurred in the incidence of prostate cancer with different characteristics. In addition, the nomogram prediction model of prostate cancer-specific survival rate constructed based on four factors has a high reference value, which helps physicians to correctly assess the patient-specific survival rate and provides a reference basis for patient diagnosis and prognosis evaluation.

Abstract

The 2017 Philippines National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS 2017) is a nationwide survey with a nationally representative sample of approximately 30,832 housing units. The primary objective of the survey is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. Specifically, the NDHS 2017 collected information on marriage, fertility levels, fertility preferences, awareness and use of family planning methods, breastfeeding, maternal and child health, child mortality, awareness and behavior regarding HIV/AIDS, women’s empowerment, domestic violence, and other health-related issues such as smoking.

The information collected through the NDHS 2017 is intended to assist policymakers and program managers in the Department of Health (DOH) and other organizations in designing and evaluating programs and strategies for improving the health of the country’s population.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents) and all women age 15-49 years resident in the sample household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling scheme provides data representative of the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas separately, and for each of the country’s administrative regions. The sample selection methodology for the NDHS 2017 is based on a two-stage stratified sample design using the Master Sample Frame (MSF), designed and compiled by the PSA. The MSF is constructed based on the results of the 2010 Census of Population and Housing and updated based on the 2015 Census of Population. The first stage involved a systematic selection of 1,250 primary sampling units (PSUs) distributed by province or HUC. A PSU can be a barangay, a portion of a large barangay, or two or more adjacent small barangays.

In the second stage, an equal take of either 20 or 26 sample housing units were selected from each sampled PSU using systematic random sampling. In situations where a housing unit contained one to three households, all households were interviewed. In the rare situation where a housing unit contained more than three households, no more than three households were interviewed. The survey interviewers were instructed to interview only the pre-selected housing units. No replacements and no changes of the preselected housing units were allowed in the implementing stage in order to prevent bias. Survey weights were calculated, added to the data file, and applied so that weighted results are representative estimates of indicators at the regional and national levels.

All women age 15-49 who were either permanent residents of the selected households or visitors who stayed in the households the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed. Among women eligible for an individual interview, one woman per household was selected for a module on domestic violence.

For further details on sample design, see Appendix A of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used for the NDHS 2017: the Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire. Both questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s standard Demographic and Health Survey (DHS-7) questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to the Philippines. Input was solicited from various stakeholders representing government agencies, universities, and international agencies.

Cleaning operations

The processing of the NDHS 2017 data began almost as soon as fieldwork started. As data collection was completed in each PSU, all electronic data files were transferred via an Internet file streaming system (IFSS) to the PSA central office in Quezon City. These data files were registered and checked for inconsistencies, incompleteness, and outliers. The field teams were alerted to any inconsistencies and errors while still in the PSU. Secondary editing involved resolving inconsistencies and the coding of openended questions; the former was carried out in the central office by a senior data processor, while the latter was taken on by regional coordinators and central office staff during a 5-day workshop following the completion of the fieldwork. Data editing was carried out using the CSPro software package. The concurrent processing of the data offered a distinct advantage, because it maximized the likelihood of the data being error-free and accurate. Timely generation of field check tables allowed for more effective monitoring. The secondary editing of the data was completed by November 2017. The final cleaning of the data set was carried out by data processing specialists from The DHS Program by the end of December 2017.

Response rate

A total of 31,791 households were selected for the sample, of which 27,855 were occupied. Of the occupied households, 27,496 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 99%. In the interviewed households, 25,690 women age 15-49 were identified for individual interviews; interviews were completed with 25,074 women, yielding a response rate of 98%.

The household response rate is slightly lower in urban areas than in rural areas (98% and 99%, respectively); however, there is no difference by urban-rural residence in response rates among women (98% for each).

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and sampling errors. Nonsampling 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 Philippines National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS) 2017 to minimize this type of error, nonsampling 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 NDHS 2017 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 among all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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% 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 NDHS 2017 sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearization method to estimate variances for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix B of the survey final report.

Data appraisal

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

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix C of the survey final report.

Unemployment Rate in Philippines increased to 4.10 percent in April from 3.90 percent in March of 2025. This dataset provides - Philippines Unemployment Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

PSA levels categorised by age group.

Indicator 5.2.2The proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by age and place of occurrence.Methodology:This indicator calls for disaggregation by age group and place of occurrence. No standard definitions and methods have been globally agreed yet to collect data on the place where the violence occurs, therefore this is not presented at this point in the computation method below. Number of women and girls aged 15 years and above who experience sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months divided by the number of women and girls aged 15 years and above in the population multiplied by 100.Data Source:Ministry of Interior and PSA calculation.

PURPOSE:

For patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent/oligoprogressive lymph node metastases from PCa, metastases-directed therapy is an emerging strategy. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the oncological outcome and pattern of recurrence in patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to lymph node metastases.

METHODS:

In this multi-institutional analysis, patients with a maximum of five lymph node metastases from PCa treated with SBRT were included. Primary endpoints of the analysis were local control (LC), out-of-field nodal progression-free survival (NPFS), overall progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS:

109 patients and 155 lymph node metastases were evaluated. Patients' median age was 70.8 years (range 51-84) and median PSA before SBRT was 1.88 ng/ml (range 0.3-45.5 ng/ml). The dose delivered to the target ranged from 25 to 48 Gy in 4-7 fractions; median BED_1.5 Gy was 198 Gy (range 108.3-432 Gy). With a median follow-up of 16 months, LC rates at 1 and 3 years were 93% and 86%, respectively. In-field progression of disease was observed in 11 (7%) lesions. One- and 3‑year NPFS was 59% and 29%, and median NPFS was 15 months. Rates of OS at 1 and 3 years were 100% and 95%. The median time to administration of a systemic treatment after SBRT was 7.8 months (1.7-54.8).

CONCLUSION:

SBRT is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in the management of lymph node metastases from PCa. Prospective trials are necessary to better select patients who benefit most from this ablative focal treatment and better define the recurrence patterns.

†Only 95th percentile was documented in [19].

Age groups.

1Pregnant: up to 14 weeks gestational age at enrolment as defined by abdominal ultrasound;2Vaginal Practices: using other substances than the use of water, soap and/or fingers alone;3HIV-positive women: on antiretroviral treatment for at least 6 months, currently asymptomatic, and a CD4 count of more than 350 cells/µl.4N (%) of women with the characteristic; mean/median (range) when otherwise specified;5Last 3 months prior to screening visit;6Sexual risk taking: Low risk: 1 or no partners in last year AND did not have any partner (in the last 3 months) with multiple partners AND age first sex at least 15 years; Medium risk: 2 partners last year OR had at least one sexual partner (in the last 3 months) who had multiple partners; High risk: sex worker OR at least 3 partners last year OR at had at least one sexual partner with HIV in the last 3 months OR age first sex less than 15 years.7Recent vaginal sex: vaginal sex this morning and/or yesterday evening before enrolment visit;8Prostate specific antigen present in vaginal fluid, including weak reaction.9With partners in the 3 months prior to enrolment;10Most of the time/every time.11Data for Trichomonas vaginalis testing was unavailable for 8 women, HSV-2 for one, and Nugent scores slides were unreadable at screening for 36 and at enrolment for 41.Sociodemographic, behavioural, and clinical characteristics of the study population by group.

A: Adjusted for age, margin, Gleason score, tumor stage, PSA, family history of PCa, smoking status.B: Adjusted for age, tumor stage, tumour grade, PSA, smoking satus.C: Adjusted for age, Gleason score, tumor stage, PSA,familiy history of PCa, smoking status, and RP status.MAF: minor allele frequency; BCR: biochemical recurrence; Non-BCR: patients without biochemical recurrence; NA: not available.There are two groups of patients in study by Nock et al. The data set of Nock NL, 2009 (1) is consist of Caucasian population and Nock NL, 2009 (2) data set is consist of African-Americans.

Meningococcal meningitis poses a significant public health burden in the meningitis belt region of sub-Saharan Africa. The introduction of the meningococcal PsA-TT vaccine (MenAfriVac®) has successfully eliminated Neisseria meningitidis serogroup A (NmA) cases in the region. However, the duration of post-vaccination immunity and the need for booster doses remain uncertain. To address this knowledge gap, we developed computational models using machine learning techniques to improve the effectiveness of modeling in guiding vaccination strategies for the African meningitis belt. Using serologic data from previous clinical trials of PsA-TT, we proposed a short-term and a long-term model that integrated demographic and medical variables (such as age, height and weight) with previous antibody titer levels and vaccination information to predict NmA antibody titer levels following vaccination. In the short-term model, we found moderately high performance (R-squared = 0.59) for out-of-training-data subjects and even better performance (R squared = 0.83) in the long-term evaluation. Our models estimated the half-life of the vaccine to be 13.9 years for the study population overall, similar to previously reported estimates. Machine learning techniques offer several advantages over previous approaches, as they do not require multiple readings from the same subject, can be rigorously validated using a subset of subject data not used for training. The proposed approach also facilitates the interpretation of the relationship between input variables and antibody levels at a population level. By incorporating subject-specific demographic and medical variables, our models could potentially be used to tailor vaccination schedules to at-risk populations.