BY: Maternal Mortality Ratio: National Estimate: per 100,000 Live Births data was reported at 1.000 Ratio in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.000 Ratio for 2013. BY: Maternal Mortality Ratio: National Estimate: per 100,000 Live Births data is updated yearly, averaging 20.000 Ratio from Dec 1985 (Median) to 2014, with 26 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 30.000 Ratio in 1991 and a record low of 0.000 Ratio in 2013. BY: Maternal Mortality Ratio: National Estimate: per 100,000 Live Births data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Belarus – Table BY.World Bank.WDI: Social: Health Statistics. Maternal mortality ratio is the number of women who die from pregnancy-related causes while pregnant or within 42 days of pregnancy termination per 100,000 live births.;The country data compiled, adjusted and used in the estimation model by the Maternal Mortality Estimation Inter-Agency Group (MMEIG). The country data were compiled from the following sources: civil registration and vital statistics; specialized studies on maternal mortality; population based surveys and censuses; other available data sources including data from surveillance sites.;;

BY: Tuberculosis Treatment Success Rate: % of New Cases data was reported at 87.000 % in 2022. This records an increase from the previous number of 84.000 % for 2021. BY: Tuberculosis Treatment Success Rate: % of New Cases data is updated yearly, averaging 85.000 % from Dec 2003 (Median) to 2022, with 20 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 93.000 % in 2005 and a record low of 71.000 % in 2011. BY: Tuberculosis Treatment Success Rate: % of New Cases data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Belarus – Table BY.World Bank.WDI: Social: Health Statistics. Tuberculosis treatment success rate is the percentage of all new tuberculosis cases (or new and relapse cases for some countries) registered under a national tuberculosis control programme in a given year that successfully completed treatment, with or without bacteriological evidence of success ('cured' and 'treatment completed' respectively).;World Health Organization, Global Tuberculosis Report.;Weighted average;Aggregate data by groups are computed based on the groupings for the World Bank fiscal year in which the data was released by the World Health Organization.

Data here contain and describe an open-source structured query language (SQLite) portable database containing high resolution mass spectrometry data (MS1 and MS2) for per- and polyfluorinated alykl substances (PFAS) and associated metadata regarding their measurement techniques, quality assurance metrics, and the samples from which they were produced. These data are stored in a format adhering to the Database Infrastructure for Mass Spectrometry (DIMSpec) project. That project produces and uses databases like this one, providing a complete toolkit for non-targeted analysis. See more information about the full DIMSpec code base - as well as these data for demonstration purposes - at GitHub (https://github.com/usnistgov/dimspec) or view the full User Guide for DIMSpec (https://pages.nist.gov/dimspec/docs). Files of most interest contained here include the database file itself (dimspec_nist_pfas.sqlite) as well as an entity relationship diagram (ERD.png) and data dictionary (DIMSpec for PFAS_1.0.1.20230615_data_dictionary.json) to elucidate the database structure and assist in interpretation and use.

WHO European Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative (COSI) is a systematic process of collecting, analysing, interpreting and disseminating descriptive information to monitor excess body weight. COSI aims to measure trends (based on measured data) in overweight and obesity in children aged 7,0-7,9 and 9,0-9,9 years, to monitor the progress of the epidemic and reverse it. COSI collect data about school nutrition and physical activity environment.

Over 40 Member States of the WHO European Region will participate in the fifth round of COSI during the 2018–2019 school year.

The MIT-BIH Arrhythmia Database contains 48 half-hour excerpts of two-channel ambulatory ECG recordings, obtained from 47 subjects studied by the BIH Arrhythmia Laboratory between 1975 and 1979. Twenty-three recordings were chosen at random from a set of 4000 24-hour ambulatory ECG recordings collected from a mixed population of inpatients (about 60%) and outpatients (about 40%) at Boston's Beth Israel Hospital; the remaining 25 recordings were selected from the same set to include less common but clinically significant arrhythmias that would not be well-represented in a small random sample.

About OPCRD

Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD) is a real-world, longitudinal, research database that provides anonymised data to support scientific, medical, public health and exploratory research. OPCRD is established, funded and maintained by Optimum Patient Care Limited (OPC) – which is a not-for-profit social enterprise that has been providing quality improvement programmes and research support services to general practices across the UK since 2005.

Key Features of OPCRD

OPCRD has been purposefully designed to facilitate real-world data collection and address the growing demand for observational and pragmatic medical research, both in the UK and internationally. Data held in OPCRD is representative of routine clinical care and thus enables the study of ‘real-world’ effectiveness and health care utilisation patterns for chronic health conditions.

OPCRD unique qualities which set it apart from other research data resources: • De-identified electronic medical records of more than 24.9 million patients • OPCRD covers all major UK primary care clinical systems • OPCRD covers approximately 35% of the UK population • One of the biggest primary care research networks in the world, with over 1,175 practices • Linked patient reported outcomes for over 68,000 patients including Covid-19 patient reported data • Linkage to secondary care data sources including Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)

Data Available in OPCRD

OPCRD has received data contributions from over 1,175 practices and currently holds de-identified research ready data for over 24.9 million patients or data subjects. This includes longitudinal primary care patient data and any data relevant to the management of patients in primary care, and thus covers all conditions. The data is derived from both electronic health records (EHR) data and patient reported data from patient questionnaires delivered as part of quality improvement. OPCRD currently holds over 68,000 patient reported questionnaire data on Covid-19, asthma, COPD and rare diseases.

Approvals and Governance

OPCRD has NHS research ethics committee (REC) approval to provide anonymised data for scientific and medical research since 2010, with its most recent approval in 2020 (NHS HRA REC ref: 20/EM/0148). OPCRD is governed by the Anonymised Data Ethics and Protocols Transparency committee (ADEPT). All research conducted using anonymised data from OPCRD must gain prior approval from ADEPT. Proceeds from OPCRD data access fees and detailed feasibility assessments are re-invested into OPC services for the continued free provision of patient quality improvement programmes for contributing practices and patients.

For more information on OPCRD please visit: https://opcrd.co.uk/

The website shows data on the plan and implementation of the health services program by individual health activities (VZD) :

• hospital medical activity,
• general outpatient medical activity,
• specialist outpatient medical activity,
• dental practice,
• other health activities,
• activity of accommodation facilities for patient care,
• social care without accommodation for the elderly and disabled,
• production of pharmaceutical preparations,
• retail trade in specialized stores with pharmaceutical products,
• compulsory social security activity.

Within the framework of each activity, the data for each period are shown separately by contractors and together, the activity by regional units of ZZZS and the activity data at the level of Slovenia together.

Data on the plan and implementation of the health services program are shown in the accounting unit (e.g. points, quotients, weights, groups of comparable cases, non-medical care day, care, days...), which are used to calculate the work performed in the field of individual activities.

The publication of information about the plan and implementation of the program on the ZZZS website is primarily intended for the professional public. The displayed program plan for an individual contractor refers to the defined billing period. (example: The plan for the period 1-3 201X is calculated as 3/12 of the annual plan agreed in the contract).

The data on the implementation of the program represents the implementation of the program at an individual provider for insured persons who benefited from medical services from him during the accounting period. Data on the realization of the program do not refer to persons insured in accordance with the European legal order and bilateral agreements on social security. Data for individual contractors are classified by regional units based on the contractor's headquarters. The content of the data on the "number of cases" is defined in the Instruction on recording and accounting for medical services and issued materials.

The institute reserves the right to change the data, in the event of subsequently discovered irregularities after already published on the Internet.

Hydrographic and Impairment Statistics (HIS) is a National Park Service (NPS) Water Resources Division (WRD) project established to track certain goals created in response to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA). One water resources management goal established by the Department of the Interior under GRPA requires NPS to track the percent of its managed surface waters that are meeting Clean Water Act (CWA) water quality standards. This goal requires an accurate inventory that spatially quantifies the surface water hydrography that each bureau manages and a procedure to determine and track which waterbodies are or are not meeting water quality standards as outlined by Section 303(d) of the CWA. This project helps meet this DOI GRPA goal by inventorying and monitoring in a geographic information system for the NPS: (1) CWA 303(d) quality impaired waters and causes; and (2) hydrographic statistics based on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). Hydrographic and 303(d) impairment statistics were evaluated based on a combination of 1:24,000 (NHD) and finer scale data (frequently provided by state GIS layers).

Abstract

The fourth edition of the Global Findex offers a lens into how people accessed and used financial services during the COVID-19 pandemic, when mobility restrictions and health policies drove increased demand for digital services of all kinds.

The Global Findex is the world's most comprehensive database on financial inclusion. It is also the only global demand-side data source allowing for global and regional cross-country analysis to provide a rigorous and multidimensional picture of how adults save, borrow, make payments, and manage financial risks. Global Findex 2021 data were collected from national representative surveys of about 128,000 adults in more than 120 economies. The latest edition follows the 2011, 2014, and 2017 editions, and it includes a number of new series measuring financial health and resilience and contains more granular data on digital payment adoption, including merchant and government payments.

The Global Findex is an indispensable resource for financial service practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and development professionals.

Geographic coverage

Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Nunavut (representing approximately 0.3 percent of the Canadian population) were excluded.

Analysis unit

Individual

Kind of data

Observation data/ratings [obs]

Sampling procedure

In most developing economies, Global Findex data have traditionally been collected through face-to-face interviews. Surveys are conducted face-to-face in economies where telephone coverage represents less than 80 percent of the population or where in-person surveying is the customary methodology. However, because of ongoing COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, face-to-face interviewing was not possible in some of these economies in 2021. Phone-based surveys were therefore conducted in 67 economies that had been surveyed face-to-face in 2017. These 67 economies were selected for inclusion based on population size, phone penetration rate, COVID-19 infection rates, and the feasibility of executing phone-based methods where Gallup would otherwise conduct face-to-face data collection, while complying with all government-issued guidance throughout the interviewing process. Gallup takes both mobile phone and landline ownership into consideration. According to Gallup World Poll 2019 data, when face-to-face surveys were last carried out in these economies, at least 80 percent of adults in almost all of them reported mobile phone ownership. All samples are probability-based and nationally representative of the resident adult population. Phone surveys were not a viable option in 17 economies that had been part of previous Global Findex surveys, however, because of low mobile phone ownership and surveying restrictions. Data for these economies will be collected in 2022 and released in 2023.

In economies where face-to-face surveys are conducted, the first stage of sampling is the identification of primary sampling units. These units are stratified by population size, geography, or both, and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size; otherwise, simple random sampling is used. Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. To increase the probability of contact and completion, attempts are made at different times of the day and, where possible, on different days. If an interview cannot be obtained at the initial sampled household, a simple substitution method is used. Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households. Each eligible household member is listed, and the hand-held survey device randomly selects the household member to be interviewed. For paper surveys, the Kish grid method is used to select the respondent. In economies where cultural restrictions dictate gender matching, respondents are randomly selected from among all eligible adults of the interviewer's gender.

In traditionally phone-based economies, respondent selection follows the same procedure as in previous years, using random digit dialing or a nationally representative list of phone numbers. In most economies where mobile phone and landline penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used.

The same respondent selection procedure is applied to the new phone-based economies. Dual frame (landline and mobile phone) random digital dialing is used where landline presence and use are 20 percent or higher based on historical Gallup estimates. Mobile phone random digital dialing is used in economies with limited to no landline presence (less than 20 percent).

For landline respondents in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is 80 percent or higher, random selection of respondents is achieved by using either the latest birthday or household enumeration method. For mobile phone respondents in these economies or in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is less than 80 percent, no further selection is performed. At least three attempts are made to reach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of day.

Sample size for Canada is 1007.

Mode of data collection

Landline and mobile telephone

Research instrument

Questionnaires are available on the website.

Sampling error estimates

Estimates of standard errors (which account for sampling error) vary by country and indicator. For country-specific margins of error, please refer to the Methodology section and corresponding table in Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli, Leora Klapper, Dorothe Singer, Saniya Ansar. 2022. The Global Findex Database 2021: Financial Inclusion, Digital Payments, and Resilience in the Age of COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank.

The Health Services Training Report (HST) Database tracks the overall number of Personnel and Accounting Integrated Data Systems (PAID) and Without Compensation (WOC) Trainee positions by the cooperating academic institutions for all medical center approved health services programs. Information in the database comes from all Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) who have Office of Academic Affiliations (OAA) approved HST programs. Worksheets and memos are distributed to participating VAMCs by the OAA annually. VAMC personnel enter the information electronically into the database located at the OAA Support Center (OAASC) in St. Louis, Missouri. The main user of this database is the OAA.

Abstract

Well-functioning financial systems serve a vital purpose, offering savings, credit, payment, and risk management products to people with a wide range of needs. Yet until now little had been known about the global reach of the financial sector - the extent of financial inclusion and the degree to which such groups as the poor, women, and youth are excluded from formal financial systems. Systematic indicators of the use of different financial services had been lacking for most economies.

The Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) database provides such indicators. This database contains the first round of Global Findex indicators, measuring how adults in more than 140 economies save, borrow, make payments, and manage risk. The data set can be used to track the effects of financial inclusion policies globally and develop a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how people around the world manage their day-to-day finances. By making it possible to identify segments of the population excluded from the formal financial sector, the data can help policy makers prioritize reforms and design new policies.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage.

Analysis unit

Individual

Universe

The target population is the civilian, non-institutionalized population 15 years and above.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Global Findex indicators are drawn from survey data collected by Gallup, Inc. over the 2011 calendar year, covering more than 150,000 adults in 148 economies and representing about 97 percent of the world's population. Since 2005, Gallup has surveyed adults annually around the world, using a uniform methodology and randomly selected, nationally representative samples. The second round of Global Findex indicators was collected in 2014 and is forthcoming in 2015. The set of indicators will be collected again in 2017.

Surveys were conducted face-to-face in economies where landline telephone penetration is less than 80 percent, or where face-to-face interviewing is customary. The first stage of sampling is the identification of primary sampling units, consisting of clusters of households. The primary sampling units are stratified by population size, geography, or both, and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size; otherwise, simple random sampling is used. Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. If an interview cannot be obtained at the initial sampled household, a simple substitution method is used. Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households by means of the Kish grid.

Surveys were conducted by telephone in economies where landline telephone penetration is over 80 percent. The telephone surveys were conducted using random digit dialing or a nationally representative list of phone numbers. In selected countries where cell phone penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used. Random respondent selection is achieved by using either the latest birthday or Kish grid method. At least three attempts are made to teach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of year.

The sample size in Afghanistan was 1,000 individuals. Gender-matched sampling was used during the final stage of selection.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was designed by the World Bank, in conjunction with a Technical Advisory Board composed of leading academics, practitioners, and policy makers in the field of financial inclusion. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Gallup, Inc. also provided valuable input. The questionnaire was piloted in over 20 countries using focus groups, cognitive interviews, and field testing. The questionnaire is available in 142 languages upon request.

Questions on insurance, mobile payments, and loan purposes were asked only in developing economies. The indicators on awareness and use of microfinance insitutions (MFIs) are not included in the public dataset. However, adults who report saving at an MFI are considered to have an account; this is reflected in the composite account indicator.

Sampling error estimates

Estimates of standard errors (which account for sampling error) vary by country and indicator. For country- and indicator-specific standard errors, refer to the Annex and Country Table in Demirguc-Kunt, Asli and L. Klapper. 2012. "Measuring Financial Inclusion: The Global Findex." Policy Research Working Paper 6025, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Abstract

The fourth edition of the Global Findex offers a lens into how people accessed and used financial services during the COVID-19 pandemic, when mobility restrictions and health policies drove increased demand for digital services of all kinds.

The Global Findex is the world's most comprehensive database on financial inclusion. It is also the only global demand-side data source allowing for global and regional cross-country analysis to provide a rigorous and multidimensional picture of how adults save, borrow, make payments, and manage financial risks. Global Findex 2021 data were collected from national representative surveys of about 128,000 adults in more than 120 economies. The latest edition follows the 2011, 2014, and 2017 editions, and it includes a number of new series measuring financial health and resilience and contains more granular data on digital payment adoption, including merchant and government payments.

The Global Findex is an indispensable resource for financial service practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and development professionals.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individual

Kind of data

Observation data/ratings [obs]

Sampling procedure

In most developing economies, Global Findex data have traditionally been collected through face-to-face interviews. Surveys are conducted face-to-face in economies where telephone coverage represents less than 80 percent of the population or where in-person surveying is the customary methodology. However, because of ongoing COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, face-to-face interviewing was not possible in some of these economies in 2021. Phone-based surveys were therefore conducted in 67 economies that had been surveyed face-to-face in 2017. These 67 economies were selected for inclusion based on population size, phone penetration rate, COVID-19 infection rates, and the feasibility of executing phone-based methods where Gallup would otherwise conduct face-to-face data collection, while complying with all government-issued guidance throughout the interviewing process. Gallup takes both mobile phone and landline ownership into consideration. According to Gallup World Poll 2019 data, when face-to-face surveys were last carried out in these economies, at least 80 percent of adults in almost all of them reported mobile phone ownership. All samples are probability-based and nationally representative of the resident adult population. Phone surveys were not a viable option in 17 economies that had been part of previous Global Findex surveys, however, because of low mobile phone ownership and surveying restrictions. Data for these economies will be collected in 2022 and released in 2023.

In economies where face-to-face surveys are conducted, the first stage of sampling is the identification of primary sampling units. These units are stratified by population size, geography, or both, and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size; otherwise, simple random sampling is used. Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. To increase the probability of contact and completion, attempts are made at different times of the day and, where possible, on different days. If an interview cannot be obtained at the initial sampled household, a simple substitution method is used. Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households. Each eligible household member is listed, and the hand-held survey device randomly selects the household member to be interviewed. For paper surveys, the Kish grid method is used to select the respondent. In economies where cultural restrictions dictate gender matching, respondents are randomly selected from among all eligible adults of the interviewer's gender.

In traditionally phone-based economies, respondent selection follows the same procedure as in previous years, using random digit dialing or a nationally representative list of phone numbers. In most economies where mobile phone and landline penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used.

The same respondent selection procedure is applied to the new phone-based economies. Dual frame (landline and mobile phone) random digital dialing is used where landline presence and use are 20 percent or higher based on historical Gallup estimates. Mobile phone random digital dialing is used in economies with limited to no landline presence (less than 20 percent).

For landline respondents in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is 80 percent or higher, random selection of respondents is achieved by using either the latest birthday or household enumeration method. For mobile phone respondents in these economies or in economies where mobile phone or landline penetration is less than 80 percent, no further selection is performed. At least three attempts are made to reach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of day.

Sample size for Kazakhstan is 1000.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Questionnaires are available on the website.

Sampling error estimates

Estimates of standard errors (which account for sampling error) vary by country and indicator. For country-specific margins of error, please refer to the Methodology section and corresponding table in Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli, Leora Klapper, Dorothe Singer, Saniya Ansar. 2022. The Global Findex Database 2021: Financial Inclusion, Digital Payments, and Resilience in the Age of COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Database Migration Solutions Market Outlook

The global database migration solutions market size is expected to grow significantly from $4.5 billion in 2023 to an impressive $14.7 billion by 2032, reflecting a robust CAGR of 14.2% during the forecast period. This substantial growth can be attributed to several factors, including the increasing adoption of cloud-based solutions, rising need for efficient database management, and the growing complexity and volume of data across various industry verticals.

One of the primary growth factors driving the database migration solutions market is the rapid digital transformation initiatives being undertaken by enterprises globally. As companies strive to modernize their IT infrastructure, there's a significant push towards adopting cloud-based systems and applications. This shift necessitates the migration of existing databases to new environments, spurring demand for database migration solutions. Additionally, the proliferation of big data and analytics is prompting organizations to migrate their databases to more powerful and flexible platforms that can handle vast amounts of data efficiently.

Another critical growth driver is the increasing focus on data security and compliance. As data breaches and cyber threats become more frequent and sophisticated, organizations are seeking robust migration solutions that ensure secure data transfer and compliance with regulatory standards. Database migration solutions offer advanced features such as data masking, encryption, and auditing, which help organizations maintain data integrity and security during the migration process. This emphasis on data security is particularly crucial for industries such as BFSI, healthcare, and government, where data sensitivity is paramount.

Cost-efficiency and operational agility are also significant factors contributing to the market's growth. Database migration solutions enable organizations to reduce their operational costs by streamlining the migration process and minimizing downtime. These solutions also offer scalability, allowing businesses to adjust their database resources according to their needs, thus enhancing operational agility. The ability to migrate databases without significant disruption to business operations is a compelling value proposition for enterprises of all sizes.

In the context of cloud migration, organizations are increasingly turning to Cloud Migration Tools to facilitate seamless transitions from on-premises systems to cloud environments. These tools are designed to simplify the migration process by automating tasks such as data transfer, application reconfiguration, and system integration. By leveraging cloud migration tools, businesses can minimize downtime, reduce migration risks, and ensure data integrity throughout the transition. As the demand for cloud-based solutions continues to rise, the market for cloud migration tools is expected to expand significantly, offering enterprises the ability to modernize their IT infrastructure efficiently.

From a regional perspective, North America is expected to hold a significant share of the database migration solutions market, driven by early adoption of advanced technologies and a strong presence of key market players. Meanwhile, the Asia Pacific region is anticipated to witness the highest growth rate, owing to the rapid expansion of the IT sector, increasing investments in cloud infrastructure, and rising demand for data management solutions in emerging economies such as China and India.

Type Analysis

The database migration solutions market can be segmented by type into cloud migration, on-premises migration, and hybrid migration. Cloud migration is anticipated to dominate the market due to the growing adoption of cloud computing across various industries. Organizations are increasingly transitioning their databases to cloud environments to leverage the benefits of scalability, flexibility, and cost-efficiency. The cloud migration segment is expected to witness a high growth rate as businesses continue to move away from legacy systems and embrace cloud infrastructure.

On-premises migration, while not as dominant as cloud migration, still holds significant relevance, especially for organizations with stringent data security and compliance requirements. Certain industries, such as BFSI and government, often prefer on-premises solutions to maintain control over their data and ensure compliance wit

This dataset contains parametric data (epicentre, magnitude, depth, etc) for over one million earthquakes worldwide. The dataset has been compiled gradually over a period of thirty years from original third-party catalogues, and parameters have not been revised by BGS, although erroneous entries have been flagged where found. The dataset is kept in two versions: the complete "master" version, in which all entries for any single earthquake from contributing catalogue are preserved, and the "pruned" version, in which each earthquake is represented by a single entry, selected from the contributing sources according to a hierarchy of preferences. The pruned version, which is intended to be free from duplicate entries for the same event, provides a starting point for studies of seismicity and seismic hazard anywhere in the world.

It has never been easier to solve any database related problem using any sequel language and the following gives an opportunity for you guys to understand how I was able to figure out some of the interline relationships between databases using Panoply.io tool.

I was able to insert coronavirus dataset and create a submittable, reusable result. I hope it helps you work in Data Warehouse environment.

The following is list of SQL commands performed on dataset attached below with the final output as stored in Exports Folder QUERY 1 SELECT "Province/State" As "Region", Deaths, Recovered, Confirmed FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated" WHERE Recovered>(Deaths/2) AND Deaths>0 Description: How will we estimate where Coronavirus has infiltrated, but there is effective recovery amongst patients? We can view those places by having Recovery twice more than the Death Toll.

Query 2 SELECT country, sum(confirmed) as "Confirmed Count", sum(Recovered) as "Recovered Count", sum(Deaths) as "Death Toll" FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated" WHERE Recovered>(Deaths/2) AND Confirmed>0 GROUP BY country

Description: Coronavirus Epidemic has infiltrated multiple countries, and the only way to be safe is by knowing the countries which have confirmed Coronavirus Cases. So here is a list of those countries

Query 3 SELECT country as "Countries where Coronavirus has reached" FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated" WHERE confirmed>0 GROUP BY country Description: Coronavirus Epidemic has infiltrated multiple countries, and the only way to be safe is by knowing the countries which have confirmed Coronavirus Cases. So here is a list of those countries.

Query 4 SELECT country, sum(suspected) as "Suspected Cases under potential CoronaVirus outbreak" FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated" WHERE suspected>0 AND deaths=0 AND confirmed=0 GROUP BY country ORDER BY sum(suspected) DESC

Description: Coronavirus is spreading at alarming rate. In order to know which countries are newly getting the virus is important because in these countries if timely measures are taken, it could prevent any causalities. Here is a list of suspected cases with no virus resulted deaths.

Query 5 SELECT country, sum(suspected) as "Coronavirus uncontrolled spread count and human life loss", 100*sum(suspected)/(SELECT sum((suspected)) FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated") as "Global suspected Exposure of Coronavirus in percentage" FROM "public"."coronavirus_updated" WHERE suspected>0 AND deaths=0 GROUP BY country ORDER BY sum(suspected) DESC Description: Coronavirus is getting stronger in particular countries, but how will we measure that? We can measure it by knowing the percentage of suspected patients amongst countries which still doesn’t have any Coronavirus related deaths. The following is a list.

After May 3, 2024, this dataset and webpage will no longer be updated because hospitals are no longer required to report data on COVID-19 hospital admissions, and hospital capacity and occupancy data, to HHS through CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network. Data voluntarily reported to NHSN after May 1, 2024, will be available starting May 10, 2024, at COVID Data Tracker Hospitalizations.

This time series dataset includes viral COVID-19 laboratory test [Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)] results from over 1,000 U.S. laboratories and testing locations including commercial and reference laboratories, public health laboratories, hospital laboratories, and other testing locations. Data are reported to state and jurisdictional health departments in accordance with applicable state or local law and in accordance with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (CARES Act Section 18115).

Data are provisional and subject to change.

Data presented here is representative of diagnostic specimens being tested - not individual people - and excludes serology tests where possible. Data presented might not represent the most current counts for the most recent 3 days due to the time it takes to report testing information. The data may also not include results from all potential testing sites within the jurisdiction (e.g., non-laboratory or point of care test sites) and therefore reflect the majority, but not all, of COVID-19 testing being conducted in the United States.

Sources: CDC COVID-19 Electronic Laboratory Reporting (CELR), Commercial Laboratories, State Public Health Labs, In-House Hospital Labs

Data for each state is sourced from either data submitted directly by the state health department via COVID-19 electronic laboratory reporting (CELR), or a combination of commercial labs, public health labs, and in-house hospital labs. Data is taken from CELR for states that either submit line level data or submit aggregate counts which do not include serology tests.

THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 2:10 AM EASTERN ON JUNE 28

OVERVIEW

2019 had the most mass killings since at least the 1970s, according to the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings Database.

In all, there were 45 mass killings, defined as when four or more people are killed excluding the perpetrator. Of those, 33 were mass shootings . This summer was especially violent, with three high-profile public mass shootings occurring in the span of just four weeks, leaving 38 killed and 66 injured.

A total of 229 people died in mass killings in 2019.

The AP's analysis found that more than 50% of the incidents were family annihilations, which is similar to prior years. Although they are far less common, the 9 public mass shootings during the year were the most deadly type of mass murder, resulting in 73 people's deaths, not including the assailants.

One-third of the offenders died at the scene of the killing or soon after, half from suicides.

About this Dataset

The Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database tracks all U.S. homicides since 2006 involving four or more people killed (not including the offender) over a short period of time (24 hours) regardless of weapon, location, victim-offender relationship or motive. The database includes information on these and other characteristics concerning the incidents, offenders, and victims.

The AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern database represents the most complete tracking of mass murders by the above definition currently available. Other efforts, such as the Gun Violence Archive or Everytown for Gun Safety may include events that do not meet our criteria, but a review of these sites and others indicates that this database contains every event that matches the definition, including some not tracked by other organizations.

This data will be updated periodically and can be used as an ongoing resource to help cover these events.

Using this Dataset

To get basic counts of incidents of mass killings and mass shootings by year nationwide, use these queries:

Mass killings by year

Mass shootings by year

To get these counts just for your state:

Filter killings by state

Definition of "mass murder"

Mass murder is defined as the intentional killing of four or more victims by any means within a 24-hour period, excluding the deaths of unborn children and the offender(s). The standard of four or more dead was initially set by the FBI.

This definition does not exclude cases based on method (e.g., shootings only), type or motivation (e.g., public only), victim-offender relationship (e.g., strangers only), or number of locations (e.g., one). The time frame of 24 hours was chosen to eliminate conflation with spree killers, who kill multiple victims in quick succession in different locations or incidents, and to satisfy the traditional requirement of occurring in a “single incident.”

Offenders who commit mass murder during a spree (before or after committing additional homicides) are included in the database, and all victims within seven days of the mass murder are included in the victim count. Negligent homicides related to driving under the influence or accidental fires are excluded due to the lack of offender intent. Only incidents occurring within the 50 states and Washington D.C. are considered.

Methodology

Project researchers first identified potential incidents using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR). Homicide incidents in the SHR were flagged as potential mass murder cases if four or more victims were reported on the same record, and the type of death was murder or non-negligent manslaughter.

Cases were subsequently verified utilizing media accounts, court documents, academic journal articles, books, and local law enforcement records obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Each data point was corroborated by multiple sources, which were compiled into a single document to assess the quality of information.

In case(s) of contradiction among sources, official law enforcement or court records were used, when available, followed by the most recent media or academic source.

Case information was subsequently compared with every other known mass murder database to ensure reliability and validity. Incidents listed in the SHR that could not be independently verified were excluded from the database.

Project researchers also conducted extensive searches for incidents not reported in the SHR during the time period, utilizing internet search engines, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspapers.com. Search terms include: [number] dead, [number] killed, [number] slain, [number] murdered, [number] homicide, mass murder, mass shooting, massacre, rampage, family killing, familicide, and arson murder. Offender, victim, and location names were also directly searched when available.

This project started at USA TODAY in 2012.

Contacts

Contact AP Data Editor Justin Myers with questions, suggestions or comments about this dataset at jmyers@ap.org. The Northeastern University researcher working with AP and USA TODAY is Professor James Alan Fox, who can be reached at j.fox@northeastern.edu or 617-416-4400.

This dataset includes bibliographic information for 501 papers that were published from 2010-April 2017 (time of search) and use online biodiversity databases for research purposes. Our overarching goal in this study is to determine how research uses of biodiversity data developed during a time of unprecedented growth of online data resources. We also determine uses with the highest number of citations, how online occurrence data are linked to other data types, and if/how data quality is addressed. Specifically, we address the following questions:

1.) What primary biodiversity databases have been cited in published research, and which

 databases have been cited most often?

2.) Is the biodiversity research community citing databases appropriately, and are

 the cited databases currently accessible online?

3.) What are the most common uses, general taxa addressed, and data linkages, and how

 have they changed over time?

4.) What uses have the highest impact, as measured through the mean number of citations

 per year?

5.) Are certain uses applied more often for plants/invertebrates/vertebrates?

6.) Are links to specific data types associated more often with particular uses?

7.) How often are major data quality issues addressed?

8.) What data quality issues tend to be addressed for the top uses?

Relevant papers for this analysis include those that use online and openly accessible primary occurrence records, or those that add data to an online database. Google Scholar (GS) provides full-text indexing, which was important to identify data sources that often appear buried in the methods section of a paper. Our search was therefore restricted to GS. All authors discussed and agreed upon representative search terms, which were relatively broad to capture a variety of databases hosting primary occurrence records. The terms included: “species occurrence” database (8,800 results), “natural history collection” database (634 results), herbarium database (16,500 results), “biodiversity database” (3,350 results), “primary biodiversity data” database (483 results), “museum collection” database (4,480 results), “digital accessible information” database (10 results), and “digital accessible knowledge” database (52 results)--note that quotations are used as part of the search terms where specific phrases are needed in whole. We downloaded all records returned by each search (or the first 500 if there were more) into a Zotero reference management database. About one third of the 2500 papers in the final dataset were relevant. Three of the authors with specialized knowledge of the field characterized relevant papers using a standardized tagging protocol based on a series of key topics of interest. We developed a list of potential tags and descriptions for each topic, including: database(s) used, database accessibility, scale of study, region of study, taxa addressed, research use of data, other data types linked to species occurrence data, data quality issues addressed, authors, institutions, and funding sources. Each tagged paper was thoroughly checked by a second tagger.

The final dataset of tagged papers allow us to quantify general areas of research made possible by the expansion of online species occurrence databases, and trends over time. Analyses of this data will be published in a separate quantitative review.

description: The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) database is used by Federal agencies to continuously manage an average of 1,000 advisory committees government-wide. This database is also used by the Congress to perform oversight of related Executive Branch programs and by the public, the media, and others, to stay abreast of important developments resulting from advisory committee activities. Although centrally supported by the General Services Administration's (GSA) Committee Management Secretariat, the database represents a true shared system wherein each participating agency and individual committee manager has responsibility for providing accurate and timely information that may be used to assure that the system's wide array of users has access to data required by FACA.; abstract: The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) database is used by Federal agencies to continuously manage an average of 1,000 advisory committees government-wide. This database is also used by the Congress to perform oversight of related Executive Branch programs and by the public, the media, and others, to stay abreast of important developments resulting from advisory committee activities. Although centrally supported by the General Services Administration's (GSA) Committee Management Secretariat, the database represents a true shared system wherein each participating agency and individual committee manager has responsibility for providing accurate and timely information that may be used to assure that the system's wide array of users has access to data required by FACA.

Open access and open data are becoming more prominent on the global research agenda. Funders are increasingly requiring grantees to deposit their raw research data in appropriate public archives or stores in order to facilitate the validation of results and further work by other researchers.

While the rise of open access has fundamentally changed the academic publishing landscape, the policies around data are reigniting the conversation around what universities can and should be doing to protect the assets generated at their institution. The main difference between an open access and open data policy is that there is not already a precedent or status quo of how academia deals with the dissemination of research that is not in the form of a traditional ‘paper’ publication.

As governments and funders of research see the benefit of open content, the creation of recommendations, mandates and enforcement of mandates are coming thick and fast.