This dataset provides a comprehensive overview of global population trends, historical data, and future projections. It includes detailed information for various countries and regions, encompassing key demographic indicators such as population size, growth rates, and density.

The dataset covers a broad time span, from 1980 to 2050, allowing for analysis of long-term population dynamics. It incorporates data from reputable sources like the United Nations Population Division and World Population Review, ensuring data accuracy and reliability.

Globally, about 25 percent of the population is under 15 years of age and 10 percent is over 65 years of age. Africa has the youngest population worldwide. In Sub-Saharan Africa, more than 40 percent of the population is below 15 years, and only three percent are above 65, indicating the low life expectancy in several of the countries. In Europe, on the other hand, a higher share of the population is above 65 years than the population under 15 years. Fertility rates The high share of children and youth in Africa is connected to the high fertility rates on the continent. For instance, South Sudan and Niger have the highest population growth rates globally. However, about 50 percent of the world’s population live in countries with low fertility, where women have less than 2.1 children. Some countries in Europe, like Latvia and Lithuania, have experienced a population decline of one percent, and in the Cook Islands, it is even above two percent. In Europe, the majority of the population was previously working-aged adults with few dependents, but this trend is expected to reverse soon, and it is predicted that by 2050, the older population will outnumber the young in many developed countries. Growing global population As of 2025, there are 8.1 billion people living on the planet, and this is expected to reach more than nine billion before 2040. Moreover, the global population is expected to reach 10 billions around 2060, before slowing and then even falling slightly by 2100. As the population growth rates indicate, a significant share of the population increase will happen in Africa.

In the middle of 2023, about 60 percent of the global population was living in Asia.The total world population amounted to 8.1 billion people on the planet. In other words 4.7 billion people were living in Asia as of 2023. Global populationDue to medical advances, better living conditions and the increase of agricultural productivity, the world population increased rapidly over the past century, and is expected to continue to grow. After reaching eight billion in 2023, the global population is estimated to pass 10 billion by 2060. Africa expected to drive population increase Most of the future population increase is expected to happen in Africa. The countries with the highest population growth rate in 2024 were mostly African countries. While around 1.47 billion people live on the continent as of 2024, this is forecast to grow to 3.9 billion by 2100. This is underlined by the fact that most of the countries wit the highest population growth rate are found in Africa. The growing population, in combination with climate change, puts increasing pressure on the world's resources.

Population, total in World was reported at 8142056446 in 2024, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. World - Population, total - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Context

While working on the gun violence data set, i wanted to normalize the number of incidents because some states are more populous than others so normalizing the gun incidents per million people gave me a different outlook towards the data. The source of this data is unofficial as the last numbers from US census bureau were available only from 2010. I just wanted to get a quick unofficial source of this data and stumbled upon this site

http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/

Content

Simple two columns - state and population as of 2018

Acknowledgements

http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/

Inspiration

Your data will be in front of the world's largest data science community. What questions do you want to see answered?

Analysis of ‘COVID-19 State Data’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/nightranger77/covid19-state-data on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

This dataset is a per-state amalgamation of demographic, public health and other relevant predictors for COVID-19.

Deaths, Infections and Tests by State

The COVID Tracking Project: https://covidtracking.com/data/api

Used positive, death and totalTestResults from the API for, respectively, Infected, Deaths and Tested in this dataset. Please read the documentation of the API for more context on those columns

Predictor Data and Sources

Population (2020)

Density is people per meter squared https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/

ICU Beds and Age 60+

https://khn.org/news/as-coronavirus-spreads-widely-millions-of-older-americans-live-in-counties-with-no-icu-beds/

GDP

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/gdp-by-state/

Income per capita (2018)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/per-capita-income-by-state/

Gini

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_Gini_coefficient

Unemployment (2020)

Rates from Feb 2020 and are percentage of labor force
https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Sex (2017)

Ratio is Male / Female
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-gender/

Smoking Percentage (2020)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/smoking-rates-by-state/

Influenza and Pneumonia Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/flu_pneumonia_mortality/flu_pneumonia.htm

Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/lung_disease_mortality/lung_disease.htm

Active Physicians (2019)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-active-physicians/

Hospitals (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-hospitals

Health spending per capita

Includes spending for all health care services and products by state of residence. Hospital spending is included and reflects the total net revenue. Costs such as insurance, administration, research, and construction expenses are not included.
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/avg-annual-growth-per-capita/

Pollution (2019)

Pollution: Average exposure of the general public to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) measured in micrograms per cubic meter (3-year estimate)
https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/annual/measure/air/state/ALL

Medium and Large Airports

For each state, number of medium and large airports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_airports_in_the_United_States

Temperature (2019)

Note that FL was incorrect in the table, but is corrected in the Hottest States paragraph
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/average-temperatures-by-state/
District of Columbia temperature computed as the average of Maryland and Virginia

Urbanization (2010)

Urbanization as a percentage of the population https://www.icip.iastate.edu/tables/population/urban-pct-states

Age Groups (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-age/

School Closure Dates

Schools that haven't closed are marked NaN https://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/map-coronavirus-and-school-closures.html

Note that some datasets above did not contain data for District of Columbia, this missing data was found via Google searches manually entered.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

This dataset is a per-state amalgamation of demographic, public health and other relevant predictors for COVID-19.

Deaths, Infections and Tests by State

The COVID Tracking Project: https://covidtracking.com/data/api

Used positive, death and totalTestResults from the API for, respectively, Infected, Deaths and Tested in this dataset. Please read the documentation of the API for more context on those columns

Predictor Data and Sources

Population (2020)

Density is people per meter squared https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/

ICU Beds and Age 60+

https://khn.org/news/as-coronavirus-spreads-widely-millions-of-older-americans-live-in-counties-with-no-icu-beds/

GDP

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/gdp-by-state/

Income per capita (2018)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/per-capita-income-by-state/

Gini

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_Gini_coefficient

Unemployment (2020)

Rates from Feb 2020 and are percentage of labor force
https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Sex (2017)

Ratio is Male / Female
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-gender/

Smoking Percentage (2020)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/smoking-rates-by-state/

Influenza and Pneumonia Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/flu_pneumonia_mortality/flu_pneumonia.htm

Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/lung_disease_mortality/lung_disease.htm

Active Physicians (2019)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-active-physicians/

Hospitals (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-hospitals

Health spending per capita

Includes spending for all health care services and products by state of residence. Hospital spending is included and reflects the total net revenue. Costs such as insurance, administration, research, and construction expenses are not included.
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/avg-annual-growth-per-capita/

Pollution (2019)

Pollution: Average exposure of the general public to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) measured in micrograms per cubic meter (3-year estimate)
https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/annual/measure/air/state/ALL

Medium and Large Airports

For each state, number of medium and large airports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_airports_in_the_United_States

Temperature (2019)

Note that FL was incorrect in the table, but is corrected in the Hottest States paragraph
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/average-temperatures-by-state/
District of Columbia temperature computed as the average of Maryland and Virginia

Urbanization (2010)

Urbanization as a percentage of the population https://www.icip.iastate.edu/tables/population/urban-pct-states

Age Groups (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-age/

School Closure Dates

Schools that haven't closed are marked NaN https://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/map-coronavirus-and-school-closures.html

Note that some datasets above did not contain data for District of Columbia, this missing data was found via Google searches manually entered.

List of Army personnel in the world, and the population of the respective country. The data is extracted and scrapped from 1. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/military-size-by-country 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel

World population point data for use with GIS mapping software, databases, and web applications are from Caliper Corporation.

Associated with manuscript titled: Fifty Muslim-majority countries have fewer COVID-19 cases and deaths than the 50 richest non-Muslim countriesThe objective of this research was to determine the difference in the total number of COVID-19 cases and deaths between Muslim-majority and non-Muslim countries, and investigate reasons for the disparities. Methods: The 50 Muslim-majority countries had more than 50.0% Muslims with an average of 87.5%. The non-Muslim country sample consisted of 50 countries with the highest GDP while omitting any Muslim-majority countries listed. The non-Muslim countries’ average percentage of Muslims was 4.7%. Data pulled on September 18, 2020 included the percentage of Muslim population per country by World Population Review15 and GDP per country, population count, and total number of COVID-19 cases and deaths by Worldometers.16 The data set was transferred via an Excel spreadsheet on September 23, 2020 and analyzed. To measure COVID-19’s incidence in the countries, three different Average Treatment Methods (ATE) were used to validate the results. Results published as a preprint at https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/84zq5(15) Muslim Majority Countries 2020 [Internet]. Walnut (CA): World Population Review. 2020- [Cited 2020 Sept 28]. Available from: http://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/muslim-majority-countries (16) Worldometers.info. Worldometer. Dover (DE): Worldometer; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 28]. Available from: http://worldometers.info

Context

After observing many naive conversations about COVID-19, claiming that the pandemic can be blamed on just a few factors, I decided to create a data set, to map a number of different data points to every U.S. state (including D.C. and Puerto Rico).

Content

This data set contains basic COVID-19 information about each state, such as total population, total COVID-19 cases, cases per capita, COVID-19 deaths and death rate, Mask mandate start, and end dates, mask mandate duration (in days), and vaccination rates.

However, when evaluating a pandemic (specifically a respiratory virus) it would be wise to also explore the population density of each state, which is also included. For those interested, I also included political party affiliation for each state ("D" for Democrat, "R" for Republican, and "I" for Puerto Rico). Vaccination rates are split into 1-dose and 2-dose rates.

Also included is data ranking the Well-Being Index and Social Determinantes of Health Index for each state (2019). There are also several other columns that "rank" states, such as ranking total cases per state (ascending), total cases per capita per state (ascending), population density rank (ascending), and 2-dose vaccine rate rank (ascending). There are also columns that compare deviation between columns: case count rank vs population density rank (negative numbers indicate that a state has more COVID-19 cases, despite being lower in population density, while positive numbers indicate the opposite), as well as per-capita case count vs density.

Acknowledgements

Several Statista Sources: * COVID-19 Cases in the US * Population Density of US States * COVID-19 Cases in the US per-capita * COVID-19 Vaccination Rates by State

Other sources I'd like to acknowledge: * Ballotpedia * DC Policy Center * Sharecare Well-Being Index * USA Facts * World Population Overview

Inspiration

I would like to see if any new insights could be made about this pandemic, where states failed, or if these case numbers are 100% expected for each state.

Published in The Anthropocene Review. Abstract: Enormous growth of the world population during the last two centuries and its present slowing down pose questions about precedents in history and broader forces shaping the population size. Population estimates collected in an extensive survey of literature (873 estimates from 25 studies covering 1,000,000 BCE to 2100 CE) show that world population growth has proceeded in two distinct phases of acceleration followed by stoppage—from at least 25,000 BCE to 100 BCE, and from 400 CE to the present, interrupted by centuries of standstill and 10% decrease. Both phases can be fitted with a mathematical function that projects to a peak at 11.2 ± 1.5 billion around 2100 CE. An interaction model can account for this acceleration-stoppage pattern in quantitative detail: Technology grows exponentially, with rate boosted by population. Population grows exponentially, capped by Earth’s carrying capacity. Technology raises this cap, but only until it approaches Earth’s ultimate carrying capacity.

Introduction

Gmail Statistics: Gmail, the popular email service by Google, has become an essential tool for communication in today's digital age. But how much do you know about how Gmail works and how people use it globally? This article includes a range of effective analyses on current trends of Gmail, such as market share, users, country-wise usage, etc. All the statistics described below will be valuable.

So, let’s get ready to explore some fascinating statistics about this email giant.

Clinical studies, especially randomized controlled trials, are essential for generating evidence for clinical practice. However, generalizability is a long-standing concern when applying trial results to real-world patients. Generalizability assessment is thus important, nevertheless, not consistently practiced. We performed a systematic scoping review to understand the practice of generalizability assessment. We identified 187 relevant papers and systematically organized these studies in a taxonomy with three dimensions: (1) data availability (i.e., before or after trial [a priori vs a posteriori generalizability]), (2) result outputs (i.e., score vs non-score), and (3) populations of interest. We further reported disease areas, underrepresented subgroups, and types of data used to profile target populations. We observed an increasing trend of generalizability assessments, but less than 30% of studies reported positive generalizability results. As a priori generalizability can be assessed using only study design information (primarily eligibility criteria), it gives investigators a golden opportunity to adjust the study design before the trial starts. Nevertheless, less than 40% of the studies in our review assessed a priori generalizability. With the wide adoption of electronic health records systems, rich real-world patient databases are increasingly available for generalizability assessment; however, informatics tools are lacking to support the adoption of generalizability assessment practice.

Methods We performed the literature search over the following 4 databases: MEDLINE, Cochrane, PychINFO, and CINAHL. Following the Institute of Medicine’s standards for systematic review and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we conducted the scoping review in the following six steps: 1) gaining an initial understanding about clinical trial generalizability assessment, population representativeness, internal validity, and external validity, 2) identifying relevant keywords, 3) formulating four search queries to identify relevant articles in the 4 databases, 4) screening the articles by reviewing titles and abstracts, 5) reviewing articles’ full-text to further filter out irrelevant ones based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and 6) coding the articles for data extraction.

Study selection and screening process

We used an iterative process to identify and refine the search keywords and search strategies. We identified 5,352 articles as of February 2019 from MEDLINE, CINAHL, PychINFO, and Cochrane. After removing duplicates, 3,569 records were assessed for relevancy by two researchers (ZH and XT) through reviewing the titles and abstracts against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Conflicts were resolved with a third reviewer (JB). During the screening process, we also iteratively refined the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Out of the 3,569 articles, 3,275 were excluded through the title and abstract screening process. Subsequently, we reviewed the full texts of 294 articles, among which 106 articles were further excluded based on the exclusion criteria. The inter-rater reliability of the full-text review between the two annotators is 0.901 (i.e., Cohen’s kappa, p < .001). 187 articles were included in the final scoping review.

Data extraction and reporting

We coded and extracted data from the 187 eligible articles according to the following aspects: (1) whether the study performed an a priori generalizability assessment or a posteriori generalizability assessment or both; (2) the compared populations and the conclusions of the assessment; (3) the outputs of the results (e.g., generalizability scores, descriptive comparison); (4) whether the study focused on a specific disease. If so, we extracted the disease and disease category; (5) whether the study focused on a particular population subgroup (e.g., elderly). If so, we extracted the specific population subgroup; (6) the type(s) of the real-world patient data used to profile the target population (i.e., trial data, hospital data, regional data, national data, and international data). Note that trial data can also be regional, national, or even international, depending on the scale of the trial. Regardless, we considered them in the category of “trial data” as the study population of a trial is typically small compared to observational cohorts or real-world data. For observational cohorts or real-world data (e.g., EHRs), we extracted the specific scale of the database (i.e., regional, national, and international). For the studies that compared the characteristics of different populations to indicate generalizability issues, we further coded the populations that were compared (e.g., enrolled patients, eligible patients, general population, ineligible patients), and the types of characteristics that were compared (i.e., demographic information, clinical attributes and comorbidities, treatment outcomes, and adverse events). We then used Fisher’s exact test to assess whether there is a difference in the types of characteristics compared between a priori and a posteriori generalizability assessment studies.

BackgroundThe prevalence of diabetes in West Africa is increasing, posing a major public health threat. An estimated 24 million Africans have diabetes, with rates in West Africa around 2–6% and projected to rise 129% by 2045 according to the WHO. Over 90% of cases are Type 2 diabetes (IDF, World Bank). As diabetes is ambulatory care sensitive, good primary care is crucial to reduce complications and mortality. However, research on factors influencing diabetes primary care access, utilisation and quality in West Africa remains limited despite growing disease burden. While research has emphasised diabetes prevalence and risk factors in West Africa, there remains limited evidence on contextual influences on primary care. This scoping review aims to address these evidence gaps.Methods and analysisUsing the established methodology by Arksey and O’Malley, this scoping review will undergo six stages. The review will adopt the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to ensure methodological rigour. We will search four electronic databases and search through grey literature sources to thoroughly explore the topic. The identified articles will undergo thorough screening. We will collect data using a standardised data extraction form that covers study characteristics, population demographics, and study methods. The study will identify key themes and sub-themes related to primary healthcare access, utilisation, and quality. We will then analyse and summarise the data using a narrative synthesis approach.ResultsThe findings and conclusive report will be finished and sent to a peer-reviewed publication within six months.ConclusionThis review protocol aims to systematically examine and assess the factors that impact the access, utilisation, and standard of primary healthcare services for diabetes in West Africa.

BackgroundFatigue is one of the most common subjective symptoms that impairs daily life and predict health-related events. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of fatigue in the global population.MethodsPubMed and the Cochrane Library were used to search for relevant articles from inception to December 31, 2021. Studies with prevalence data of fatigue in the general population were selected and reviewed by three authors independently and cross-checked. Regarding subgroups, adults (≥18 years), minors (<18 years), and specific occupation population (participants in each study being limited to a specific occupational group), and fatigue types and severity, meta-analysis was conducted to produce point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).ResultsFrom the initial 3,432 studies, 91 studies accounting for 115 prevalence data points (623,624 participants) were finally selected. The prevalence of general fatigue (fatigue lasting < 6 months, or fatigue of unspecified duration) was 20.4% (95% CI, 16.7–25.0) in adults, 11.7% (95% CI, 5.2–26.6) in minors, and 42.3% (95% CI, 33.0–54.2) in specific occupations. Chronic fatigue (fatigue lasting more than 6 months) affected 10.1% (95% CI, 8.2–12.5) of adults, 1.5% (95% CI, 0.5–4.7) of minors, and 5.5% (95% CI, 1.4–21.6) of subjects in specific occupations. There was an overall female-predominant prevalence for all subgroup analyses, with a total odds ratio of 1.4 (95% CI, 1.3–1.6). Regarding the severity and presence of medical causes, the total prevalence of moderate fatigue [14.6% (95% CI, 9.8–21.8)] was 2.4-fold that of severe fatigue [6.1% (95% CI, 3.4–11.0)], while unexplained fatigue (fatigue experienced by individuals without any underlying medical condition that can explain the fatigue) was ~2.7-fold that of explained fatigue (fatigue experienced by individuals with a medical condition that can explain the fatigue); as proportion of 40.0% of physical, 8.6% of mental, and 28.4% of mixed cause.ConclusionsThis study has produced the first comprehensive picture of global fatigue prevalence in the general population, which will provide vital reference data contributing to fatigue-related research, including the prevention of diseases.Systematic review registrationIdentifier: CRD42021270498.

Turks and Caicos Islands saw a murder rate of ***** per 100,000 inhabitants, making it the most dangerous country for this kind of crime worldwide as of 2024. Interestingly, El Salvador, which long had the highest global homicide rates, has dropped out of the top 29 after a high number of gang members have been incarcerated. Meanwhile, Colima in Mexico was the most dangerous city for murders. Violent conflicts worldwide Notably, these figures do not include deaths that resulted from war or a violent conflict. While there is a persistent number of conflicts worldwide, resulting casualties are not considered murders. Partially due to this reason, homicide rates in Latin America are higher than those in Afghanistan or Syria. A different definition of murder in these circumstances could change the rate significantly in some countries. Causes of death Also, noteworthy is that murders are usually not random events. In the United States, the circumstances of murders are most commonly arguments, followed by narcotics incidents and robberies. Additionally, murders are not a leading cause of death. Heart diseases, strokes and cancer pose a greater threat to life than violent crime.

This study was conducted to explore the effects prostitution legislation has on sex trafficking rates. This issue holds paramount importance in the fields of legal studies and human rights. By leveraging advanced machine learning techniques to analyze data from the Counter-Trafficking Data Collaborative (CTDC), encompassing 180 countries, this study aims to uncover the relationship between various prostitution legislation types and sex trafficking occurrences. The exploration begins with extensive cleaning, merging, and filtering of the CTDC dataset, integrating it with prostitution legislation data from the World Population Review. This process ensures a harmonized dataset that accurately reflects the global landscape of sex trafficking in relation to legislative frameworks. The machine learning model initially concentrated on prostitution legislation as a key variable but evolved to include a broader range of factors like registration year, population, growth rate, gender, and citizenship. This expansion was crucial in developing a more accurate and holistic model.This study offered a nuanced exploration of the impact of prostitution legislation on sex trafficking, employing sophisticated data analysis and machine learning models to parse through extensive data. The advanced RandomForestClassifier was key in the research, achieving an 87% accuracy rate for predicting instances of sex trafficking and demonstrating the need to incorporate diverse predictive features. Notably, the analysis emphasized the importance of the legislative feature in accurately predicting sex trafficking, despite the inclusion of other variables to improve overall model precision. These findings underscore the significance of a multifaceted approach, considering factors like demographics and socio-economic indicators, to gain a comprehensive understanding of sex trafficking trends.Complementing the machine learning insights, a logistic regression model scrutinized the specific effects of different legislative approaches on sex trafficking. The analysis revealed that legislative frameworks such as legalization, abolitionism, decriminalization, and neo-abolitionism have a considerable influence on reducing sex trafficking rates, suggesting their potential as effective legal strategies. Alternantively, prohibition legislation is found to corrrelate with significantly higher sex trafficking rates. These results serve as a critical resource for policymakers and advocates engaged in the development of informed, evidence-based approaches to address the global challenge of sex trafficking.

Equity in health has risen in prominence in recent decades. Within eye health, The World Health Organization’s (WHO) World Report on Vision and the Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health both highlighted that in all parts of the world, there are population groups underserved by existing services, such as rural dwellers, women, Indigenous/First-Nations and non-dominant ethnicity groups, and people living in areas of high deprivation. These reports also called for more evidence and action to address inequity, including better monitoring of inequality.

Population-based eye health surveys (including those employing the Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) methodology) can be used by governments to strengthen eye health services to meet the needs of the population. These surveys assess and/or report the eye health needs of underserved groups in a range of ways, for example by intentionally recruiting communities with large unmet needs, or by conducting surveys in the general population and disaggregating the outcomes by different population groups. Future approaches to enhance inequality monitoring may include increasing the sample size so that it is adequately powered for subgroup analysis, adapting recruitment strategies to ensure they are appropriate for the target population groups, and finding ways to include traditionally ineligible population groups (e.g. people without housing / a fixed address). These modifications may allow surveys to be as equity-relevant as possible.

We wish to identify the extent to which underserved population groups have been considered by researchers in the design, implementation, and reporting of population-based eye health surveys, and which strategies have been described.

Our aims are to summarise: 1. The proportion of eye health surveys that have considered underserved groups in their design, implementation, and reporting; and 2. How and in what ways eye health surveys have considered underserved groups in their design, implementation, and reporting.

In addition to identifying the range of strategies that have been implemented to date, the findings of this review will form a baseline from which the field can develop.

This dataset is the Supplementary Material for a review of uncertainty in petrel population estimates. It contains raw data from the literature review, source code for the full analysis, and additional text accompanying the manuscript.

Raw data were extracted from a literature review of petrel population estimates on islands. References were sourced from the Web of Science bibliographic index searched on 20 January 2020 using the search terms "burrowing seabird" OR "burrow-nesting seabird" OR "burrow-nesting petrel" OR "burrowing petrel" OR “scientific name” OR “common name” (taxonomy followed HBW and BirdLife International, 2018) for all species in the families Procellariidae, Hydrobatidae and Oceanitidae, AND “abundance” OR “population” in the title, abstract or keywords.

The data contain the original reference with metadata on year, journal, species studied, island studied, motivations for the study. We extracted published population estimates reported in each paper. Most represented a mean, but where only minima or maxima were reported we used this as the estimate, and where only minima and maxima were reported we used their average as the estimate. To allow comparison between studies we extracted basic dispersion statistics and manipulated them to approximate confidence intervals (see paper for methods).

The full dataset includes: 1. data.csv - the raw data from the literature review including information for 60 variables.

1. supplementary_code.rmd - full code for the analysis.

2. Supplementary material.docx - supporting text including methods, results and references.