Search results

Sponsored by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Active for Life (AFL) initiative investigated how two physical activity programs for adults aged 50 and older, Active Choices (AC) and Active Living Every Day (ALED), worked in community settings. Created by researchers at Stanford University, Active Choices used lifestyle counseling and personalized telephone support to encourage older adults to be physically active. In AFL, this was a 6-month program delivered through one face-to-face meeting followed by up to eight one-on-one telephone counseling calls. Active Living Every Day, which was created by the Cooper Institute and Human Kinetics Inc., also provided lifestyle counseling to promote physical activity, but in a classroom and workbook format. During the first three years of the four-year AFL initiative, ALED was delivered as a 20-week program where participants attended weekly small group meetings, but in the last year it was shortened to 12 weekly meetings. Nine organizations received AFL grants to implement the programs during 2003-2006. Four grantees implemented the one-on-one AC model, while five implemented the group-based ALED model.

Data were collected from the AC and ALED sites for both a process and outcomes evaluation. The primary aims of the process evaluation were to (1) monitor the extent to which the grantees demonstrated fidelity to the AC and ALED models in their program implementation, (2) assess staff experiences implementing the programs, and (3) assess participants' impressions of the programs. A quasi-experimental, pre-post study design was used to assess outcomes. Primary aims of the outcomes evaluation were to evaluate the impact of AC and ALED on self-reported physical activity, and to evaluate the impact of the programs on self-reported stress, depressive symptoms, and satisfaction with body function and appearance. Secondary aims of the outcome evaluation were to (1) evaluate the impact of the programs on measures of functional fitness, (2) examine whether changes in self-reported physical activity and functional fitness were moderated by participant characteristics, including age, gender, race, baseline physical activity self-efficacy, and baseline physical activity social support, and (3) examine whether changes in self-reported physical activity were consistent with a mediation model for physical activity self-efficacy and physical activity social support.

The collection has 14 data files (datasets). Datasets 1-7 constitute the process evaluation data, and Datasets 8-14 the outcomes evaluation data:

Dataset 1 (AC Initial Face-to-Face Sessions Data) contains information about the initial face-to-face AC session: the format, date, and length of the session, whether the 8 steps required in the face-to-face session were completed, what was discussed between the health educator and the participant related to physical activity plans, interests, benefits, and barriers, and the health educator's progress notes. The file contains one record for each AC participant.

Dataset 2 (AC Completed Calls Data) comprises information about the completed AC calls, but does not cover the topics discussed on the calls. Recorded information about each call includes the date and length of the call, the health educator's progress notes, and whether the participant was assessed for injury, light activity, moderate activity, exercise goals, or exercise intentions. Each call is represented by a separate record in the data file and, typically, there are multiple records per participant.

Dataset 3 (AC Topics Discussed on Completed Calls ) contains information about the topics discussed on each completed AC call, e.g., exercise barriers/benefits, previous exercise experiences, goal setting, long term goals, injury prevention, rewards/reinforcement, social support, progress tracking, and relapse prevention. Each record in the file represents one topic and there are often multiple records per call for each participant.

Dataset 4 (AC Aggregate Call Data) aggregates the call data across calls for each AC participant. For example, for a given participant, this dataset shows the total number of calls completed, the number of calls where injury/health problems were assessed, etc. The file contains one record per participant.

Dataset 5 (ALED Sessions Data) contains information about each class session for every ALED group, including the session date, start time, and end time, learning activities covered in the session, participant evaluations of the session and the facilitator, facilitator progress notes, the number of participants who were in various stages of readiness for moderate exercise, and the number of participants who tracked physical activity and thoughts about physical activity. This file has one record for each session of every ALED group.

Dataset 6 (ALED Attendance and Tracking Data (Years 2-4)) consists of participant-level attendance and tracking data for every ALED session during the second to fourth years of the evaluation, including the participant's attendance at the session, whether the participant's stage of readiness was assessed, and whether the participant tracked thoughts about physical activity or actual physical activity. There is no participant-level ALED data for the first year. Each participant has a separate record for each session. Thus, the file contains 20 records per participant in the years 2-3, and 12 records per participant in year 4.

Dataset 7 (ALED Aggregate Attendance and Tracking Data (Years 2-4)) contains ALED attendance and tracking data for each participant in years 2-4, aggregated across the sessions. The data file has one record for each participant.

Dataset 8 (Demographics) comprises program information (e.g., program status, start date, end date, site, etc.), demographic information (e.g., age, gender, race, Hispanic origin, employment status, income, and the participant's state and ZIP code of residence), and responses to the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q), a screening tool that was used to assess possible risks of exercising based on answers to specific health history questions. The file contains one record for each AFL participant, except for those with a status of "nonstarter" or "repeater."

Datasets 9 (Pretest Survey Data) and 10 (Posttest Survey Data) contain data from the Pretest and Posttest Surveys. The Pretest Survey was administered at the beginning of the AC and ALED programs, while the Posttest Survey was administered at their end. Topics covered by the surveys include social and recreational activities, activities undertaken for exercise, perceived stress, depressive symptoms, satisfaction with body appearance and function, social support for physical activity, self-efficacy for physical activity, neighborhood environment, health conditions, health-related quality of life, caregiving, and self-reported height and weight. Both surveys included items from the Community Health Activities Model Program for Seniors Physical Activity Questionnaire (CHAMPS), the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Questionnaire (CES-D), the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Questionnaires (BRFSS), and the International Physical Activity Prevalence Study Environmental Module. These data files each have one record for each participant who submitted a questionnaire.

Dataset 11 (ALED Week 12 Survey Data (Year 4)) contains responses to the ALED Week 12 Posttest Survey, which was used to evaluate the 12-week adaptation of ALED in Year 4. (In Year 4, ALED participants completed both a 12- and 20-week posttest survey). There is one record for each participant who returned this survey.

Dataset 12 (Six-Month Posttest Follow-Up Survey Data (Years 3-4)) comprises data from a special 6-month follow-up survey which was administered in years 3-4 in six of the ALED sites and one of the AC sites. Participants were questioned about their current physical activities, weight, health-related quality of life, satisfaction with bodily function, and other topics. As with Datasets 9-11, the data file contains one record for each participant who returned a questionnaire.

Dataset 13 (Functional Fitness Tests Data) contains the results of pretest and posttest functional fitness tests which were administered by one ALED grantee. Four tests were adminstered: (1) the 30-Foot Walk Test, (2) the 30-Second Chair Stand, (3) 8-Foot Up and Go, and (4) the Chair Sit and Reach Test. This participant-level data file also includes pretest height measurements plus pretest and posttest weight measurements.

Dataset 14 (Participants' Impressions of the Programs (Years 1, 3, and 4)) contains data collected by the last sections of the Posttest Survey, ALED Week 12 survey, and 6-Month Follow-up Survey. The topics it covers include the participants' impressions of the programs, participation in physical activities, and changes (compared to before they started the AFL program) in motivation to be physically active, actual level of physical activity, medical and health conditions, overall pain, flexibility/limberness, level of stress, happiness, and enjoyment of life. The file has a separate record for each survey completed by the participants. Thus, there are 1-3 records per participant.

The Annual Health Survey (AHS), conducted by the Government of India between July 2010 and May 2013, investigates maternal and child health in nine states: Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh. These states constitute about 70 percent of neonatal deaths in India and about one-in-five neonatal deaths globally. The AHS consists of a three-round panel that interviewed over 4 million households in each round, as well as a one-time Clinical, Anthropometric, and Bio-Chemical Survey (CAB). The data were originally released to the public in 2015 as a set of 45 .csv files. The .csv files are included in a restricted-use zipped package as part of the ICPSR release (see dataset 21).

The survey focused on topics such as household composition, caste, fertility, family planning, pre- and post-natal care, breastfeeding, infant mortality, illness, disease, disability, and health care practices. Demographic information includes sex, age, education, occupation, marital status, household size, and religion. The CAB files contain biometric data including but not limited to height, weight, blood pressure, hemoglobin, pulse, and blood glucose.

Potential data users should note that the public-use and restricted-use versions of the datasets are the same except for the masking of day component variables for certain dates in the public-use versions of the files (please see the Description of Variables section for full details). Therefore, only researchers with a limited set of research questions that require full birth, marriage, and death dates will need to apply for the restricted-use versions of the data files.

Additionally, because the final data files are very large and potentially very time consuming to analyze on personal computers, researchers have the option to download ten-percent samples of each file (see datasets 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, and 20). These samples contain the same variables as the original files but only ten percent of the records. The samples were determined by taking a randomly selected ten percent of households in each district. P.I. codebooks were not produced for these samples. Please note that the ten-percent samples for each dataset were selected independently, so it is not advised to merge across datasets within the AHS using these samples, as the match rates will be very low.

Oral contraceptive (OC) users living in El Paso, Texas were interviewed to assess motivations for patronizing a United States clinic or a Mexican pharmacy with over-the-counter (OTC) pills and to determine which women were likely to use the OTC option. The experiences of OC users who obtained their contraception from Mexican pharmacies were compared with those of women who obtained their pills from family planning clinics in El Paso, Texas, where eligible low-income women often pay nothing. 532 clinic users and 514 pharmacy users were surveyed about background characteristics, motivations for choosing their oral contraception source, and satisfaction with this source. For more information, please see the Border Contraceptive Access Study website.

The Boston Reentry Study (BRS) was a mixed-methods, longitudinal study of 122 men and women released from Massachusetts state prisons to the Boston area, that focused on the transition into the community during participants' first year after prison release. The original data collection combined a panel survey, qualitative interviews, interviews with family members, and administrative records on criminal history. The BRS examined the complexity of integration after incarceration drawing from participants' life histories, including childhood experiences, to understand how individual biographies shape the transition into the community. This collection includes responses to 5 survey waves: (1) baseline, about one week before release from prison, (2) 1 week after prison release, (3) 2 months after prison release, (4) 6 months after prison release, and (5) 12 months after prison release. The survey collected information on housing, employment, income, health, family relationships, and criminal justice system contact.

This collection includes a combined dataset of the Generations study wave 1 (baseline) survey and the TransPop study transgender survey. The two studies have many overlapping variables, and they examined topics such as respondents' health outcomes and behaviors, experiences with discrimination, identity, and transition-related experiences. Data from these studies were merged to allow for analysis of the combined LGBT populations. This dataset has also been reweighted to be representative of these populations.

The complete Generations study data (baseline, wave 2, and wave 3 survey data) can be found under study number 37166, and the complete TransPop study data (transgender and cisgender survey data) can be found under study number 37938. For detailed information on the Generations and TransPop studies, including related publications, please refer to their respective DSDR/ICPSR study pages.

The Consumer Pyramids is the largest survey of households in India. The survey contains record-level data that are delivered in the form of population estimates. The survey contains multiple databases that contain population estimates on household demographics, household income and expenses, borrowing by household, and household assets. The data also contain individual-level health status, financial inclusion, education level, and caste and literacy estimates. Demographic information collected include gender, age, religion, education, and occupation.

Database Composition: The Consumer Pyramids Survey is conducted over the course of four-month periods or waves throughout the year totaling three rounds a year. This collection includes the following six databases: People of India; Household Income and Expenses; Household Amenities, Assets, and Liabilities; Household Expenses; Composition of Incomes at the member level; Composition of Incomes at the household level.

The Displaced New Orleans Residents Pilot Study was designed to examine the current location, well-being, and plans of people who lived in the city of New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina struck on August 29, 2005. The study is based on a representative sample of pre-Katrina dwellings in New Orleans. Fieldwork focused on tracking respondents wherever they currently resided, including back to New Orleans. Respondents were administered a short paper-and-pencil interview by mail, by telephone, or in person. The pilot study was fielded in the fall of 2006, approximately one year after Hurricane Katrina. The goal of DNORPS was to assess the feasibility of the study design and thereby to lay the groundwork for launching a major longitudinal study of displaced New Orleans residents.

ICPSR only holds the public data for the pilot study. The main study (DNORS) was carried out 2009-2010. These data are not yet publicly available, but for more information, visit the RAND Corporation website.

The Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS, formerly known as the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study) follows a cohort of nearly 5,000 children born in large, U.S. cities between 1998 and 2000. The study oversampled births to unmarried couples; and, when weighted, the data are representative of births in large U.S. cities at the turn of the century. The FFCWS was originally designed to address four questions of great interest to researchers and policy makers:

1. What are the conditions and capabilities of unmarried parents, especially fathers?
2. What is the nature of the relationships between unmarried parents?
3. How do children born into these families fare?
4. How do policies and environmental conditions affect families and children?

The FFCWS consists of interviews with mothers, fathers, and/or primary caregivers at birth and again when children are ages 1, 3, 5, 9, 15, and 22. The parent interviews collected information on attitudes, relationships, parenting behavior, demographic characteristics, health (mental and physical), economic and employment status, neighborhood characteristics, and program participation. Beginning at age 9, children were interviewed directly (either during the home visit or on the telephone). The direct child interviews collected data on family relationships, home routines, schools, peers, and physical and mental health, as well as health behaviors.

A collaborative study of the FFCWS, the In-Home Longitudinal Study of Pre-School Aged Children (In-Home Study) collected data from a subset of the FFCWS Core respondents at the Year 3 and 5 follow-ups to ask how parental resources in the form of parental presence or absence, time, and money influence children under the age of 5. The In-Home Study collected information on a variety of domains of the child's environment, including: the physical environment (quality of housing, nutrition and food security, health care, adequacy of clothing and supervision) and parenting (parental discipline, parental attachment, and cognitive stimulation). In addition, the In-Home Study also collected information on several important child outcomes, including anthropometrics, child behaviors, and cognitive ability. This information was collected through interviews with the child's primary caregiver, and direct observation of the child's home environment and the child's interactions with his or her caregiver.

Similar activities were conducted during the Year 9 follow-up. At the Year 15 follow-up, a condensed set of home visit activities were conducted with a subsample of approximately 1,000 teens. Teens who participated in the In-Home Study were also invited to participate in a Sleep Study and were asked to wear an accelerometer on their non-dominant wrist for seven consecutive days to track their sleep (Sleep Actigraphy Data) and that day's behaviors and mood (Daily Sleep Actigraphy and Diary Survey Data).

An additional collaborative study collected data from the child care provider (Year 3) and teacher (Years 9 and 15) through mail-based surveys. Saliva samples were collected at Year 9 and 15 (Biomarker file and Polygenic Scores). The Study of Adolescent Neural Development (SAND) COVID Study began data collection in May 2020 following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. It included online surveys with the young adult and their primary caregiver.

The FFCWS began its seventh wave of data collection in October 2020, around the focal child's 22nd birthday. Data collection and interviews continued through January 2024. The Year 22 wave included a young adult (YA) survey with the original focal child and a primary caregiver (PCG) survey. Data were also collected on the children of the original focal child (referred to as Generation 3, or G3).

In 2017, the FFCWS team announced the Fragile Families (FF) Challenge, a collaborative effort in which participants were tasked with using machine learning methods and FFCWS data (Baseline to Year 9) to build a model that would predict six key outcomes at Year 15. Materials used in the FF Challenge have been archived in this collection.

Documentation for these files is available on the FFCWS website under Data and Documentation. For details of updates made to the FFCWS data files, please see the project's Data Alerts page.

Data collection for the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers R01HD36916, R01HD39135, and R01HD40421, as well as a consortium of private foundations.

Below is the citation for use of the FFCWS data accessed through ICPSR. For information on additional citation requirements when using FFCWS in publications, please refer to this FAQ on the FFCWS project site.

The Generations study is a five-year study designed to examine health and well-being across three generations of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGB). The study explored identity, stress, health outcomes, and health care and services utilization among LGBs in three generations of adults who came of age during different historical contexts. This collection includes baseline, wave 1, and wave 2 data collected as part of the Generations study.

The study aimed to assess whether younger cohorts of LGBs differed from older cohorts in how they viewed their LGB identity and experienced stress related to prejudice and everyday forms of discrimination, as well as whether patterns of resilience differed between different LGB cohorts. Additionally, the study sought to examine how differences in stress experience affected mental health and well-being, including depressive and anxiety symptoms, substance and alcohol use, suicide ideation and behavior, and how younger LGBs utilized LGB-oriented social and health services, relative to older cohorts.

In wave 2, respondents were re-interviewed approximately one year after completion of the baseline (wave 1) survey. Only respondents who participated in the original sample of participants were surveyed at wave 2 (i.e., the enhancement oversample was not included in the longitudinal design of this study).

In wave 3, respondents were re-interviewed approximately one year after the completion of the wave 2 survey.

Demographic variables collected as part of this study include questions related to age, education, race, ethnicity, sexual identity, gender identity, income, employment, and religiosity.

The Guatemalan Survey of Family Health (EGSF) was undertaken to investigate the health of children under the age of five and women during pregnancy and childbirth residing in 60 communities within the departments (geopolitical units) of Chimaltenango, Suchitepequez, Totonicapan, and Jalapa in Guatemala. Data were collected at the household, individual, and community levels to gain an in-depth understanding of the way residents in these rural populations think about their health, treatment, and family relations.

Data at the household level (Parts 1-5, 90-92) provide information on household members, relation to household head, age, education, and language used.

The individual-level data (Parts 6-37) describe the respondent's background, marital/relationship history, social ties and social support, and economic status, along with health beliefs, a complete birth history, knowledge and use of contraception, health problems and treatment during the last two pregnancies, and anthropometry on mothers and children. Extensive data were gathered regarding the health problems and treatment for each of the two youngest children born since January 1990, with particular focus on diarrhea and respiratory infections.

The community data (Parts 41-60) supply information gathered from three knowledgeable individuals called "key informants" about occupations in the community, crops grown, wages, utilities and community services, and the history of the community. Parts 61-89 contain information regarding Health Posts (health care centers) through interviews conducted with key informants, doctors (Parts 72-80), and other health service providers (Parts 81-89), including traditional providers such as curers, midwives, and bone setters, regarding their practices, patients, referrals, fees, payment, and the use of specific treatments.

The Housing and Children's Healthy Development (HCHD) Study included four main aims:

1. to learn how parents make choices about where to live while negotiating tradeoffs between dwelling unit quality, neighborhood quality, and school quality;
2. to assess how features of the child's social contexts--home, neighborhood, and school--combine to influence key cognitive, socio-emotional, and health outcomes among parents and their children;
3. to examine how the quality of housing affects parenting practices and outcomes for children and their caregivers; and
4. to enhance the study of child development through theoretical and methodological advances in the study of housing and the other social contexts related to housing.

For this collection, the study team conducted Wave 1 data collection with families in Cleveland, Ohio (Cuyahoga County) and Dallas, Texas, United States, using a randomized controlled trial design. One-half of the sample was an experimental sample consisting of applicants for a federal housing voucher, including both voucher winners (treatment group) and voucher losers (control group). The other half of the sample was generated through a random selection and screening process in census blocks that varied by household income weighted toward lower-income blocks.

Interviews were conducted with primary caregivers, lasting about 90 minutes, and included the collection of anthropometric measures from primary caregivers and children and administration of Woodcock-Johnson tests to children. Primary caregiver voucher sample participants were asked for three blood pressure measurements, and blood spots were collected from voucher sample primary caregivers and children. The data collection also includes laser tape measurement of all rooms in a household, 8 block face neighborhood observations, and post-interview observations. Four-day leave-behind child time diary data were collected but are not available.

The Housing and Children's Healthy Development (HCHD) Study included four main aims:

1. to learn how parents make choices about where to live while negotiating tradeoffs between dwelling unit quality, neighborhood quality, and school quality;
2. to assess how features of the child's social contexts--home, neighborhood, and school--combine to influence key cognitive, socio-emotional, and health outcomes among parents and their children;
3. to examine how the quality of housing affects parenting practices and outcomes for children and their caregivers; and
4. to enhance the study of child development through theoretical and methodological advances in the study of housing and the other social contexts related to housing.

This collection includes data from Wave 2 of the HCHD Study. In Wave 2, telephone interviews were completed with 1,413 primary caregivers (PCGs) from the Wave 1 data collection. The PCGs also provided reports for 1,954 focal children who were still living in the household of the caregiver at the time of the Wave 2 survey. Wave 2 data collection included a coverscreen to gather updated location and contact information for the PCGs and children to determine household eligibility, and a PCG questionnaire based largely on the Wave 1 protocol with modifications for telephone interviewing.

A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download. The India Human Development Survey 2005 (IHDS) is a nationally representative, multi-topic survey of 41,554 households in 1,503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India. Two one-hour interviews in each household covered topics concerning health, education, employment, economic status, marriage, fertility, gender relations, and social capital. Children aged 8-11 completed short reading, writing and arithmetic tests. Additional village, school, and medical facility interviews are also available.

This release of the 1993 Indonesian Family Life Survey (IFLS-1-PR) is a revised and restructured version of the Wave 1 data. This data collection provides a broad range of economic, demographic, and health information at both the household and community levels across 13 provinces on the islands of Java, Sumatra, Bali, West Nusa Tenggara, Kalimantan, and Sulawesi. A sample of 7,224 households was interviewed during August 1993 through January 1994. Household-level data cover topics such as household characteristics, income, education of both adults and children, marriage histories, inter-household transfers, pregnancy history, and knowledge and use of contraceptives. At the community-facility level, information was gathered from village leaders and heads of village women's groups in each of the 321 enumeration areas (EAs) where the households were located. Questions were asked regarding community characteristics (transportation, water and sanitation, history of schools, and availability of health facilities), nurses, midwives, and paramedics (facility management and family planning history, vignettes on types of care), and traditional health practitioners (buying or making herbal medicines or using services of traditional practitioners, rituals, and incantations). When the household data are combined with the community-facility data, the 1993 Indonesian Family Life Survey provides a unique look at areas of fertility, family planning, infant and child health, education, migration, employment, and the social, economic, and health status of over 7,000 households in a diverse setting during a period of rapid demographic and socioeconomic change.

As of June 2015, there are four waves of data for the IFLS. However, a fifth wave of data collection has begun. Please see the IFLS Web site for more information on how to obtain these data.

This randomized controlled trial examined the independent effect of village income inequality and individual income on individual health. Specifically, the study assessed how these two variables interacted with social capital to affect individual health. For the trial, 40 villages were selected for two experimental treatments.

In the first treatment, 13 villages were picked at random to receive 782kg of edible rice as in-kind income. The 782kg of rice was split equally between all households in the village. For the second treatment, another 13 villages were picked at random. Each village in the second treatment received the same amount of rice as the villages in the first treatment (782kg), but all of the rice went to the poorest 20 percent of households in the village, with each household getting the same amount of rice. All households in the remaining 14 villages and all households in the top 80 percent of the village income distribution of the second treatment acted as controls, and received 6kg of high-yielding, improved rice seeds.

The baseline survey was administered between February and May 2008, households received the rice between October 2008 and January 2009, and the end-line survey was administered between February and May 2009. Outcomes included anthropometric indicators of nutritional status, perceived health, and blood pressure.