Let us predict what will ail you next year

Disease prediction can have many paths. We can use your lab data and family history. But your health story and lifestyle can tell more about your health.

Your health data will be stored in your gmail. Create a new gmail email.

We will not collect your name, tel, address, birthdate and we ensure not to keep your email when adding your data in a database for analysis. You get your personalize health coaching.

Email motherhealth@gmail.com to participate, to share health data, to be part owner of Motherhealth and to help shape the future health of others.

 

The Business Value of Taxonomy

The Business Value of Taxonomy

by Earley Information Science, Inc.

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/109038/EIS_Assets/EIS-Whitepaper-Business-Value-Taxonomy-2016.pdf

Customers demand the ability to find and access information easily.

Managers need quick access to accurate and reliable information to quickly respond to market changes.

Employees want to spend less time validating information accuracy and recreating ‘lost’ documents. Real-world uses for taxonomy:

  • Motorola uses taxonomy to ensure consistent web content delivery across over 50 global sites
  • A big box retailer uses taxonomy to map supplier data to its internal item master standards
  • Jackson Laboratories uses taxonomy to ensure effective search of its vast technical content
  • A manufacturer of silicon chip production machinery uses taxonomy to ensure its field support engineers have the latest updates
  • AstraZeneca uses taxonomy to ensure effective reuse and digital rights management of marketing content The Dual Role of Taxonomy How should organizations approach taxonomy?

The value proposition of business taxonomy is realized when its dual roles are developed:

  • to structure and manage critical business concepts and vocabularies, and;
  • to be a provider of content assets to consuming applications.

Taxonomy is a system for storing and organizing terms that represent an organization’s critical concepts. Business taxonomy consists of term names and labels that are assigned to content assets. Term names are organized into hierarchical and/or associative relationships.

They are represented as a tree-like structure that branches out to reveal sub-categories and items. Taxonomy includes a dictionary of preferred and equivalent (synonym) terms to provide flexibility for naming terms. A developed taxonomy is a valuable authoritative source for the organization. It will improve content organization, accessibility, reuse, and findability. Taxonomy is a provider of content assets to consuming applications and is a resource for end users.

Taxonomy-driven improvements lead to reduced costs for delivering services, developing products and conducting operations. Six Ways to Use Business Taxonomy Resolve differences in terminology.

Many organizations have problems with terminology and vocabulary: Companies inherit different vocabularies through mergers. Different customer groups use different naming conventions. Different business areas use different vocabularies. Taxonomy’s core function is resolving terminology and vocabulary differences. Taxonomy can reconcile terminology differences and provide a standard vocabulary for use across all business functions and customer groups, and structured and unstructured content. Inform navigational structures.

Managing concept and term relationships is another core function of taxonomy. Terms are organized so that more specific (narrower) terms are arranged or linked under more general (broader) terms. Relationships are the 6 Ways to Use Business Taxonomy

  • Resolve differences in terminology
  • Inform navigational structures
  • Populate metadata field values
  • Optimize search
  • Inform user experience on E-commerce web sites
  • Extend Business Intelligence (BI) foundation of navigable structures in SharePoint, Enterprise Content Management (ECM) systems, Digital Asset Management (DAM) systems, and web sites.

Taxonomy can provide terms to an organization’s global web sites to standardize web content, resulting in a consistent user experience across all web sites. Taxonomy can also relate documents and digital assets to an organization’s subject-based navigational structure, resulting in a consistent user experience.

Populate metadata field values. Tagging documents or digital assets incorrectly is a common problem that impacts findability and retrieval. Tagging accuracy is improved when users use restricted terms (i.e., controlled vocabulary) that are stored in taxonomy. When taxonomy provides terms to the different consuming systems, organizations can maintain term consistency across the enterprise. For example, an organization’s taxonomy populates SharePoint, ECM, and DAM systems with the controlled vocabulary terms for the element ‘Industry’. If a term changes for ‘Industry’ – say “Healthcare” to “Life Science”, the change need only be made to taxonomy and not to the three content systems.

Optimize search.

Taxonomy refines search by reducing the number of search results users need to sift through to find the desired content. Search results are more relevant and accurate when search engines ingest taxonomy terms. In addition, users can select taxonomic terms to fine-tune their search queries.

For example, after a call center’s website was organized using taxonomy, representatives—users of the website—reduced their time spent helping customers almost 50%. Inform user experience on E-commerce web sites. Websites use taxonomy to present information in useful ways and to further the user experience. For example, a toy store’s taxonomy can be used to display all game box products on its website. Or it can display all game box accessories, or only those game boxes within a price range. Extend Business Intelligence (BI). Many organizations have term inconsistencies in their structured data. They lack an approach for normalizing terms when an enterprise dictionary doesn’t exist. Consequently, traditional BI can’t provide the ‘full story’ that would enable executives to make fully informed decisions. Taxonomy can extend BI by mapping database values to common concepts, so that BI analysis includes a fuller set of content. For example, a greeting card manufacturer could use its taxonomy to define “glossy” and “coated” as synonyms in order to ensure that its reports aggregate results for cards with both attributes. Business Taxonomy Best Practices

1. Define a clear path to getting value from your taxonomy. Don’t risk creating shelf-ware with abstract or technology-centric approaches.

2. Make sure a project team includes perspectives from the content owner and consumer/end users.

3. Have an approach for tagging content.

  • Ensure you have an approach to successfully use the metadata to improve the user experience.

  • Make sure you have a governance process to maintain, update, and sustain the taxonomy.

Conclusion Organizations increasingly need to access, reuse, and locate content across different information systems, business applications, and mobile devices. Their hope is that technology is the key solution. However, information issues are not just an IT problem. Every organizational area and person is part of the issue.

Business groups use different terminology, impacting the ability to share data between business processes. Everyone is a creator of information, resulting in too many sets of inconsistent organizing principles. An enterprise approach to organizing information doesn’t exist. Technology-centric solutions aren’t solving the problem. The root of the issue—the content—is only addressed peripherally.

Education as Social Determinants of Health Visualization for male and female

edu health menedu health

http://ghdx.healthdata.org/record/global-educational-attainment-1970-2015

Zambia 2010 15 to 44 Females 6.89
Zambia 2010 25 plus Males 7.25
Zambia 2010 25 plus Females 4.85
Zambia 2010 25 plus Both 6.05
Zimbabwe 2010 15 to 44 Females 9.05
Zimbabwe 2010 25 plus Males 8.09
Zimbabwe 2010 25 plus Females 6.39
Zimbabwe 2010 25 plus Both 7.24
Afghanistan 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.16
Afghanistan 2011 25 plus Males 2.94
Afghanistan 2011 25 plus Females 0.53
Afghanistan 2011 25 plus Both 1.73
Angola 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.79
Angola 2011 25 plus Males 5.1
Angola 2011 25 plus Females 2.74
Angola 2011 25 plus Both 3.92
Albania 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.32
Albania 2011 25 plus Males 10.76
Albania 2011 25 plus Females 10.04
Albania 2011 25 plus Both 10.4
Andorra 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.6
Andorra 2011 25 plus Males 12.37
Andorra 2011 25 plus Females 12.21
Andorra 2011 25 plus Both 12.29
United Arab Emirates 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.53
United Arab Emirates 2011 25 plus Males 9.42
United Arab Emirates 2011 25 plus Females 7.22
United Arab Emirates 2011 25 plus Both 8.32
Argentina 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.1
Argentina 2011 25 plus Males 10.2
Argentina 2011 25 plus Females 10.69
Argentina 2011 25 plus Both 10.45
Armenia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.12
Armenia 2011 25 plus Males 11.48
Armenia 2011 25 plus Females 11.49
Armenia 2011 25 plus Both 11.49
Antigua and Barbuda 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.99
Antigua and Barbuda 2011 25 plus Males 12.12
Antigua and Barbuda 2011 25 plus Females 13.2
Antigua and Barbuda 2011 25 plus Both 12.66
Australia 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.09
Australia 2011 25 plus Males 13.06
Australia 2011 25 plus Females 13.12
Australia 2011 25 plus Both 13.09
Austria 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.24
Austria 2011 25 plus Males 12.18
Austria 2011 25 plus Females 11.69
Austria 2011 25 plus Both 11.93
Azerbaijan 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.33
Azerbaijan 2011 25 plus Males 12.25
Azerbaijan 2011 25 plus Females 11.42
Azerbaijan 2011 25 plus Both 11.83
Burundi 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.65
Burundi 2011 25 plus Males 3.74
Burundi 2011 25 plus Females 2.13
Burundi 2011 25 plus Both 2.94
Belgium 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.54
Belgium 2011 25 plus Males 12.54
Belgium 2011 25 plus Females 12.58
Belgium 2011 25 plus Both 12.56
Benin 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.77
Benin 2011 25 plus Males 3.66
Benin 2011 25 plus Females 1.48
Benin 2011 25 plus Both 2.57
Burkina Faso 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.72
Burkina Faso 2011 25 plus Males 1.57
Burkina Faso 2011 25 plus Females 0.79
Burkina Faso 2011 25 plus Both 1.18
Bangladesh 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.8
Bangladesh 2011 25 plus Males 4.97
Bangladesh 2011 25 plus Females 2.69
Bangladesh 2011 25 plus Both 3.83
Bulgaria 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.38
Bulgaria 2011 25 plus Males 11.67
Bulgaria 2011 25 plus Females 11.89
Bulgaria 2011 25 plus Both 11.78
Bahrain 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.8
Bahrain 2011 25 plus Males 7.53
Bahrain 2011 25 plus Females 6.38
Bahrain 2011 25 plus Both 6.95
The Bahamas 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.89
The Bahamas 2011 25 plus Males 11.12
The Bahamas 2011 25 plus Females 11.61
The Bahamas 2011 25 plus Both 11.37
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.4
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2011 25 plus Males 9.98
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2011 25 plus Females 8.95
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2011 25 plus Both 9.47
Belarus 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.58
Belarus 2011 25 plus Males 12.73
Belarus 2011 25 plus Females 12.99
Belarus 2011 25 plus Both 12.86
Belize 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.15
Belize 2011 25 plus Males 8.18
Belize 2011 25 plus Females 7.9
Belize 2011 25 plus Both 8.04
Bolivia 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.99
Bolivia 2011 25 plus Males 8.26
Bolivia 2011 25 plus Females 6.48
Bolivia 2011 25 plus Both 7.37
Brazil 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.6
Brazil 2011 25 plus Males 6.34
Brazil 2011 25 plus Females 6.7
Brazil 2011 25 plus Both 6.52
Barbados 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.55
Barbados 2011 25 plus Males 8.08
Barbados 2011 25 plus Females 7.88
Barbados 2011 25 plus Both 7.98
Brunei 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.98
Brunei 2011 25 plus Males 12.57
Brunei 2011 25 plus Females 11.36
Brunei 2011 25 plus Both 11.96
Bhutan 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.99
Bhutan 2011 25 plus Males 4.85
Bhutan 2011 25 plus Females 1.86
Bhutan 2011 25 plus Both 3.35
Botswana 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.15
Botswana 2011 25 plus Males 4.86
Botswana 2011 25 plus Females 5.05
Botswana 2011 25 plus Both 4.96
Central African Republic 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.72
Central African Republic 2011 25 plus Males 4.88
Central African Republic 2011 25 plus Females 1.99
Central African Republic 2011 25 plus Both 3.44
Canada 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.79
Canada 2011 25 plus Males 14.37
Canada 2011 25 plus Females 14.54
Canada 2011 25 plus Both 14.46
Switzerland 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.86
Switzerland 2011 25 plus Males 13.96
Switzerland 2011 25 plus Females 13.23
Switzerland 2011 25 plus Both 13.59
Chile 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.46
Chile 2011 25 plus Males 10.52
Chile 2011 25 plus Females 10.7
Chile 2011 25 plus Both 10.61
China 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.28
China 2011 25 plus Males 8.65
China 2011 25 plus Females 6.39
China 2011 25 plus Both 7.52
Cote d’Ivoire 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.49
Cote d’Ivoire 2011 25 plus Males 4.07
Cote d’Ivoire 2011 25 plus Females 1.86
Cote d’Ivoire 2011 25 plus Both 2.96
Cameroon 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.53
Cameroon 2011 25 plus Males 6.38
Cameroon 2011 25 plus Females 4.24
Cameroon 2011 25 plus Both 5.31
Democratic Republic of the Congo 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.6
Democratic Republic of the Congo 2011 25 plus Males 7.43
Democratic Republic of the Congo 2011 25 plus Females 3.84
Democratic Republic of the Congo 2011 25 plus Both 5.64
Congo 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.84
Congo 2011 25 plus Males 8.27
Congo 2011 25 plus Females 5.25
Congo 2011 25 plus Both 6.76
Colombia 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.91
Colombia 2011 25 plus Males 7.72
Colombia 2011 25 plus Females 7.87
Colombia 2011 25 plus Both 7.8
Comoros 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.03
Comoros 2011 25 plus Males 4.18
Comoros 2011 25 plus Females 2.31
Comoros 2011 25 plus Both 3.24
Cape Verde 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.79
Cape Verde 2011 25 plus Males 4.62
Cape Verde 2011 25 plus Females 2.84
Cape Verde 2011 25 plus Both 3.73
Costa Rica 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.11
Costa Rica 2011 25 plus Males 8.41
Costa Rica 2011 25 plus Females 8.75
Costa Rica 2011 25 plus Both 8.58
Cuba 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.42
Cuba 2011 25 plus Males 10.71
Cuba 2011 25 plus Females 10.52
Cuba 2011 25 plus Both 10.62
Cyprus 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.7
Cyprus 2011 25 plus Males 12.17
Cyprus 2011 25 plus Females 11.56
Cyprus 2011 25 plus Both 11.86
Czech Republic 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.35
Czech Republic 2011 25 plus Males 13.45
Czech Republic 2011 25 plus Females 13.15
Czech Republic 2011 25 plus Both 13.3
Germany 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.28
Germany 2011 25 plus Males 12.97
Germany 2011 25 plus Females 12.58
Germany 2011 25 plus Both 12.77
Djibouti 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.82
Djibouti 2011 25 plus Males 5.25
Djibouti 2011 25 plus Females 1.78
Djibouti 2011 25 plus Both 3.52
Dominica 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.01
Dominica 2011 25 plus Males 9.86
Dominica 2011 25 plus Females 10.37
Dominica 2011 25 plus Both 10.12
Denmark 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.99
Denmark 2011 25 plus Males 13.7
Denmark 2011 25 plus Females 13.82
Denmark 2011 25 plus Both 13.76
Dominican Republic 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.12
Dominican Republic 2011 25 plus Males 7.64
Dominican Republic 2011 25 plus Females 7.76
Dominican Republic 2011 25 plus Both 7.7
Algeria 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.04
Algeria 2011 25 plus Males 4.44
Algeria 2011 25 plus Females 3.12
Algeria 2011 25 plus Both 3.78
Ecuador 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.19
Ecuador 2011 25 plus Males 8.55
Ecuador 2011 25 plus Females 8.42
Ecuador 2011 25 plus Both 8.49
Egypt 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.07
Egypt 2011 25 plus Males 7.88
Egypt 2011 25 plus Females 5.15
Egypt 2011 25 plus Both 6.52
Eritrea 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.76
Eritrea 2011 25 plus Males 3.58
Eritrea 2011 25 plus Females 1.7
Eritrea 2011 25 plus Both 2.64
Spain 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.4
Spain 2011 25 plus Males 10.17
Spain 2011 25 plus Females 10.04
Spain 2011 25 plus Both 10.11
Estonia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.86
Estonia 2011 25 plus Males 12.36
Estonia 2011 25 plus Females 13.09
Estonia 2011 25 plus Both 12.73
Ethiopia 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.6
Ethiopia 2011 25 plus Males 3.54
Ethiopia 2011 25 plus Females 1.49
Ethiopia 2011 25 plus Both 2.51
Finland 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.81
Finland 2011 25 plus Males 12.9
Finland 2011 25 plus Females 13.3
Finland 2011 25 plus Both 13.1
Fiji 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.32
Fiji 2011 25 plus Males 9.67
Fiji 2011 25 plus Females 9.56
Fiji 2011 25 plus Both 9.61
France 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.88
France 2011 25 plus Males 11.41
France 2011 25 plus Females 11.63
France 2011 25 plus Both 11.52
Federated States of Micronesia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.27
Federated States of Micronesia 2011 25 plus Males 11.7
Federated States of Micronesia 2011 25 plus Females 10.54
Federated States of Micronesia 2011 25 plus Both 11.12
Global 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.53
Global 2011 25 plus Males 8.74
Global 2011 25 plus Females 7.28
Global 2011 25 plus Both 8.01
Gabon 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.21
Gabon 2011 25 plus Males 7.04
Gabon 2011 25 plus Females 6.39
Gabon 2011 25 plus Both 6.72
United Kingdom 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.07
United Kingdom 2011 25 plus Males 13.56
United Kingdom 2011 25 plus Females 13.63
United Kingdom 2011 25 plus Both 13.59
Georgia 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.55
Georgia 2011 25 plus Males 12.92
Georgia 2011 25 plus Females 13.01
Georgia 2011 25 plus Both 12.96
Ghana 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.67
Ghana 2011 25 plus Males 7.43
Ghana 2011 25 plus Females 4.86
Ghana 2011 25 plus Both 6.14
Guinea 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.05
Guinea 2011 25 plus Males 3
Guinea 2011 25 plus Females 0.96
Guinea 2011 25 plus Both 1.98
The Gambia 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.35
The Gambia 2011 25 plus Males 3.7
The Gambia 2011 25 plus Females 1.68
The Gambia 2011 25 plus Both 2.69
Guinea-Bissau 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.15
Guinea-Bissau 2011 25 plus Males 2.96
Guinea-Bissau 2011 25 plus Females 1.02
Guinea-Bissau 2011 25 plus Both 1.99
Equatorial Guinea 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.51
Equatorial Guinea 2011 25 plus Males 7.68
Equatorial Guinea 2011 25 plus Females 4.18
Equatorial Guinea 2011 25 plus Both 5.93
Greece 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.88
Greece 2011 25 plus Males 11.17
Greece 2011 25 plus Females 10.55
Greece 2011 25 plus Both 10.86
Grenada 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.55
Grenada 2011 25 plus Males 8.08
Grenada 2011 25 plus Females 7.88
Grenada 2011 25 plus Both 7.98
Guatemala 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.08
Guatemala 2011 25 plus Males 5.29
Guatemala 2011 25 plus Females 4.41
Guatemala 2011 25 plus Both 4.85
Guyana 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.22
Guyana 2011 25 plus Males 9.08
Guyana 2011 25 plus Females 8.92
Guyana 2011 25 plus Both 9
Honduras 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.81
Honduras 2011 25 plus Males 5.87
Honduras 2011 25 plus Females 5.87
Honduras 2011 25 plus Both 5.87
Croatia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.17
Croatia 2011 25 plus Males 10.56
Croatia 2011 25 plus Females 9.94
Croatia 2011 25 plus Both 10.25
Haiti 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.94
Haiti 2011 25 plus Males 4.94
Haiti 2011 25 plus Females 3.62
Haiti 2011 25 plus Both 4.28
Hungary 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.04
Hungary 2011 25 plus Males 12.24
Hungary 2011 25 plus Females 12.22
Hungary 2011 25 plus Both 12.23
Indonesia 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.81
Indonesia 2011 25 plus Males 7.52
Indonesia 2011 25 plus Females 6.29
Indonesia 2011 25 plus Both 6.9
India 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.39
India 2011 25 plus Males 6.26
India 2011 25 plus Females 3.32
India 2011 25 plus Both 4.79
Ireland 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.74
Ireland 2011 25 plus Males 11.96
Ireland 2011 25 plus Females 12.41
Ireland 2011 25 plus Both 12.19
Iran 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.15
Iran 2011 25 plus Males 7.36
Iran 2011 25 plus Females 5.07
Iran 2011 25 plus Both 6.21
Iraq 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.86
Iraq 2011 25 plus Males 7.56
Iraq 2011 25 plus Females 4.52
Iraq 2011 25 plus Both 6.04
Iceland 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.27
Iceland 2011 25 plus Males 13.62
Iceland 2011 25 plus Females 13.46
Iceland 2011 25 plus Both 13.54
Israel 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.86
Israel 2011 25 plus Males 13.94
Israel 2011 25 plus Females 14
Israel 2011 25 plus Both 13.97
Italy 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.29
Italy 2011 25 plus Males 11.89
Italy 2011 25 plus Females 11.54
Italy 2011 25 plus Both 11.72
Jamaica 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.06
Jamaica 2011 25 plus Males 9.72
Jamaica 2011 25 plus Females 10.27
Jamaica 2011 25 plus Both 10
Jordan 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.52
Jordan 2011 25 plus Males 10.29
Jordan 2011 25 plus Females 8.15
Jordan 2011 25 plus Both 9.22
Japan 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.81
Japan 2011 25 plus Males 13.48
Japan 2011 25 plus Females 13.4
Japan 2011 25 plus Both 13.44
Kazakhstan 2011 15 to 44 Females 13
Kazakhstan 2011 25 plus Males 12.18
Kazakhstan 2011 25 plus Females 12.16
Kazakhstan 2011 25 plus Both 12.17
Kenya 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.02
Kenya 2011 25 plus Males 7.31
Kenya 2011 25 plus Females 5.1
Kenya 2011 25 plus Both 6.21
Kyrgyzstan 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.89
Kyrgyzstan 2011 25 plus Males 11.97
Kyrgyzstan 2011 25 plus Females 11.9
Kyrgyzstan 2011 25 plus Both 11.94
Cambodia 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.26
Cambodia 2011 25 plus Males 5.66
Cambodia 2011 25 plus Females 3.38
Cambodia 2011 25 plus Both 4.52
Kiribati 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.3
Kiribati 2011 25 plus Males 7.38
Kiribati 2011 25 plus Females 6.72
Kiribati 2011 25 plus Both 7.05
South Korea 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.72
South Korea 2011 25 plus Males 12.53
South Korea 2011 25 plus Females 10.8
South Korea 2011 25 plus Both 11.67
Kuwait 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.41
Kuwait 2011 25 plus Males 9.45
Kuwait 2011 25 plus Females 8.19
Kuwait 2011 25 plus Both 8.82
Laos 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.52
Laos 2011 25 plus Males 5.5
Laos 2011 25 plus Females 3.44
Laos 2011 25 plus Both 4.47
Lebanon 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.49
Lebanon 2011 25 plus Males 8.71
Lebanon 2011 25 plus Females 8.14
Lebanon 2011 25 plus Both 8.42
Liberia 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.89
Liberia 2011 25 plus Males 5.63
Liberia 2011 25 plus Females 2.35
Liberia 2011 25 plus Both 3.99
Libya 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.82
Libya 2011 25 plus Males 6.58
Libya 2011 25 plus Females 3.84
Libya 2011 25 plus Both 5.21
Saint Lucia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.23
Saint Lucia 2011 25 plus Males 9.46
Saint Lucia 2011 25 plus Females 9.82
Saint Lucia 2011 25 plus Both 9.64
Sri Lanka 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.91
Sri Lanka 2011 25 plus Males 9.45
Sri Lanka 2011 25 plus Females 9.12
Sri Lanka 2011 25 plus Both 9.29
Lesotho 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.33
Lesotho 2011 25 plus Males 5.96
Lesotho 2011 25 plus Females 7.56
Lesotho 2011 25 plus Both 6.76
Lithuania 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.86
Lithuania 2011 25 plus Males 11.86
Lithuania 2011 25 plus Females 12.03
Lithuania 2011 25 plus Both 11.95
Luxembourg 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.74
Luxembourg 2011 25 plus Males 12.44
Luxembourg 2011 25 plus Females 11.97
Luxembourg 2011 25 plus Both 12.2
Latvia 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.26
Latvia 2011 25 plus Males 12.63
Latvia 2011 25 plus Females 13.17
Latvia 2011 25 plus Both 12.9
Morocco 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.29
Morocco 2011 25 plus Males 4.05
Morocco 2011 25 plus Females 2.18
Morocco 2011 25 plus Both 3.12
Moldova 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.96
Moldova 2011 25 plus Males 11.28
Moldova 2011 25 plus Females 11.45
Moldova 2011 25 plus Both 11.36
Madagascar 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.6
Madagascar 2011 25 plus Males 5.18
Madagascar 2011 25 plus Females 4.04
Madagascar 2011 25 plus Both 4.61
Maldives 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.95
Maldives 2011 25 plus Males 5.26
Maldives 2011 25 plus Females 4.56
Maldives 2011 25 plus Both 4.91
Mexico 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.89
Mexico 2011 25 plus Males 8.21
Mexico 2011 25 plus Females 7.6
Mexico 2011 25 plus Both 7.91
Marshall Islands 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.82
Marshall Islands 2011 25 plus Males 10.07
Marshall Islands 2011 25 plus Females 8.95
Marshall Islands 2011 25 plus Both 9.51
Macedonia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.68
Macedonia 2011 25 plus Males 10.98
Macedonia 2011 25 plus Females 9.84
Macedonia 2011 25 plus Both 10.41
Mali 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.56
Mali 2011 25 plus Males 1.89
Mali 2011 25 plus Females 0.79
Mali 2011 25 plus Both 1.34
Malta 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.71
Malta 2011 25 plus Males 9.86
Malta 2011 25 plus Females 9.64
Malta 2011 25 plus Both 9.75
Myanmar 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.93
Myanmar 2011 25 plus Males 5.5
Myanmar 2011 25 plus Females 4.85
Myanmar 2011 25 plus Both 5.18
Montenegro 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.16
Montenegro 2011 25 plus Males 12
Montenegro 2011 25 plus Females 10.9
Montenegro 2011 25 plus Both 11.45
Mongolia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.05
Mongolia 2011 25 plus Males 10.02
Mongolia 2011 25 plus Females 10.02
Mongolia 2011 25 plus Both 10.02
Mozambique 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.32
Mozambique 2011 25 plus Males 3.86
Mozambique 2011 25 plus Females 2.28
Mozambique 2011 25 plus Both 3.07
Mauritania 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.91
Mauritania 2011 25 plus Males 3.57
Mauritania 2011 25 plus Females 1.91
Mauritania 2011 25 plus Both 2.74
Mauritius 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.74
Mauritius 2011 25 plus Males 8.42
Mauritius 2011 25 plus Females 7.27
Mauritius 2011 25 plus Both 7.85
Malawi 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.6
Malawi 2011 25 plus Males 5.23
Malawi 2011 25 plus Females 2.93
Malawi 2011 25 plus Both 4.08
Malaysia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.02
Malaysia 2011 25 plus Males 8.9
Malaysia 2011 25 plus Females 7.51
Malaysia 2011 25 plus Both 8.21
Namibia 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.78
Namibia 2011 25 plus Males 6.62
Namibia 2011 25 plus Females 6.44
Namibia 2011 25 plus Both 6.53
Niger 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.31
Niger 2011 25 plus Males 1.4
Niger 2011 25 plus Females 0.58
Niger 2011 25 plus Both 0.99
Nigeria 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.39
Nigeria 2011 25 plus Males 6.39
Nigeria 2011 25 plus Females 4.17
Nigeria 2011 25 plus Both 5.28
Nicaragua 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.19
Nicaragua 2011 25 plus Males 5.98
Nicaragua 2011 25 plus Females 6.01
Nicaragua 2011 25 plus Both 6
Netherlands 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.75
Netherlands 2011 25 plus Males 13.34
Netherlands 2011 25 plus Females 13.03
Netherlands 2011 25 plus Both 13.19
Norway 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.43
Norway 2011 25 plus Males 13.65
Norway 2011 25 plus Females 13.81
Norway 2011 25 plus Both 13.73
Nepal 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.47
Nepal 2011 25 plus Males 4.27
Nepal 2011 25 plus Females 1.38
Nepal 2011 25 plus Both 2.82
New Zealand 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.4
New Zealand 2011 25 plus Males 13.38
New Zealand 2011 25 plus Females 13.6
New Zealand 2011 25 plus Both 13.49
Oman 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.38
Oman 2011 25 plus Males 5.97
Oman 2011 25 plus Females 3.75
Oman 2011 25 plus Both 4.86
Pakistan 2011 15 to 44 Females 3.88
Pakistan 2011 25 plus Males 5.26
Pakistan 2011 25 plus Females 2.07
Pakistan 2011 25 plus Both 3.67
Panama 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.55
Panama 2011 25 plus Males 9.29
Panama 2011 25 plus Females 9.86
Panama 2011 25 plus Both 9.58
Peru 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.57
Peru 2011 25 plus Males 9.82
Peru 2011 25 plus Females 8.47
Peru 2011 25 plus Both 9.15
Philippines 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.84
Philippines 2011 25 plus Males 9.16
Philippines 2011 25 plus Females 9.43
Philippines 2011 25 plus Both 9.3
Papua New Guinea 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.52
Papua New Guinea 2011 25 plus Males 5.02
Papua New Guinea 2011 25 plus Females 3.13
Papua New Guinea 2011 25 plus Both 4.07
Poland 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.72
Poland 2011 25 plus Males 12.69
Poland 2011 25 plus Females 12.8
Poland 2011 25 plus Both 12.75
North Korea 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.96
North Korea 2011 25 plus Males 10.28
North Korea 2011 25 plus Females 8.18
North Korea 2011 25 plus Both 9.23
Portugal 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.27
Portugal 2011 25 plus Males 8.02
Portugal 2011 25 plus Females 7.89
Portugal 2011 25 plus Both 7.95
Paraguay 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.34
Paraguay 2011 25 plus Males 7.42
Paraguay 2011 25 plus Females 7.57
Paraguay 2011 25 plus Both 7.5
Palestine 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.27
Palestine 2011 25 plus Males 9.26
Palestine 2011 25 plus Females 7.07
Palestine 2011 25 plus Both 8.16
Qatar 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.16
Qatar 2011 25 plus Males 7.64
Qatar 2011 25 plus Females 7.68
Qatar 2011 25 plus Both 7.66
High-income Asia Pacific 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.42
High-income Asia Pacific 2011 25 plus Males 13.22
High-income Asia Pacific 2011 25 plus Females 12.7
High-income Asia Pacific 2011 25 plus Both 12.96
Western Europe 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.23
Western Europe 2011 25 plus Males 12.2
Western Europe 2011 25 plus Females 12.05
Western Europe 2011 25 plus Both 12.13
Andean Latin America 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.19
Andean Latin America 2011 25 plus Males 9.21
Andean Latin America 2011 25 plus Females 8.13
Andean Latin America 2011 25 plus Both 8.67
Central Latin America 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.65
Central Latin America 2011 25 plus Males 7.91
Central Latin America 2011 25 plus Females 7.57
Central Latin America 2011 25 plus Both 7.74
Southern Latin America 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.15
Southern Latin America 2011 25 plus Males 10.25
Southern Latin America 2011 25 plus Females 10.66
Southern Latin America 2011 25 plus Both 10.45
Tropical Latin America 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.62
Tropical Latin America 2011 25 plus Males 6.37
Tropical Latin America 2011 25 plus Females 6.72
Tropical Latin America 2011 25 plus Both 6.54
North Africa and Middle East 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.49
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Males 7.06
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Females 4.58
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Both 5.82
High-income North America 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.17
High-income North America 2011 25 plus Males 14.32
High-income North America 2011 25 plus Females 14.37
High-income North America 2011 25 plus Both 14.34
Oceania 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.59
Oceania 2011 25 plus Males 6.14
Oceania 2011 25 plus Females 4.52
Oceania 2011 25 plus Both 5.33
Central Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.52
Central Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Males 6.88
Central Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Females 3.65
Central Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Both 5.26
Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.98
Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Males 4.95
Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Females 2.97
Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Both 3.96
Central Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.38
Central Asia 2011 25 plus Males 11.91
Central Asia 2011 25 plus Females 11.54
Central Asia 2011 25 plus Both 11.73
Southern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.13
Southern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Males 8.38
Southern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Females 8.12
Southern Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Both 8.25
Western Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.89
Western Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Males 5.18
Western Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Females 3.11
Western Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Both 4.15
East Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.37
East Asia 2011 25 plus Males 8.72
East Asia 2011 25 plus Females 6.49
East Asia 2011 25 plus Both 7.61
South Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.06
South Asia 2011 25 plus Males 5.98
South Asia 2011 25 plus Females 3.07
South Asia 2011 25 plus Both 4.53
Southeast Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.09
Southeast Asia 2011 25 plus Males 7.85
Southeast Asia 2011 25 plus Females 6.92
Southeast Asia 2011 25 plus Both 7.39
Australasia 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.14
Australasia 2011 25 plus Males 13.11
Australasia 2011 25 plus Females 13.2
Australasia 2011 25 plus Both 13.15
Caribbean 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.92
Caribbean 2011 25 plus Males 8.65
Caribbean 2011 25 plus Females 8.29
Caribbean 2011 25 plus Both 8.47
Central Europe 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.84
Central Europe 2011 25 plus Males 12.17
Central Europe 2011 25 plus Females 11.9
Central Europe 2011 25 plus Both 12.03
Eastern Europe 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.65
Eastern Europe 2011 25 plus Males 12.72
Eastern Europe 2011 25 plus Females 12.94
Eastern Europe 2011 25 plus Both 12.83
Romania 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.72
Romania 2011 25 plus Males 12.03
Romania 2011 25 plus Females 11.32
Romania 2011 25 plus Both 11.67
Russia 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.69
Russia 2011 25 plus Males 12.69
Russia 2011 25 plus Females 12.94
Russia 2011 25 plus Both 12.82
Rwanda 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.68
Rwanda 2011 25 plus Males 4.21
Rwanda 2011 25 plus Females 2.76
Rwanda 2011 25 plus Both 3.49
High-income 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.68
High-income 2011 25 plus Males 12.98
High-income 2011 25 plus Females 12.85
High-income 2011 25 plus Both 12.92
Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.14
Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia 2011 25 plus Males 12.41
Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia 2011 25 plus Females 12.41
Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia 2011 25 plus Both 12.41
Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.51
Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Males 5.61
Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Females 3.7
Sub-Saharan Africa 2011 25 plus Both 4.66
North Africa and Middle East 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.49
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Males 7.06
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Females 4.58
North Africa and Middle East 2011 25 plus Both 5.82
South Asia 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.06
South Asia 2011 25 plus Males 5.98
South Asia 2011 25 plus Females 3.07
South Asia 2011 25 plus Both 4.53
Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.26
Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011 25 plus Males 8.48
Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011 25 plus Females 6.59
Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Oceania 2011 25 plus Both 7.53
Latin America and Caribbean 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.33
Latin America and Caribbean 2011 25 plus Males 7.47
Latin America and Caribbean 2011 25 plus Females 7.33
Latin America and Caribbean 2011 25 plus Both 7.4
Saudi Arabia 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.4
Saudi Arabia 2011 25 plus Males 8.38
Saudi Arabia 2011 25 plus Females 4.42
Saudi Arabia 2011 25 plus Both 6.4
Sudan 2011 15 to 44 Females 5
Sudan 2011 25 plus Males 4.75
Sudan 2011 25 plus Females 2.56
Sudan 2011 25 plus Both 3.66
Senegal 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.9
Senegal 2011 25 plus Males 3.29
Senegal 2011 25 plus Females 1.58
Senegal 2011 25 plus Both 2.44
Singapore 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.97
Singapore 2011 25 plus Males 10.74
Singapore 2011 25 plus Females 9.27
Singapore 2011 25 plus Both 10.01
Solomon Islands 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.25
Solomon Islands 2011 25 plus Males 6.86
Solomon Islands 2011 25 plus Females 5.08
Solomon Islands 2011 25 plus Both 5.97
Sierra Leone 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.79
Sierra Leone 2011 25 plus Males 3.3
Sierra Leone 2011 25 plus Females 1.45
Sierra Leone 2011 25 plus Both 2.38
El Salvador 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.34
El Salvador 2011 25 plus Males 7.17
El Salvador 2011 25 plus Females 6.52
El Salvador 2011 25 plus Both 6.85
Somalia 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.88
Somalia 2011 25 plus Males 2.95
Somalia 2011 25 plus Females 1.05
Somalia 2011 25 plus Both 2
Serbia 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.77
Serbia 2011 25 plus Males 11.35
Serbia 2011 25 plus Females 10.7
Serbia 2011 25 plus Both 11.02
South Sudan 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.16
South Sudan 2011 25 plus Males 2.08
South Sudan 2011 25 plus Females 0.59
South Sudan 2011 25 plus Both 1.34
Sao Tome and Principe 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.56
Sao Tome and Principe 2011 25 plus Males 5.3
Sao Tome and Principe 2011 25 plus Females 3.17
Sao Tome and Principe 2011 25 plus Both 4.24
Suriname 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.27
Suriname 2011 25 plus Males 8.57
Suriname 2011 25 plus Females 8.03
Suriname 2011 25 plus Both 8.3
Slovakia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.5
Slovakia 2011 25 plus Males 12.38
Slovakia 2011 25 plus Females 11.89
Slovakia 2011 25 plus Both 12.14
Slovenia 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.82
Slovenia 2011 25 plus Males 12.12
Slovenia 2011 25 plus Females 11.8
Slovenia 2011 25 plus Both 11.96
Sweden 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.45
Sweden 2011 25 plus Males 12.91
Sweden 2011 25 plus Females 13.34
Sweden 2011 25 plus Both 13.12
Swaziland 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.95
Swaziland 2011 25 plus Males 7.15
Swaziland 2011 25 plus Females 6.6
Swaziland 2011 25 plus Both 6.88
Seychelles 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.61
Seychelles 2011 25 plus Males 8.96
Seychelles 2011 25 plus Females 8.99
Seychelles 2011 25 plus Both 8.98
Syria 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.44
Syria 2011 25 plus Males 7.07
Syria 2011 25 plus Females 4.5
Syria 2011 25 plus Both 5.79
Chad 2011 15 to 44 Females 1.63
Chad 2011 25 plus Males 2.71
Chad 2011 25 plus Females 0.74
Chad 2011 25 plus Both 1.72
Togo 2011 15 to 44 Females 4.14
Togo 2011 25 plus Males 5.12
Togo 2011 25 plus Females 2.2
Togo 2011 25 plus Both 3.66
Thailand 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.57
Thailand 2011 25 plus Males 7.91
Thailand 2011 25 plus Females 7.38
Thailand 2011 25 plus Both 7.65
Tajikistan 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.96
Tajikistan 2011 25 plus Males 11.19
Tajikistan 2011 25 plus Females 9.77
Tajikistan 2011 25 plus Both 10.48
Turkmenistan 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.1
Turkmenistan 2011 25 plus Males 11.66
Turkmenistan 2011 25 plus Females 11.01
Turkmenistan 2011 25 plus Both 11.33
Timor-Leste 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.08
Timor-Leste 2011 25 plus Males 4.3
Timor-Leste 2011 25 plus Females 2.81
Timor-Leste 2011 25 plus Both 3.55
Tonga 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.24
Tonga 2011 25 plus Males 10.25
Tonga 2011 25 plus Females 10.11
Tonga 2011 25 plus Both 10.18
Trinidad and Tobago 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.62
Trinidad and Tobago 2011 25 plus Males 10.39
Trinidad and Tobago 2011 25 plus Females 10.53
Trinidad and Tobago 2011 25 plus Both 10.46
Tunisia 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.13
Tunisia 2011 25 plus Males 7.71
Tunisia 2011 25 plus Females 4.82
Tunisia 2011 25 plus Both 6.26
Turkey 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.03
Turkey 2011 25 plus Males 7.93
Turkey 2011 25 plus Females 5.66
Turkey 2011 25 plus Both 6.8
Taiwan 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.93
Taiwan 2011 25 plus Males 11.37
Taiwan 2011 25 plus Females 9.98
Taiwan 2011 25 plus Both 10.67
Tanzania 2011 15 to 44 Females 6.27
Tanzania 2011 25 plus Males 5.79
Tanzania 2011 25 plus Females 3.85
Tanzania 2011 25 plus Both 4.82
Uganda 2011 15 to 44 Females 5.61
Uganda 2011 25 plus Males 6.24
Uganda 2011 25 plus Females 3.54
Uganda 2011 25 plus Both 4.89
Ukraine 2011 15 to 44 Females 13.7
Ukraine 2011 25 plus Males 12.95
Ukraine 2011 25 plus Females 13.07
Ukraine 2011 25 plus Both 13.01
Uruguay 2011 15 to 44 Females 11.12
Uruguay 2011 25 plus Males 9.38
Uruguay 2011 25 plus Females 10.06
Uruguay 2011 25 plus Both 9.72
United States 2011 15 to 44 Females 14.1
United States 2011 25 plus Males 14.31
United States 2011 25 plus Females 14.35
United States 2011 25 plus Both 14.33
Uzbekistan 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.18
Uzbekistan 2011 25 plus Males 11.8
Uzbekistan 2011 25 plus Females 11.3
Uzbekistan 2011 25 plus Both 11.55
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.55
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2011 25 plus Males 8.08
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2011 25 plus Females 7.88
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2011 25 plus Both 7.98
Venezuela 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.66
Venezuela 2011 25 plus Males 8.52
Venezuela 2011 25 plus Females 8.53
Venezuela 2011 25 plus Both 8.52
Vietnam 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.07
Vietnam 2011 25 plus Males 8.53
Vietnam 2011 25 plus Females 7.14
Vietnam 2011 25 plus Both 7.84
Vanuatu 2011 15 to 44 Females 8.29
Vanuatu 2011 25 plus Males 7.57
Vanuatu 2011 25 plus Females 6.58
Vanuatu 2011 25 plus Both 7.07
Samoa 2011 15 to 44 Females 12.69
Samoa 2011 25 plus Males 10.66
Samoa 2011 25 plus Females 10.94
Samoa 2011 25 plus Both 10.8
Yemen 2011 15 to 44 Females 2.13
Yemen 2011 25 plus Males 3.77
Yemen 2011 25 plus Females 0.83
Yemen 2011 25 plus Both 2.3
South Africa 2011 15 to 44 Females 10.5
South Africa 2011 25 plus Males 8.66
South Africa 2011 25 plus Females 8.57
South Africa 2011 25 plus Both 8.61
Zambia 2011 15 to 44 Females 7.03
Zambia 2011 25 plus Males 7.37
Zambia 2011 25 plus Females 4.96
Zambia 2011 25 plus Both 6.17
Zimbabwe 2011 15 to 44 Females 9.21
Zimbabwe 2011 25 plus Males 8.22
Zimbabwe 2011 25 plus Females 6.53
Zimbabwe 2011 25 plus Both 7.38
Afghanistan 2012 15 to 44 Females 1.2
Afghanistan 2012 25 plus Males 3.01
Afghanistan 2012 25 plus Females 0.55
Afghanistan 2012 25 plus Both 1.78
Angola 2012 15 to 44 Females 4.92
Angola 2012 25 plus Males 5.21
Angola 2012 25 plus Females 2.82
Angola 2012 25 plus Both 4.01
Albania 2012 15 to 44 Females 11.48
Albania 2012 25 plus Males 10.9
Albania 2012 25 plus Females 10.2
Albania 2012 25 plus Both 10.55
Andorra 2012 15 to 44 Females 14.73
Andorra 2012 25 plus Males 12.5
Andorra 2012 25 plus Females 12.37
Andorra 2012 25 plus Both 12.43
United Arab Emirates 2012 15 to 44 Females 11.7
United Arab Emirates 2012 25 plus Males 9.57
United Arab Emirates 2012 25 plus Females 7.36
United Arab Emirates 2012 25 plus Both 8.46
Argentina 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.25
Argentina 2012 25 plus Males 10.33
Argentina 2012 25 plus Females 10.85
Argentina 2012 25 plus Both 10.59
Armenia 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.27
Armenia 2012 25 plus Males 11.61
Armenia 2012 25 plus Females 11.65
Armenia 2012 25 plus Both 11.63
Antigua and Barbuda 2012 15 to 44 Females 14.13
Antigua and Barbuda 2012 25 plus Males 12.25
Antigua and Barbuda 2012 25 plus Females 13.35
Antigua and Barbuda 2012 25 plus Both 12.8
Australia 2012 15 to 44 Females 14.23
Australia 2012 25 plus Males 13.19
Australia 2012 25 plus Females 13.27
Australia 2012 25 plus Both 13.23
Austria 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.39
Austria 2012 25 plus Males 12.3
Austria 2012 25 plus Females 11.84
Austria 2012 25 plus Both 12.07
Azerbaijan 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.48
Azerbaijan 2012 25 plus Males 12.38
Azerbaijan 2012 25 plus Females 11.58
Azerbaijan 2012 25 plus Both 11.98
Burundi 2012 15 to 44 Females 3.75
Burundi 2012 25 plus Males 3.83
Burundi 2012 25 plus Females 2.2
Burundi 2012 25 plus Both 3.01
Belgium 2012 15 to 44 Females 13.69
Belgium 2012 25 plus Males 12.67
Belgium 2012 25 plus Females 12.74
Belgium 2012 25 plus Both 12.7
Benin 2012 15 to 44 Females 2.85
Benin 2012 25 plus Males 3.74
Benin 2012 25 plus Females 1.53
Benin 2012 25 plus Both 2.64
Burkina Faso 2012 15 to 44 Females 1.78
Burkina Faso 2012 25 plus Males 1.61
Burkina Faso 2012 25 plus Females 0.82
Burkina Faso 2012 25 plus Both 1.21
Bangladesh 2012 15 to 44 Females 4.92
Bangladesh 2012 25 plus Males 5.07
Bangladesh 2012 25 plus Females 2.77
Bangladesh 2012 25 plus Both 3.92
Bulgaria 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.52
Bulgaria 2012 25 plus Males 11.79
Bulgaria 2012 25 plus Females 12.04
Bulgaria 2012 25 plus Both 11.92
Bahrain 2012 15 to 44 Females 9.95
Bahrain 2012 25 plus Males 7.65
Bahrain 2012 25 plus Females 6.51
Bahrain 2012 25 plus Both 7.08
The Bahamas 2012 15 to 44 Females 13.04
The Bahamas 2012 25 plus Males 11.26
The Bahamas 2012 25 plus Females 11.77
The Bahamas 2012 25 plus Both 11.51
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2012 15 to 44 Females 10.58
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2012 25 plus Males 10.12
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2012 25 plus Females 9.12
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2012 25 plus Both 9.62
Belarus 2012 15 to 44 Females 13.73
Belarus 2012 25 plus Males 12.87
Belarus 2012 25 plus Females 13.15
Belarus 2012 25 plus Both 13.01
Belize 2012 15 to 44 Females 9.31
Belize 2012 25 plus Males 8.31
Belize 2012 25 plus Females 8.05
Belize 2012 25 plus Both 8.18
Bolivia 2012 15 to 44 Females 9.16
Bolivia 2012 25 plus Males 8.39
Bolivia 2012 25 plus Females 6.62
Bolivia 2012 25 plus Both 7.5
Brazil 2012 15 to 44 Females 8.76
Brazil 2012 25 plus Males 6.46
Brazil 2012 25 plus Females 6.84
Brazil 2012 25 plus Both 6.65
Barbados 2012 15 to 44 Females 10.71
Barbados 2012 25 plus Males 8.21
Barbados 2012 25 plus Females 8.04
Barbados 2012 25 plus Both 8.13
Brunei 2012 15 to 44 Females 14.12
Brunei 2012 25 plus Males 12.7
Brunei 2012 25 plus Females 11.51
Brunei 2012 25 plus Both 12.11
Bhutan 2012 15 to 44 Females 3.08
Bhutan 2012 25 plus Males 4.95
Bhutan 2012 25 plus Females 1.91
Bhutan 2012 25 plus Both 3.43
Botswana 2012 15 to 44 Females 8.31
Botswana 2012 25 plus Males 4.96
Botswana 2012 25 plus Females 5.17
Botswana 2012 25 plus Both 5.07
Central African Republic 2012 15 to 44 Females 3.82
Central African Republic 2012 25 plus Males 4.98
Central African Republic 2012 25 plus Females 2.05
Central African Republic 2012 25 plus Both 3.52
Canada 2012 15 to 44 Females 14.91
Canada 2012 25 plus Males 14.48
Canada 2012 25 plus Females 14.67
Canada 2012 25 plus Both 14.57
Switzerland 2012 15 to 44 Females 13.01
Switzerland 2012 25 plus Males 14.07
Switzerland 2012 25 plus Females 13.38
Switzerland 2012 25 plus Both 13.72
Chile 2012 15 to 44 Females 12.61
Chile 2012 25 plus Males 10.66
Chile 2012 25 plus Females 10.86
Chile 2012 25 plus Both 10.76
China 2012 15 to 44 Females 9.44
China 2012 25 plus Males 8.78
China 2012 25 plus Females 6.53
China 2012 25 plus Both 7.66
Cote d’Ivoire 2012 15 to 44 Females 3.58

Mobile Health IT News

Three CEOs share their visions for the future of telemedicine

While the word “telemedicine” was once considered a catch-all term for any type of healthcare service administered remotely, it’s become evident over the last decade that the word can be applied to the myriad virtual care services, tools and companies out there today. So in effort to get an idea of where the industry is heading in the next few years, a panel at the American Telemedicine Association’s conference in Orlando this week put three CEOs heading very different companies in the hot seat to get their take on the future.

“We can look around and see a lot of hype, so many amazing ideas and innovations, but when you push, you have to ask how many patients are actually treated through telemedicine. A lot of companies are still in their infancy,” moderator Dr. Ateev Mehrota, who is a professor of medicine at Harvard and a hospitalist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, said. “But online consultations are showing some real numbers, with a million or a million and a half visits conducted in 2016. But as great as that sounds, in the grand scheme of things, we have around 1 billion in-person visits per year. So how does telemedicine grow and catch up to that level?”

Scott Decker, CEO of telemedicine platform provider MDLive, said the main macro-level challenges affecting the telemedicine industry are the same as those in traditional healthcare, with cost barriers and a lack of primary care providers. From there, he says, telemedicine companies can rise up to expand the ideas people have around how to manage their wellness.

“We take this low-acuity business we started, but now we need to start thinking about how to push the envelope,” Decker said. “How comfortable can we make people? That comes from trying things and seeing if [users] are satisfied with new technologies like connected devices. I don’t think people get excited to go to the doctor or hospital, just like I don’t think people get very excited about going to the bank or the mall, but they will embrace new tools to do these things. I think we’re just at the cusp of saying telemedicine is proven, but I think now is the time we can be bullish and start to get aggressive about seeing what consumers might be interested in.”

For Hill Ferguson, CEO of app-based telemedicine provider and platform Doctor on Demand, his company is heavily focused on building their own brand and being seen as the main contact point for their services. Rather than just providing the technology, they want to be synonymous with quality healthcare and ongoing value.

“Our mission at Doctor on Demand is to take what is a transaction based consumer experience and evolve it into a relationship-based one that keeps building,” Ferguson said. “One of the things I do every morning, without fail, is go through all of our customer reviews. One of the themes emerging is, ‘That was great, I wish all doctors, etc.’ This is becoming more and more frequent, because people try, and they are like, ‘Hey, this actually works, it’s not just a doctor, but a good doctor, and how can I start engaging in my health more?’ So our vision for the next three to five years is you will be doing more and more visits.”

On the opposite end of the spectrum, American Well CEO Dr. Roy Schoenberg says while his company is certainly riding the wave of telemedicine growth, they don’t see themselves as the primary face of the service. Rather, American Well seeks to be a technology provider that allows for integration of new devices, virtual visit modalities and information systems.

“I do agree that branding needs to be in the front, because the brand is something that creates trust, legions, and becomes something that people come to expect more from. And I think that’s fine and healthcare should come with a brand, but I just think the brand shouldn’t be a software company. I think the brand of healthcare should be all healthcare entities,” he said. “As long as what you offer is incredibly new and different that has never been done by traditional healthcare entities, then I think it’s ok for us to do it under our brand. But really simply, in the world where every health plan is beginning to offer virtual healthcare services, I think the use of those healthcare services under a software company brand becomes gradually less important.”

That being said, Schoenberg does believe the industry itself will continue to grow, but perhaps not in the way some may foresee.

“I don’t think growth will be directed to telehealth products. I think the way growth is going to come, is the integration of telehealth services, which will more and more represent the usual suspects of healthcare,” he said.

As technologies get better and more widely adopted, Schoenberg thinks people will interact with them more and more not as standalone device or telemedicine technology brands, but through their familiar insurance providers, health systems or hospitals.

“Technology will retreat to the back as an enabler for Americans to interact with those institutions of healthcare,” he said.

Given the different perspectives on what’s to come, Mehrota asked the panel how all the different companies acting in the space go about developing their own business models.

For Decker, MDLive is embarking on plans and partnerships to allow for more data collection, analysis and sharing.

“I think we will see more integration, seamlessness, which will give us ability to do more data-driven models of delivery. Population health, right?” Decker said. “You are going to be able see massive amounts of data, you’ll be able to sort through it and use it, you will have healthcare-oriented data companies that help us do that. I think it’s a natural extension for telehealth companies, at least with our model. From a business model standpoint, I think that data moves us out of a transactional process to more of a value-building place.”

Ferguson said he would like to see better devices designed with the consumer in mind and smoother integration with existing workflows. As his company employs full-time physicians as well as part-time, he doesn’t like the idea of growing a large, disparate provider network so much as getting better tools that enable his own workforce to be more efficient. A big part of that would be integrating a remote version of services that need to be in-person, like lab tests.

“We’ve talked about the limitations of telemedicine, but we need to be realistic. Ask a different question: what is the resolution rate? Think about the fact that less than 10 percent of sore throats are strep throat. We don’t need to order enough for every kid, just 10 percent of them,” Ferguson said. “But we do need to build capabilities so when doctors feel that more testing is appropriate, we can get that done. “

Schoenberg pointed that many things will still need to be done in-person, and noted that telehealth cannot solve for all fragmentation problems.

“There are better ways of ensuring how that can happen, like with expanded physician networks, but I think the issue is actually much bigger. It’s not about dispatching, who’s coming in, who’s coming back. The biggest issue we have is that if a patient is seen by a clinician and any additional other procedure has to be done to establish a diagnosis. And forget telehealth, this is in all healthcare settings,” he said.

That being said, he thinks the growing sophistication of connected devices or at-home testing kits are definitely indicative of an evolving telemedicine industry that we can count on to keep moving forward.

“As technology improves, and more and more of these tests are valuable to the telehealth transaction, some of those tests become innovative enough and low cost enough to be able to do them in the home,” he said. “I think the devices coming in and everything, these are the reflection: all of these devices wouldn’t exist unless telehealth had grown in the last 10 years so that it made sense for a company to invent a telehealth-purpose device. The same thing is going to go for lab tests. You are going to see telehealth-purposed home kits for strep throat and UTI and a variety of diagnostic devices are going to surface, and that’s going to be driven because of the telehealth industry.”

To bring in telemedicine, do homework and meet the patients – and health system CEOs – where they are

As fun as FaceTime or other video calls can be, many people may choose to decline an incoming face-to-face chat for the simple reason of, well, not wanting to show their face. Understandably, when people are sick and are choosing to engage with their doctor virtually, they may not leap at the choice of a video visit.

“When we talk about telemedicine, a lot of people immediately think video. But when you look at modes preferred, most are not even willing to use video. In fact, half would choose a modality that specifically does not include it at all,” Dr. Kevin Smith, chief clinical officer at Zipnosis, said during a presentation at the American Telemedicine Association conference in Orlando.

And they aren’t eschewing the technology for complicated reasons, either, Smith said.

“In our company, we’ve done lots of testing with groups and done lots of polling, and many testers are mainly opting out of video for things like ‘what I’m wearing,’ or ‘what my hair looks like.’ Those are the top reasons.”

But providers and health systems need not put the brakes on bringing telemedicine into their practice for fear of alienating their patients, Smith said. Most patients are more than happy to use virtual visits, and, just like their aversion to the in-your-face approach of video, most even prefer it over a real human doctor.

“In our studies, we saw 70 percent of patients who would use telehealth over human contact,” Smith said. “That can be a bit sobering for physicians, but the fact is they are not nearly as loyal to our in-person relationship as we believe them to be.”

But it’s not personal. Cost savings and convenience are the main reason, even with older patients, whom many innovators may write off as tech-phobic, but are in fact the largest users of telehealth because, as Smith said, they are the people using the most healthcare services.

So when providers want to bring in telemedicine, Smith advised, it’s important for them to do their homework and make sure they are meeting patients with the technology they actually want to use. In Smith’s own research, he found patients vastly prefer email, phone calls and e-visits – a mix of online check-ins and patient-provided data and follow-up calls, emails or texts. Accordingly, satisfaction levels with the telemedicine modalities are on par with the patients’ initially stated preferences.

Once providers figure out what their patients want, then it’s onto how exactly how to intelligently bring telemedicine into their practice. Alex White, a consultant at KPMG, explained how telemedicine could be used to grow revenue and increase efficiency in ways that simply hiring more doctors can’t.
“We have to put telemedicine in broader context of growth strategy. When we are talking about delivering on a supply side of physicians, we can see how health systems may or many not be able to act on this demand,” White said in a presentation. “And it is clearly and definitely proven that we have to find out what consumers want before bringing in technology.”

To illustrate his point, White describe two hypothetical health systems. One hires more doctors to grapple with more patients than they could previously handle. The other brings in telemedicine to extend the reach of their existing physicians.

“You have one hospital CEO who says the way out of a problem is to grow, which will lead to economies of scale. Then you have another who wants to drive patient loyalty and physician productivity,” White said. “But the first one will most likely get is more patients, so the problem doesn’t change and you now have more costs associated with those extra physicians and the promotion of their extra services. Not only are you just as inefficient as ever, you are losing more money.”

Of course, there may be situations when health systems do have to hire more doctors, but at the same time, they should start thinking about operating models that could drive productivity, White said. That means taking polls, like Smith said, and figuring out what patients want and which modalities deliver the best engagement and outcomes.

“I don’t know why, but very few health systems are using CRM and they really should be. You need to be able to strip out noise and figure out ways to reframe telemedicine access programs in ways the CFO, CEO and COO will understand,” he said. “That means explain how you will grow, emphasize the lifetime value of retaining a patient, and not canonizing the in-patient visits.”

Roundup: news and updates from ATA 2017

The American Telemedicine Association’s conference in Orlando, held earlier this week on April 24 and 25, hosted several partnership announcements, product launches and technology evolutions. Read on for MobiHealthNews’s roundup:

Stratus Video, which has made a name for itself with its video-based language interpretation services through everyday technology like tablets and smartphones, has been steadily expanding into telehealth technology. The company now currently works with 125 health systems over 1,600 hospitals, and are building on that further with a new partnership with Pennsylvania’s Geisinger Health System. While no program is in place yet, Geisinger plans to launch several different pilots over the next few months to leverage Stratus’s dual expertise. While Geisinger has many existing telehealth programs in place, they were searching for ways to seamlessly integrate more communication tools that could address language barriers.

“Over the last year, we’ve been looking at where our gaps were (and still are) within our organization, and originally we really started out thinking that new solutions would solely be inpatient, to bridge gaps of communication in the hospital only,” Janet F. Rushing, who is the systems director at Geisinger’s Center for Telehealth, told MobiHealthNews. “We knew patients were saying nurses and doctors are not spending enough time to explain, and we saw Stratus as a very viable solution because we needed something that allowed for high egagement and a simple one touch, one click solution.”

Stratus CEO Lee Horner pointed to the impact of language barriers on a patient’s health and well-being, which his company came to understand when they first began wading into healthcare.

“When we first looked at what was happening in the world of interpretation services, we saw people could get interpreters at the point of care, but getting specialists and physicians who could could communicate with them was a gap,” Horner told MobiHealthNews. “So we thought, how can we take on the healthcare side, add interpretation, drive the healthcare organization’s strategy of expanding telehealth, and leverage technology with staff? We know patient engagement is less than seven percent for people who are Limited English Proficient (LEP), but if we can integrate a model that has the interpration services in there, that engagement goes up to 50 or 60 percent.”

The agnostic model of Stratus’ offering was also an attractive selling point, and allows Geisinger to bring more people into the conversation at once.

“What’s important to us is that we don’t have to access another provider network to bring in both capabilities, we can work with the interpreter side and also have the telehealth platform that fits right into our workflow,” Rushing said. “The nurses at the bedside are familiar, the clinics and practice sites are already familiar, so patients will have that comfort level and an easy transition to adoption. And I know as an ICU from the interpreter side, patients are very trusting. They will do anything you ask of them, but most people don’t speak nursing, especially if it is not in their native language.”

Royal Philips debuted its enterprise-level telemedicine software designed for use in intensive care units. Philips’ eCareManager, the company’s new FDA-cleared teleICU software, works to alleviate critical care team shortages by offering a platform connecting regular hospital staff with intensivists – physicians trained specifically for work in the ICU – and offering actionable insights to improve outcomes for patients with the most complex cases. More

American Well announced two developments the company has taken to expand their footprint, both in regards to consumer accessibility as well as ease of use for providers and health systems using the platform. The company unveiled a new enterprise service called AW10, which contains over 100 new features specific to providers to make their experience with American Well’s platform simpler and more comprehensive. Also, the company finally unveiled details of their partnership with Samsung; a collaboration they shared limited information on just a couple of months ago at HIMSS 17. Now American Well’s platform is fully embedded into to Samsung’s newly revamped health app, Samsung Health, and can be accessed on many Samsung devices including the Galaxy S8 and S8+, which just came out last week. Under the “Experts” tab on Samsung Health, users can have on-demand video visits with any doctor who practices with American Well. More

MAP Health Management announced its partnership with wearable maker Lief Therapeutics, which makes a patch that measures heart rate and breathing to track signs of stress. It syncs with a companion smartphone app to offer the wearer feedback and mindfulness exercises to calm their mind and self-regulate, ultimately teaching the wearer to monitor and positively control their behavior rather than succumb to knee-jerk responses common during moments of high anxiety. More

Healthcare-focused video conferencing technology company Vidyo announced a partnership with patient engagement company Zillion. Using Vidyo’s API, Zillion will now feature face-to-face video communications as a component of their engagement platform. “Zillion’s partnership with Vidyo underscores our commitment to help make deep connections to users, whenever and wherever they want,” Bill Van Wyck, president and chief innovation officer at Zillion said in a statement. “Digital and on-demand health shouldn’t be less human, and we look forward to working with Vidyo to further enhance the patient experience.”

Salus Telehealth announced the launch Quick Care, their on-demand mobile consultation platform that expands on their existing VideoMedicine offering. Users log into the VideoMedicine app, click the Quick Care banner, and are able to get a consultation from a US board-certified primary care provider within 30 minutes.

Two connected care companies, eDevice and iHealth, teamed up to co-create a remote patient-monitoring platform called iHealth Next. The platform combines iHealth’s medical sensor and front-end application capabilities with eDevice’s medical hubs technology and mobile network services skills.

Digital health company Medpod launched their self-named platform, which integrates proprietary communication software with real-time data collection from a variety of medical and laboratory devices.

Cancer rates based on sex and race in the USA during the last 9 years

cancer rates 1.JPG

cancer rates 2

 

Rates of heart diseases, cancer and stroke

heart cancer and stroke rates

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2015/036.pdf

Diabetes rate by race, sex and age

diabetes rate

Rate of Poor Health by race, age and sex

poor health 1.JPG

poor health 2

Obesity among children

obesity 1

obesity 2.JPG

 

How telemedicine pulled one rural hospital back from the brink of bankruptcy

A renewed focus on telemedicine helped an Idaho medical center regain its financial footing. (Getty/AndreyPopov)

How telemedicine pulled one rural hospital back from the brink of bankruptcy

A renewed focus on telemedicine helped an Idaho medical center regain its financial footing.