Population Data BC recently conducted a survey to better understand user’s thoughts and experiences with the data, accompanying metadata, and method of data provision.
Here we share key findings and our commitments to address researcher feedback and suggestions. The outcomes of this survey will be used in the development of next year’s annual plan and will feed into the strategic priorities for fiscal year 2022-2023.
Top 4 actionable results
92% of respondents requested a better understanding of the linking methodology
PopData will ...
Provide a linkage report and more information about linking methodology with the data.
22% of respondents found it challenging determining the differences between versions of data provided
PopData will ...
Create documentation to explain the differences between versions of data provided and completeness of data.
21% of respondents found it challenging understanding the metadata provided with files
PopData will ...
Introduce “read me” files to orient researchers to what they will find in the Secure Research Environment (i.e. data files, filter file, collections, etc.).
21% of respondents found it challenging working with fixed width files
PopData will ...
Consider delivering data in alternate format(s) and promote webinars and courses for researchers to better understand, and work with, fixed width files.
In their own words
While Researchers identified improvement opportunities as outlined left, their general experience was positive.
“Experience has been great overall, with PopData - I appreciate particularly the educational/informative resources on my.popdata e.g. Metadata Central (has been a huge help for us).”
“Overall the experience has been extremely positive, with very helpful and informative people helping to quickly address issues as they arise.”
Quick facts
92% of respondents said they could easily understand information about the files and fields of data provided
72% of respondents said they could easily work with the format the data is provided in
45% of respondents said they could easily determine the differences between versions of data provided
CSV and SASBDAT were the most common choices for preferred data formats
