The 1982 statistics on the use of family planning and infertility services presented in this report are preliminary results from Cycle III of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics. Data were collected through personal interviews with a multistage area probability sample of 7969 women aged 15-44. A detailed series of questions was asked to obtain relatively complete estimates of the extent and type of family planning services received. Statistics on family planning services are limited to women who were able to conceive 3 years before the interview date. Overall, 79% of currently mrried nonsterile women reported using some type of family planning service during the previous 3 years. There were no statistically significant differences between white (79%), black (75%) or Hispanic (77%) wives, or between the 2 income groups. The 1982 survey questions were more comprehensive than those of earlier cycles of the survey. The annual rate of visits for family planning services in 1982 was 1077 visits /1000 women. Teenagers had the highest annual visit rate (1581/1000) of any age group for all sources of family planning services combined. Visit rates declined sharply with age from 1447 at ages 15-24 to 479 at ages 35-44. Similar declines with age also were found in the visit rates for white and black women separately. Nevertheless, the annual visit rate for black women (1334/1000) was significantly higher than that for white women (1033). The highest overall visit rate was for black women 15-19 years of age (1867/1000). Nearly 2/3 of all family planning visits were to private medical sources. Teenagers of all races had higher family planning service visit rates to clinics than to private medical sources, as did black women age 15-24. White women age 20 and older had higher visit rates to private medical services than to clinics. Never married women had higher visit rates to clinics than currently or formerly married women. Data were also collected in 1982 on use of medical services for infertility by women who had difficulty in conceiving or carrying a pregnancy to term. About 1 million ever married women had 1 or more infertility visits in the 12 months before the interview. During the 3 years before interview, about 1.9 million women had infertility visits. For all ever married women, as well as for white and black women separately, infertility services were more likely to be secured from private medical sources than from clinics. The survey design, reliability of the estimates and the terms used are explained in the technical notes.

Entrepreneurship, Institutional Framework and Support Mechanisms in the EU sheds light on the important and yet crucially under-explored interactions between entrepreneurship, institutions and support mechanisms within the EU.

A Triple Helix of university-industry-government interactions is the key to innovation in increasingly knowledge-based societies. As the creation, dissemination, and utilization of knowledge moves from the periphery to the center of industrial production and governance, the concept of innovation, in product and process, is itself being transformed. In its place is a new sense of 'innovation in innovation' - the restructuring and enhancement of the organizational arrangements and incentives that foster innovation. This triple helix intersection of relatively independent institutional spheres generates hybrid organizations such as technology transfer offices in universities, firms, and government research labs and business and financial support institutions such as angel networks and venture capital for new technology-based firms that are increasingly developing around the world. The Triple Helix describes this new innovation model and assists students, researchers, and policymakers in addressing such questions as: How do we enhance the role of universities in regional economic and social development? How can governments, at all levels, encourage citizens to take an active role in promoting innovation in innovation and, conversely, how can citizens so encourage their governments? How can firms collaborate with each other and with universities and government to become more innovative? What are the key elements and challenges to reaching these goals?