Here my version of the data set as a graphical table using sparklines

http://blog.xlcubed.com/graphical-table-abortion-1980-2003/

Andreas

Andreas

I also agree with Jorge about using multiple series lines in the first two windows in his chart. The small inconsistency is hardly noteworthy, and a three-panel-wide view is hardly worth separating the chart into panels. When I first looked at Jorge’s chart, in fact, I thought nothing of the inconsistency, but instead thought it was an elegant way to show two additional cross-sections of the data. A darker line between these panels may help separate these two panels from the age group panels.

@ Conrad: This specific data set don’t include abortions per 1000 women but I saw that ratio somewhere else.

@ Andreas:
- No scale in the bar charts: it is assumed that the total bar is 100%, but you are right, is shouldn’t be assumed, it should be told;
- Right, orange for multiple purposes: the first age group should be labeled;
- Gray lines: I actually like some level of redundancy, as long as it doesn’t interfere with the message. I conducted an informal test with a similar chart and the users told me they prefer this version because it provides context (it is difficult to compare series across multiple charts); of course you may have a different feedback;
- Space between series: there are vertical lines in the header, but perhaps that’s too subtle…
- Line chart vs. Trellis: I would say that in this case, and with this specific technology (Excel) a small level of inconsistency is tolerable because there doesn’t seem to be much added value by splitting the line charts in two;

@ Rob: The global ratio may be more abstract, but it is an accepted reference to compare performance in specific groups of the population.

I’d also like to include panels showing behavior across age groups within a panel, one panel per year, but that seems like a lot of effort. Perhaps I could do every fifth year rather than every year.