OBJECTIVES: The 2000 Census, which provides denominators used in calculating vital statistics and other rates, allowed multiple-race responses. Many other data systems that provide numerators used in calculating rates collect only single-race data. Bridging is needed to make the numerators and denominators comparable. This report describes and evaluates the method used by the National Center for Health Statistics to bridge multiple-race responses obtained from Census 2000 to single-race categories, creating single-race population estimates that are available to the public. METHODS: The authors fitted logistic regression models to multiple-race data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for 1997-2000. These fitted models, and two bridging methods previously suggested by the Office of Management and Budget, were applied to the public-use Census Modified Race Data Summary file to create single-race population estimates for the U.S. The authors also compared death rates for single-race groups calculated using these three approaches. RESULTS: Parameter estimates differed between the NHIS models for the multiple-race groups. For example, as the percentage of multiple-race respondents in a county increased, the likelihood of stating black as a primary race increased among black/white respondents but decreased among American Indian or Alaska Native/black respondents. The inclusion of county-level contextual variables in the regression models as well as the underlying demographic differences across states led to variation in allocation percentages; for example, the allocation of black/white respondents to single-race white ranged from nearly zero to more than 50% across states. Death rates calculated using bridging via the NHIS models were similar to those calculated using other methods, except for the American Indian/Alaska Native group, which included a large proportion of multiple-race reporters. CONCLUSION: Many data systems do not currently allow multiple-race reporting. When such data systems are used with Census counts to produce race-specific rates, bridging methods that incorporate geographic and demographic factors may lead to better rates than methods that do not consider such factors.
OBJECTIVES: The 2000 Census, which provides denominators used in calculating vital statistics and other rates, allowed multiple-race responses. Many other data systems that provide numerators used in calculating rates collect only single-race data. Bridging is needed to make the numerators and denominators comparable. This report describes and evaluates the method used by the National Center for Health Statistics to bridge multiple-race responses obtained from Census 2000 to single-race categories, creating single-race population estimates that are available to the public. METHODS: The authors fitted logistic regression models to multiple-race data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for 1997-2000. These fitted models, and two bridging methods previously suggested by the Office of Management and Budget, were applied to the public-use Census Modified Race Data Summary file to create single-race population estimates for the U.S. The authors also compared death rates for single-race groups calculated using these three approaches. RESULTS: Parameter estimates differed between the NHIS models for the multiple-race groups. For example, as the percentage of multiple-race respondents in a county increased, the likelihood of stating black as a primary race increased among black/white respondents but decreased among American Indian or Alaska Native/black respondents. The inclusion of county-level contextual variables in the regression models as well as the underlying demographic differences across states led to variation in allocation percentages; for example, the allocation of black/white respondents to single-race white ranged from nearly zero to more than 50% across states. Death rates calculated using bridging via the NHIS models were similar to those calculated using other methods, except for the American Indian/Alaska Native group, which included a large proportion of multiple-race reporters. CONCLUSION: Many data systems do not currently allow multiple-race reporting. When such data systems are used with Census counts to produce race-specific rates, bridging methods that incorporate geographic and demographic factors may lead to better rates than methods that do not consider such factors.
Authors: Ulrike Boehmer; Nancy R Kressin; Dan R Berlowitz; Cindy L Christiansen; Lewis E Kazis; Judith A Jones Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Phyllis A Wingo; Catherine A Lesesne; Ruben A Smith; Lori de Ravello; David K Espey; Teshia G Arambula Solomon; Myra Tucker; Judith Thierry Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2012-12
Authors: Ian R Hambleton; Selvi Jeyaseelan; Christina Howitt; Natasha Sobers-Grannum; Anselm J Hennis; Rainford J Wilks; E Nigel Harris; Marlene MacLeish; Louis W Sullivan Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Jenine Dankovchik; Megan J Hoopes; Victoria Warren-Mears; Elizabeth Knaster Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2015 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Kartik K Venkatesh; Courtney D Lynch; Maged M Costantine; Carl H Backes; Jonathan L Slaughter; Heather A Frey; Xiaoning Huang; Mark B Landon; Mark A Klebanoff; Sadiya S Khan; William A Grobman Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Kartik K Venkatesh; Courtney D Lynch; Camille E Powe; Maged M Costantine; Stephen F Thung; Steven G Gabbe; William A Grobman; Mark B Landon Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Paula M Lantz; Mahasin Mujahid; Kendra Schwartz; Nancy K Janz; Angela Fagerlin; Barbara Salem; Lihua Liu; Dennis Deapen; Steven J Katz Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 9.308