OBJECTIVES: Healthy People 2010 identifies the elimination of health disparities as a critical national goal. The article analyzes the availability of state and local data to support this work. METHODS: We assessed data availability for the 10 leading health indicators (LHIs), comprising a set of 26 measures. Our analysis is based on a mid-2007 review of federal and state Web sites. FINDINGS: Federal data sources allow aggregate state estimates for 24 LHI measures, although some either are not available for all states or vary from the federal definition. National sources capture some but not all of the subgroup characteristics, defined as national disparities priorities. Limited sample size is a barrier to generating state estimates for specific subgroups, and data by geographic subdivision within a state are often lacking. States also vary in how aggressively they use disparities data or make them available externally. CONCLUSIONS: Federal leadership has been critical to state capacity to assess LHI disparities. Although some relevant state-level disparities data exist, major gaps remain, local estimates are limited, and some states make better use of the data than others. Continued federal leadership and support is critical to states' abilities to address Healthy People 2010's disparities goal.
OBJECTIVES: Healthy People 2010 identifies the elimination of health disparities as a critical national goal. The article analyzes the availability of state and local data to support this work. METHODS: We assessed data availability for the 10 leading health indicators (LHIs), comprising a set of 26 measures. Our analysis is based on a mid-2007 review of federal and state Web sites. FINDINGS: Federal data sources allow aggregate state estimates for 24 LHI measures, although some either are not available for all states or vary from the federal definition. National sources capture some but not all of the subgroup characteristics, defined as national disparities priorities. Limited sample size is a barrier to generating state estimates for specific subgroups, and data by geographic subdivision within a state are often lacking. States also vary in how aggressively they use disparities data or make them available externally. CONCLUSIONS: Federal leadership has been critical to state capacity to assess LHI disparities. Although some relevant state-level disparities data exist, major gaps remain, local estimates are limited, and some states make better use of the data than others. Continued federal leadership and support is critical to states' abilities to address Healthy People 2010's disparities goal.
Authors: Ross C Brownson; Jamie F Chriqui; Charlene R Burgeson; Megan C Fisher; Roberta B Ness Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Barry Portnoy; Simon J Craddock Lee; Jennifer Kincheloe; Nancy Breen; Jean L Olson; Judy McCormally; E Richard Brown Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2014 Sep-Oct
Authors: E Richard Brown; Jennifer Kincheloe; Nancy Breen; Jean L Olson; Barry Portnoy; Simon J Craddock Lee Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2013 Sep-Oct
Authors: Carmen M Dickinson-Copeland; Lilly Cheng Immergluck; Maria Britez; Fengxia Yan; Ruijin Geng; Mike Edelson; Salathiel R Kendrick-Allwood; Katarzyna Kordas Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 3.390