This statistic depicts an overall U.S. states health ranking in 2018, according to America's Health Rankings of the United Health Foundation. As of that year, the top state based on health was Hawaii with a score of **** above the national norm.

In 2023, Singapore dominated the ranking of the world's health and health systems, followed by Japan and South Korea. The health index score is calculated by evaluating various indicators that assess the health of the population, and access to the services required to sustain good health, including health outcomes, health systems, sickness and risk factors, and mortality rates. The health and health system index score of the top ten countries with the best healthcare system in the world ranged between 82 and 86.9, measured on a scale of zero to 100.

Global Health Security Index  Numerous health and health system indexes have been developed to assess various attributes and aspects of a nation's healthcare system. One such measure is the Global Health Security (GHS) index. This index evaluates the ability of 195 nations to identify, assess, and mitigate biological hazards in addition to political and socioeconomic concerns, the quality of their healthcare systems, and their compliance with international finance and standards. In 2021, the United States was ranked at the top of the GHS index, but due to multiple reasons, the U.S. government failed to effectively manage the COVID-19 pandemic. The GHS Index evaluates capability and identifies preparation gaps; nevertheless, it cannot predict a nation's resource allocation in case of a public health emergency.

Universal Health Coverage Index  Another health index that is used globally by the members of the United Nations (UN) is the universal health care (UHC) service coverage index. The UHC index monitors the country's progress related to the sustainable developmental goal (SDG) number three. The UHC service coverage index tracks 14 indicators related to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health, infectious diseases, non-communicable diseases, service capacity, and access to care. The main target of universal health coverage is to ensure that no one is denied access to essential medical services due to financial hardships. In 2021, the UHC index scores ranged from as low as 21 to a high score of 91 across 194 countries. 

The County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. This feature layer contains 2022 County Health Rankings data for nation, state, and county levels. The Rankings are compiled using county-level measures from a variety of national and state data sources. Some example measures are:adult smokingphysical inactivityflu vaccinationschild povertydriving alone to workTo see a full list of variables, as well as their definitions and descriptions, explore the Fields information by clicking the Data tab here in the Item Details. These measures are standardized and combined using scientifically-informed weights."By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR&R) illustrates how where we live affects how well and how long we live. CHR&R also shows what each of us can do to create healthier places to live, learn, work, and play – for everyone."Counties are ranked within their state on both health outcomes and health factors. Counties with a lower (better) health outcomes ranking than health factors ranking may see the health of their county decline in the future, as factors today can result in outcomes later. Conversely, counties with a lower (better) factors ranking than outcomes ranking may see the health of their county improve in the future.Some new variables in the 2022 Rankings data compared to previous versions:COVID-19 age-adjusted mortalitySchool segregationSchool funding adequacyGender pay gapChildcare cost burdenChildcare centersLiving wage (while the Living wage measure was introduced to the CHRR dataset in 2022 from the Living Wage Calculator, it is not available in the Living Atlas dataset and user’s interested in the most up to date living wage data can look that up on the Living Wage Calculator website).Data Processing Notes:Data downloaded April 2022Slight modifications made to the source data are as follows:The string " raw value" was removed from field labels/aliases so that auto-generated legends and pop-ups would only have the measure's name, not "(measure's name) raw value" and strings such as "(%)", "rate", or "per 100,000" were added depending on the type of measure.Percentage and Prevalence fields were multiplied by 100 to make them easier to work with in the map.Ratios were set to null if negative to make them easier to work with in the map.For demographic variables, the word "numerator" was removed and the word "population" was added where appropriate.Fields dropped from analytic data file: yearall fields ending in "_cihigh" and "_cilow"and any variables that are not listed in the sources and years documentation.Analytic data file was then merged with state-specific ranking files so that all county rankings and subrankings are included in this layer.2010 US boundaries were used as the data contain 2010 US census geographies, for a total of 3,142 counties.

This map shows the predominant race of mothers who have given birth between the ages of 15-19. This is shown by county, state, and country from the 2022 County Health Rankings. The data comes from the County Health Rankings 2022 layer. The County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. "By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR&R) illustrates how where we live affects how well and how long we live. CHR&R also shows what each of us can do to create healthier places to live, learn, work, and play – for everyone."Counties are ranked within their state on both health outcomes and health factors. Counties with a lower (better) health outcomes ranking than health factors ranking may see the health of their county decline in the future, as factors today can result in outcomes later. Conversely, counties with a lower (better) factors ranking than outcomes ranking may see the health of their county improve in the future.

Context

The World Happiness Ranking focuses on the social, urban, and natural environment. Specifically, the ranking relies on self-reports from residents of how they weigh the quality of life they are currently experiencing which englobes three main points: current life evaluation, expected future life evaluation, positive and negative affect (emotion). Half of the underlying data comes from multiple Gallup world polls which asked people to give their assessment of the previously mentioned points, and the other half of the data is comprised of six variables that could be used to try to explain the individuals’ perception in their answers.

Content

The data sources’ datasets were obtained in two different formats. The World Happiness Ranking Dataset is a Comma-separated Values (CSV) file with multiple columns (for the different variables and the score) and a row for each of the analyzed countries.

The rankings of national happiness are based on a Cantril ladder survey. Nationally representative samples of respondents are asked to think of a ladder, with the best possible life for them being a 10, and the worst possible life being a 0. They are then asked to rate their own current lives on that 0 to 10 scale. The report correlates the results with various life factors.

1. GDP per capita is in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) adjusted to constant 2011 international dollars, taken from the World Development Indicators (WDI) released by the World Bank on November 28, 2019. See Statistical Appendix 1 for more details. GDP data for 2019 are not yet available, so we extend the GDP time series from 2018 to 2019 using country-specific forecasts of real GDP growth from the OECD Economic Outlook No. 106 (Edition November 2019) and the World Bank’s Global Economic Prospects (Last Updated: 06/04/2019), after adjustment for population growth. The equation uses the natural log of GDP per capita, as this form fits the data significantly better than GDP per capita.
2. The time series of healthy life expectancy at birth are constructed based on data from the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Health Observatory data repository, with data available for 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2016. To match this report’s sample period, interpolation and extrapolation are used. See Statistical Appendix 1 for more details.
3. Social support is the national average of the binary responses (0=no, 1=yes) to the Gallup World Poll (GWP) question, “If you were in trouble, do you have relatives or friends you can count on to help you whenever you need them, or not?”
4. Freedom to make life choices is the national average of binary responses to the GWP question, “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your freedom to choose what you do with your life?”
5. Generosity is the residual of regressing the national average of GWP responses to the question, “Have you donated money to a charity in the past month?” on GDP per capita.
6. Perceptions of corruption are the average of binary answers to two GWP questions: “Is corruption widespread throughout the government or not?” and “Is corruption widespread within businesses or not?” Where data for government corruption are missing, the perception of business corruption is used as the overall corruption-perception measure.
7. Positive affect is defined as the average of previous-day affect measures for happiness, laughter, and enjoyment for GWP waves 3-7 (years 2008 to 2012, and some in 2013). It is defined as the average of laughter and enjoyment for other waves where the happiness question was not asked. The general form for the affect questions is: Did you experience the following feelings during a lot of the day yesterday? See Statistical Appendix 1 for more details.
8. Negative affect is defined as the average of previous-day affect measures for worry, sadness, and anger in all years.

Acknowledgements

The World Happiness Report is a publication of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, powered by data from the Gallup World Poll, and supported by the Ernesto Illy Foundation, illycaffè, Davines Group, Blue Chip Foundation, the William, Jeff, and Jennifer Gross Family Foundation, and Unilever’s largest ice cream brand Wall’s.

Inspiration

Find the relationship between the ladder score and the other pieces of data.

This map shows high school graduations within the US by graduation rate. This is shown by county, state, and country from the 2022 County Health Rankings. The national average of students who graduate high school is 86%.The data comes from the County Health Rankings 2022 layer. The County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. "By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR&R) illustrates how where we live affects how well and how long we live. CHR&R also shows what each of us can do to create healthier places to live, learn, work, and play – for everyone."Counties are ranked within their state on both health outcomes and health factors. Counties with a lower (better) health outcomes ranking than health factors ranking may see the health of their county decline in the future, as factors today can result in outcomes later. Conversely, counties with a lower (better) factors ranking than outcomes ranking may see the health of their county improve in the future.

This map shows teen birth rates in the US. This is shown by county, state, and country from the 2022 County Health Rankings. The average is 19 births per 1,000 women aged 15-19.The data comes from the County Health Rankings 2022 layer. The County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. "By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR&R) illustrates how where we live affects how well and how long we live. CHR&R also shows what each of us can do to create healthier places to live, learn, work, and play – for everyone."Counties are ranked within their state on both health outcomes and health factors. Counties with a lower (better) health outcomes ranking than health factors ranking may see the health of their county decline in the future, as factors today can result in outcomes later. Conversely, counties with a lower (better) factors ranking than outcomes ranking may see the health of their county improve in the future.

FOCUSONLONDON2010:HEALTH:CHILDRENANDYOUNGPEOPLE

The health and wellbeing of London’s children and young people is fundamental to the health of the city. The recent Marmot Review of health inequalities noted that “What a child experiences during the early years lays down the foundation for the whole of their life.” The Mayor’s Health Inequality Strategy for London responds to this by challenging all partners in London to create “conditions that lead to better early years experiences”.

This chapter, authored by colleagues at the London Health Observatory, provides recent evidence on the health experience of children and young people in London. The report includes data about the Local Index of Child Wellbeing, infant mortality, breastfeeding, immunisation, injury, childhood obesity, physical activity, diet, smoking, alcohol consumption, drug use, teenage conceptions and sexual health. It reveals many areas of inequality within the city, but also highlights the ways in which London’s children are doing well.

REPORT:

Access the full report in PDF format

https://londondatastore-upload.s3.amazonaws.com/fol/fol10-health-cover-thumb.png" alt=""/>

PRESENTATION:

This interactive presentation about children’s health in London looks into some of the factors that may have an effect on the high childhood obesity figures in London.

Access the presentation at Prezi.com

CHART:

This interactive scatterplot allows users to observe the relationship between some of the health indicators in the report with a selection of other socio-economic data for each of London’s 32 boroughs.

Scatterplot

RANKINGS:

An informative regional rankings scorecard has been created showing where London sits in relation to the other English regions on a number of indicators contained within the report.

Rankings

DATA:

All the data contained within the health report and used to create the scatterplot and rankings scorecard can be accessed in this spreadsheet.

FACTS:

Some interesting facts from the report…

● Five boroughs with highest teenage conception rates in 2008:

1. Lambeth – 71.5
2. Lewisham – 68.7
3. Southwark – 68.0
4. Greenwich – 66.7
5. Hackney and City of London – 61.5

-31. Richmond upon Thames – 23.6

-32. Harrow – 23.1

● The percentage of London women who smoke during pregnancy was lower than all other English regions, and around half the England average - one in 13 women in London and one in 7 nationally in 2008/09.

Other interesting facts from the Datastore…

● Five boroughs with the highest rates for children in Year 6 at risk of obesity 2008/09:

1. Southwark – 26.7%
2. Tower Hamlets – 25.7%
3. Lambeth – 25.3%
4. Newham – 24.6%
5. Barking and Dagenham – 24.2%

-31. Bromley – 16.0%

-32. Richmond-upon-Thames – 11.7%

● London has always had the lowest levels of children immunised by their second birthday against Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) compared with other regions (since regional data was first available in 1988/89).

Highest – 87 per cent (1995/96) Lowest – 70 per cent (2003/04) Now – 76 per cent (2008/09)

● Five boroughs with the highest rates of hospital admissions due to injury of children (0-17) 2008/09:

1. Hackney – 126.2
2. Tower Hamlets – 123.1
3. Hammersmith and Fulham – 117.7
4. Islington – 115.0
5. Waltham Forest – 112.5

-31. Richmond upon Thames – 63.4

-32. Kingston upon Thames – 40.2

This map displays public school funding adequacy gap across the United States by county, state, and national levels, using the County Health Rankings 2022 layer hosted in the Living Atlas. School funding adequacy is defined as "the average gap in dollars between actual and required spending per pupil among public school districts. Required spending is an estimate of dollars needed to achieve US average test scores in each school district".School funding plays an important role in educational outcomes, and their distribution geographically by race/ethnicity. Research has shown that schools and districts with more funding are better able to provide higher-quality and deeper educational opportunities to students. Explore this map to see what the school funding adequacy gap is in your geography.The County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. This feature layer contains 2022 County Health Rankings data for nation, state, and county levels. The Rankings are compiled using county-level measures from a variety of national and state data sources. According to the County Health Rankings & Roadmaps site "By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, the County Health Rankings help communities understand what influences how healthy residents are and how long they will live. These comparisons among counties provide context and demonstrate that where you live, and many other factors including race/ethnicity, can deeply impact your ability to live a healthy life. The Rankings not only provide this snapshot of your county’s health, but also are used to drive conversations and action to address the health challenges and gaps highlighted in these findings."Web Map originally compiled by Summers Cleary

This county-level map shows. Voter Turnout for the 2020 U.S. Presidential election Data from County Health Rankings.Voter turnout is the percentage of citizen population aged 18 or older who voted in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.Areas in dark blue indicate a lower voter turnout, while areas in light blue indicate a higher voter turnout. Data comes from County Health Rankings, a program of the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute with support provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.Voting collectively influences the health of our communities and healthier communities are more likely to vote. Studies show that communities with higher voter turnout tend to also have better self-reported general health, fewer chronic health conditions, a lower overall mortality rate, and less depression. Learn more about voter turnout from County Health Rankings & Roadmaps.A number of different policies can affect voter turnout, such as voter id laws, early voting, and mail-in ballots. Learn more about voter turnout strategies and initiatives.

During the financial year 2023/24, the busiest hospital provider in England was the ************************************************ with over *** thousand admissions. This trust encompasses four hospitals in the Birmingham area, one of the largest urban areas in England. The second-busiest trust this year was the ******************************************, with approximately *** thousand admissions. Accident and emergency admissionsFrom April to June 2023, there were around *** million accident and emergency (A&E) attendees (including at A&E departments not in hospitals) in England. After the drop in A&E attendances during the COVID-pandemic, numbers have risen again to previous levels, with a trend towards an increasing number of individuals seeking emergency care. Over ***** percent of A&E attendees in England in 2022/23 were first diagnosed with a sprained ankle, knee, wrist, or foot, and over **** percent were diagnosed with a respiratory infection. Furthermore, *** percent were found to have ‘no abnormality detected’ which could be detrimental to a service that is already stretched. Waiting too longOver the last few years in the A&E department, the NHS has been falling behind the target that ** percent of patients should be seen within **** hours of arrival. The last time this target was reached was back in July 2015. Not just the A&E department, but other services also require lengthy waits. It is no wonder that the ******** of respondents surveyed were fairly or very dissatisfied with the length of wait for many aspects of NHS care. Moreover, in general, levels of satisfaction with the way NHS runs is at an all-time low.