According to the data from January 2024, 22 percent of respondents said that rising health care costs were the most important health issue facing the United States. Mental health ranked second on the list with 15 percent. Issues with healthcare costsCurrently, the most urgent problem facing American healthcare is the high costs of care. The high expense of healthcare may deter people from getting the appropriate treatment when they need medical care or cause them to completely forego preventative care visits. Many Americans reported that they may skip prescription doses or refrain from taking medication as prescribed due to financial concerns. Such health-related behavior can result in major health problems, which may raise the long-term cost of care. Inflation, medical debt, and unforeseen medical expenses have all added to the burden that health costs are placing on household income. Gun violence issueThe gun violence epidemic has plagued the United States over the past few years, yet very little has been done to address the issue. In recent years, gun violence has become the leading cause of death among American children and teens. Even though more than half of Americans are in favor of tougher gun control regulations, there is little political will to strongly reform the current gun law. Gun violence has a deep traumatic impact on survivors and society, it is developing into a major public health crisis in the United States.

We asked U.S. consumers about "Prevalence of health conditions" and found that "Mental health conditions (e.g., burnout, depression, anxiety)" takes the top spot, while "Deafness or hearing loss" is at the other end of the ranking.These results are based on a representative online survey conducted in 2024 among 10,151 consumers in the United States.

A 2024 survey found that over half of U.S. individuals indicated the cost of accessing treatment was the biggest problem facing the national healthcare system. This is much higher than the global average of 32 percent and is in line with the high cost of health care in the U.S. compared to other high-income countries. Bureaucracy along with a lack of staff were also considered to be pressing issues. This statistic reveals the share of individuals who said select problems were the biggest facing the health care system in the United States in 2024.

This statistic shows the percentage of U.S. women who stated the following were the most pressing health issues facing women in the U.S. It was found that 27 percent of women felt mental health was the most pressing health issue facing women in the U.S.

NOTE: On October 19, 2021, estimates for 2016–2018 by health insurance status were revised to correct errors. Changes are highlighted and tagged at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2019/012-508.pdf

Data on health conditions among children under age 18, by selected population characteristics. Please refer to the PDF or Excel version of this table in the HUS 2019 Data Finder (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/contents2019.htm) for critical information about measures, definitions, and changes over time.

SOURCE: NCHS, National Health Interview Survey, Family Core and Sample Child questionnaires. For more information on the National Health Interview Survey, see the corresponding Appendix entry at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus19-appendix-508.pdf.

This data package contains dataset on prevalence rates of health conditions and diseases like obesity, diabetes and hearing loss and health risk factors for diseases like tobacco, alcohol and drug use.

This dataset is about books and is filtered where the book is Healthy, wealthy, or wise? : issues in American health care policy, featuring 7 columns including author, BNB id, book, book publisher, and ISBN. The preview is ordered by publication date (descending).

Project Tycho datasets contain case counts for reported disease conditions for countries around the world. The Project Tycho data curation team extracts these case counts from various reputable sources, typically from national or international health authorities, such as the US Centers for Disease Control or the World Health Organization. These original data sources include both open- and restricted-access sources. For restricted-access sources, the Project Tycho team has obtained permission for redistribution from data contributors. All datasets contain case count data that are identical to counts published in the original source and no counts have been modified in any way by the Project Tycho team. The Project Tycho team has pre-processed datasets by adding new variables, such as standard disease and location identifiers, that improve data interpretabilty. We also formatted the data into a standard data format.

Each Project Tycho dataset contains case counts for a specific condition (e.g. measles) and for a specific country (e.g. The United States). Case counts are reported per time interval. In addition to case counts, datsets include information about these counts (attributes), such as the location, age group, subpopulation, diagnostic certainty, place of aquisition, and the source from which we extracted case counts. One dataset can include many series of case count time intervals, such as "US measles cases as reported by CDC", or "US measles cases reported by WHO", or "US measles cases that originated abroad", etc.

Depending on the intended use of a dataset, we recommend a few data processing steps before analysis:

• Analyze missing data: Project Tycho datasets do not inlcude time intervals for which no case count was reported (for many datasets, time series of case counts are incomplete, due to incompleteness of source documents) and users will need to add time intervals for which no count value is available. Project Tycho datasets do include time intervals for which a case count value of zero was reported.
• Separate cumulative from non-cumulative time interval series. Case count time series in Project Tycho datasets can be "cumulative" or "fixed-intervals". Cumulative case count time series consist of overlapping case count intervals starting on the same date, but ending on different dates. For example, each interval in a cumulative count time series can start on January 1st, but end on January 7th, 14th, 21st, etc. It is common practice among public health agencies to report cases for cumulative time intervals. Case count series with fixed time intervals consist of mutually exxclusive time intervals that all start and end on different dates and all have identical length (day, week, month, year). Given the different nature of these two types of case count data, we indicated this with an attribute for each count value, named "PartOfCumulativeCountSeries".

The New York Times is releasing a series of data files with cumulative counts of coronavirus cases in the United States, at the state and county level, over time. We are compiling this time series data from state and local governments and health departments in an attempt to provide a complete record of the ongoing outbreak.

Since late January, The Times has tracked cases of coronavirus in real time as they were identified after testing. Because of the widespread shortage of testing, however, the data is necessarily limited in the picture it presents of the outbreak.

We have used this data to power our maps and reporting tracking the outbreak, and it is now being made available to the public in response to requests from researchers, scientists and government officials who would like access to the data to better understand the outbreak.

The data begins with the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020. We will publish regular updates to the data in this repository.

Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions. The core questions covered governance, funding, workforce (staffing levels, occupations employed, top executive education and licensure), LHD activities, community health assessment and health improvement planning, accreditation through the Public Health Accreditation Board, and policy-making and advocacy. The surveyed LHD activities include immunization, screening for diseases and conditions, treatment for communicable diseases, maternal and child health, epidemiology and surveillance activities, population-based primary prevention activities, and regulation, inspection and/or licensing activities. Topics covered by Module 1 included LHD interaction with academic institutions, Partnerships and collaboration, Cross-jurisdictional sharing of services, Emergency preparedness, and Access to healthcare services. Module 2 examined additional issues related to jurisdiction and governance, community health assessment and planning, human resources issues, quality improvement, public health informatics, and use of the Community Guide of Preventive Services.

Changelog:

Update September 20, 2021: Data and overview updated to reflect data used in the September 15 story Over Half of States Have Rolled Back Public Health Powers in Pandemic. It includes 303 state or local public health leaders who resigned, retired or were fired between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021. Previous versions of this dataset reflected data used in the Dec. 2020 and April 2021 stories.

Overview

Across the U.S., state and local public health officials have found themselves at the center of a political storm as they combat the worst pandemic in a century. Amid a fractured federal response, the usually invisible army of workers charged with preventing the spread of infectious disease has become a public punching bag.

In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, at least 303 state or local public health leaders in 41 states have resigned, retired or been fired since April 1, 2020, according to an ongoing investigation by The Associated Press and KHN.

According to experts, that is the largest exodus of public health leaders in American history.

Many left due to political blowback or pandemic pressure, as they became the target of groups that have coalesced around a common goal — fighting and even threatening officials over mask orders and well-established public health activities like quarantines and contact tracing. Some left to take higher profile positions, or due to health concerns. Others were fired for poor performance. Dozens retired. An untold number of lower level staffers have also left.

The result is a further erosion of the nation’s already fragile public health infrastructure, which KHN and the AP documented beginning in 2020 in the Underfunded and Under Threat project.

Findings

The AP and KHN found that:

• One in five Americans live in a community that has lost its local public health department leader during the pandemic
• Top public health officials in 28 states have left state-level departments ## Using this data To filter for data specific to your state, use this query

To get total numbers of exits by state, broken down by state and local departments, use this query

Methodology

KHN and AP counted how many state and local public health leaders have left their jobs between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021.

The government tasks public health workers with improving the health of the general population, through their work to encourage healthy living and prevent infectious disease. To that end, public health officials do everything from inspecting water and food safety to testing the nation’s babies for metabolic diseases and contact tracing cases of syphilis.

Many parts of the country have a health officer and a health director/administrator by statute. The analysis counted both of those positions if they existed. For state-level departments, the count tracks people in the top and second-highest-ranking job.

The analysis includes exits of top department officials regardless of reason, because no matter the reason, each left a vacancy at the top of a health agency during the pandemic. Reasons for departures include political pressure, health concerns and poor performance. Others left to take higher profile positions or to retire. Some departments had multiple top officials exit over the course of the pandemic; each is included in the analysis.

Reporters compiled the exit list by reaching out to public health associations and experts in every state and interviewing hundreds of public health employees. They also received information from the National Association of City and County Health Officials, and combed news reports and records.

Public health departments can be found at multiple levels of government. Each state has a department that handles these tasks, but most states also have local departments that either operate under local or state control. The population served by each local health department is calculated using the U.S. Census Bureau 2019 Population Estimates based on each department’s jurisdiction.

KHN and the AP have worked since the spring on a series of stories documenting the funding, staffing and problems around public health. A previous data distribution detailed a decade's worth of cuts to state and local spending and staffing on public health. That data can be found here.

Attribution

Findings and the data should be cited as: "According to a KHN and Associated Press report."

Is Data Missing?

If you know of a public health official in your state or area who has left that position between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021 and isn't currently in our dataset, please contact authors Anna Maria Barry-Jester annab@kff.org, Hannah Recht hrecht@kff.org, Michelle Smith mrsmith@ap.org and Lauren Weber laurenw@kff.org.

Snapshot img

US Population Health Management Market Size 2025-2029

The US population health management (PHM) market size is forecast to increase by USD 6.04 billion, at a CAGR of 7.4% between 2024 and 2029.

Population Health Management (PHM) is a critical aspect of healthcare delivery In the modern era, focusing on improving the health outcomes of large populations. The market is experiencing significant growth, driven by several key trends. One of the primary factors fueling this growth is the increasing adoption of healthcare IT solutions. These technologies enable healthcare providers to collect, manage, and analyze large amounts of patient data, facilitating personalized care and population health improvement. Another trend is the growing adoption of analytics in PHM. Analytics tools help identify patterns and insights from data, enabling early intervention and prevention of diseases. However, the high perceived costs associated with PHM solutions remain a challenge for market growth. Despite this, the benefits of PHM, including improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs, make it a worthwhile investment for healthcare organizations.

What will be the Size of the market During the Forecast Period?

Request Free Sample

Population Health Management (PHM) is a proactive healthcare approach focusing on improving the wider determinants of health and addressing health inequalities in various physical, economic, and social contexts. The market reflects the growing recognition of the importance of system-wide outcome focus, local intelligence, and data-driven decision-making in addressing ill health and managing chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease. PHM integrates qualitative and quantitative data to identify and address the unique needs of populations, enabling personalized interventions and care models. Infrastructure, leadership, and information governance are crucial elements in implementing effective PHM strategies. 
Payment reform and incentives are driving the transformation of healthcare systems towards a more integrated care model, reducing hospitalization and improving overall population health. The market is experiencing significant growth due to the increasing awareness of the importance of addressing the root causes of ill health and the need for a more holistic approach to healthcare. This shift towards PHM is influenced by the economic, social, and demographic changes In the global population, emphasizing the need for a more resource-efficient and sustainable healthcare system.

How is this market segmented and which is the largest segment?

The market research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD billion' for the period 2025-2029, as well as historical data from 2019-2023 for the following segments.

Product

  Software
  Services


Deployment

  Cloud
  On-premises


End-user

  Healthcare providers
  Healthcare payers
  Employers and government bodies


Geography

  US

By Product Insights

The software segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period.

Population Health Management (PHM) software is a crucial tool In the US healthcare sector, collecting and analyzing patient data from various healthcare systems to predict health conditions and improve overall patient care. Advanced data analytics, including data visualizations and business intelligence, enable PHM software to identify health risks within communities and promote value-based care. The adoption of PHM software is on the rise due to the increasing prevalence of chronic conditions and the demand for efficient, cost-effective healthcare. PHM software also facilitates system-wide outcome focus, integrating qualitative and quantitative data, local intelligence, and decision-making to redesign care services for at-risk groups.

The US healthcare transformation prioritizes PHM, with NHS England, NHS trusts, Public health, VCSE organizations, and Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) utilizing PHM software to address health inequalities and improve health outcomes. PHM software's infrastructure, leadership, information governance, and digital infrastructure support the integration of interventions, care models, hospitalization incentives, payment reforms, and integrated care systems. PHM software plays a vital role in addressing health issues such as cardiovascular disease (CVD) and improving overall population health.

Get a glance at the market report of share of various segments Request Free Sample

Market Dynamics

Our US Population Health Management (PHM) Market researchers analyzed the data with 2024 as the base year, along with the key drivers, trends, and challenges. A holistic analysis of drivers will help companies refine their marketing strategies to gain a competitive advantage.

What are the key market drivers leading to the rise in adopti

Health, United States is an annual report on trends in health statistics, find more information at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus.htm.

A survey of adults in the United States found that around 44 percent of respondents identified mobility issues, cancer, and cognitive decline as their top aging-related health concerns. This statistic depicts the percentage of adults in the United States who had select health concerns related to the aging process as of 2024.

This catalog record includes detailed variable-level descriptions, enabling data discovery and comparison. The data are not archived at ICPSR. Users should consult the data owners (via the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research) directly for details on obtaining the data. This collection includes variable-level metadata of Health Care Priorities, a survey by Harvard School of Public Health/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation conducted by ICR Survey Research Group. Topics covered in this survey include: Important health issues Laws The data and documentation files for this survey are available through the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research [Roper #31092259]. Frequencies and summary statistics for the 97 variables from this survey are available through the ICPSR social science variable database and can be accessed from the Variables tab.

Reporting of Aggregate Case and Death Count data was discontinued May 11, 2023, with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, this dataset will no longer be updated.

This archived public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting United States COVID-19 community levels for all available counties.

The COVID-19 community levels were developed using a combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. The COVID-19 community level was determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge.

Using these data, the COVID-19 community level was classified as low, medium, or high.

COVID-19 Community Levels were used to help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals.

For the most accurate and up-to-date data for any county or state, visit the relevant health department website. COVID Data Tracker may display data that differ from state and local websites. This can be due to differences in how data were collected, how metrics were calculated, or the timing of web updates.

Archived Data Notes:

This dataset was renamed from "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County as Originally Posted" to "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County" on March 31, 2022.

March 31, 2022: Column name for county population was changed to “county_population”. No change was made to the data points previous released.

March 31, 2022: New column, “health_service_area_population”, was added to the dataset to denote the total population in the designated Health Service Area based on 2019 Census estimate.

March 31, 2022: FIPS codes for territories American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands were re-formatted to 5-digit numeric for records released on 3/3/2022 to be consistent with other records in the dataset.

March 31, 2022: Changes were made to the text fields in variables “county”, “state”, and “health_service_area” so the formats are consistent across releases.

March 31, 2022: The “%” sign was removed from the text field in column “covid_inpatient_bed_utilization”. No change was made to the data. As indicated in the column description, values in this column represent the percentage of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients (7-day average).

March 31, 2022: Data values for columns, “county_population”, “health_service_area_number”, and “health_service_area” were backfilled for records released on 2/24/2022. These columns were added since the week of 3/3/2022, thus the values were previously missing for records released the week prior.

April 7, 2022: Updates made to data released on 3/24/2022 for Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands to correct a data mapping error.

April 21, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for counties in Nebraska for the week of April 21, 2022 have 3 counties identified in the high category and 37 in the medium category. CDC has been working with state officials to verify the data submitted, as other data systems are not providing alerts for substantial increases in disease transmission or severity in the state.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for McCracken County, KY for the week of May 5, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. McCracken County, KY should have appeared in the low community level category during the week of May 5, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for several Florida counties for the week of May 19th, 2022, have been corrected for a data processing error. Of note, Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach Counties should have appeared in the high CCL category, and Osceola County should have appeared in the medium CCL category. These corrections are reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Orange County, New York for the week of May 26, 2022 displayed an erroneous case rate of zero and a CCL category of low due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the medium CCL category.

June 2, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. Tolland County, CT should have appeared in the medium community level category during the week of May 26, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a misspelling. The medium community level category for Tolland County, CT on the week of May 26, 2022 was misspelled as “meduim” in the data set. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Mississippi counties for the week of June 9, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change over the Memorial Day holiday that resulted in artificially inflated case rates in the state.

July 7, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Rock County, Minnesota for the week of July 7, 2022 displayed an artificially low case rate and CCL category due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the high CCL category.

July 14, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Massachusetts counties for the week of July 14, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change that resulted in lower than expected case rates and CCL categories in the state.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for all Montana counties for the week of July 21, 2022 had case rates of 0 due to a reporting issue. The case rates have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Alaska for all weeks prior to July 21, 2022 included non-resident cases. The case rates for the time series have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: A laboratory in Nevada reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate will be inflated in Clark County, NV for the week of July 28, 2022.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data was updated on August 2, 2022 in error during performance testing. Data for the week of July 28, 2022 was changed during this update due to additional case and hospital data as a result of late reporting between July 28, 2022 and August 2, 2022. Since the purpose of this data set is to provide point-in-time views of COVID-19 Community Levels on Thursdays, any changes made to the data set during the August 2, 2022 update have been reverted in this update.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of July 28, 2022 for 8 counties in Utah (Beaver County, Daggett County, Duchesne County, Garfield County, Iron County, Kane County, Uintah County, and Washington County) case data was missing due to data collection issues. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 4, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence change, case rates for all Alabama counties will be lower than expected. As a result, the CCL levels published on August 4, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 11, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 4, 2022 for South Carolina have been updated to correct a data collection error that resulted in incorrect case data. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 18, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 11, 2022 for Connecticut have been updated to correct a data ingestion error that inflated the CT case rates. CDC, in collaboration with CT, has resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 25, 2022: A laboratory in Tennessee reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate may be inflated in many counties and the CCLs published on August 25, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 25, 2022: Due to a data source error, the 7-day case rate for St. Louis County, Missouri, is reported as zero in the COVID-19 Community Level data released on August 25, 2022. Therefore, the COVID-19 Community Level for this county should be interpreted with caution.

September 1, 2022: Due to a reporting issue, case rates for all Nebraska counties will include 6 days of data instead of 7 days in the COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released on September 1, 2022. Therefore, the CCLs for all Nebraska counties should be interpreted with caution.

September 8, 2022: Due to a data processing error, the case rate for Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania,

Public Health Reports FAQ - ResearchHelpDesk - Public Health Reports is the official journal of the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General and the U.S. Public Health Service and has been published since 1878. It is published bimonthly, plus supplement issues, through an official agreement with the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes original research, reviews, and commentaries in the areas of public health practice and methodology, public health law, and teaching at schools and programs of public health. Issues contain regular commentaries by the U.S. Surgeon General and executives of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health. The journal focuses upon such topics as tobacco control, teenage violence, occupational disease and injury, immunization, drug policy, lead screening, health disparities, and many other key and emerging public health issues. In addition to the six regular issues, PHR produces supplemental issues approximately 2-5 times per year which focus on specific topics that are of particular interest to our readership. The journal's contributors are on the front line of public health and they present their work in a readable and accessible format. Abstract & indexing Clarivate Analytics: Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Clarivate Analytics: Science Citation Index (SCI) Clarivate Analytics: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Clarivate Analytics: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) CABI: Global Health Clarivate Analytics: Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences EBSCO EMBASE/Excerpta Medica Ovid JSTOR PubMed Central (PMC) PAIS International - ProQuest ProQuest Statistical Reference Index PubMed: MEDLINE Scopus

As of August 2024, some 20 percent of Americans surveyed were of the opinion that opioids and fentanyl addiction is the number one public health threat in the U.S., a significant decrease from 24 percent in June 2024. Furthermore, obesity was viewed as a top public health issue by 19 percent of Americans in August 2024.
U.S. healthcare issues The United States has the highest healthcare spending globally. The majority of Americans considered rising healthcare costs as the most important healthcare problem facing the U.S. in January 2023. While COVID-19 and cancer were ranked second on the list. Due to unfortunate mass shooting incidents in the country, gun violence is typically related to homicide and is not considered a healthcare issue. Although the most popular method of suicide among Americans who attempted it was a gun or firearm, the link between gun access and suicide is frequently ignored as a public health crisis.

The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is the principal source of information on the health of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States and is one of the major data collection programs of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) which is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The National Health Survey Act of 1956 provided for a continuing survey and special studies to secure accurate and current statistical information on the amount, distribution, and effects of illness and disability in the United States and the services rendered for or because of such conditions. The survey referred to in the Act, now called the National Health Interview Survey, was initiated in July 1957. Since 1960, the survey has been conducted by NCHS, which was formed when the National Health Survey and the National Vital Statistics Division were combined. NHIS data are used widely throughout the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to monitor trends in illness and disability and to track progress toward achieving national health objectives. The data are also used by the public health research community for epidemiologic and policy analysis of such timely issues as characterizing those with various health problems, determining barriers to accessing and using appropriate health care, and evaluating Federal health programs. The NHIS also has a central role in the ongoing integration of household surveys in DHHS. The designs of two major DHHS national household surveys have been or are linked to the NHIS. The National Survey of Family Growth used the NHIS sampling frame in its first five cycles and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey currently uses half of the NHIS sampling frame. Other linkage includes linking NHIS data to death certificates in the National Death Index (NDI). While the NHIS has been conducted continuously since 1957, the content of the survey has been updated about every 10-15 years. In 1996, a substantially revised NHIS questionnaire began field testing. This revised questionnaire, described in detail below, was implemented in 1997 and has improved the ability of the NHIS to provide important health information.

This dataset contains model-based census tract estimates. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. The dataset includes estimates for 40 measures: 12 for health outcomes, 7 for preventive services use, 4 for chronic disease-related health risk behaviors, 7 for disabilities, 3 for health status, and 7 for health-related social needs. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to help develop and carry out effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2022 or 2021 data, Census Bureau 2020 population data, and American Community Survey 2018–2022 estimates. The 2024 release uses 2022 BRFSS data for 36 measures and 2021 BRFSS data for 4 measures (high blood pressure, high cholesterol, cholesterol screening, and taking medicine for high blood pressure control among those with high blood pressure) that the survey collects data on every other year. More information about the methodology can be found at www.cdc.gov/places.