From 2017 to March 2020, the prevalence of diabetes was highest among those with lower incomes, with around ** percent of those who earned *** percent or less of the federal poverty level suffering from diabetes. This statistic shows the prevalence of diabetes in the U.S. from 2017 to March 2020, by family income relative to the federal poverty level (FPL).

In 2024, 15.4 percent of U.S. adults with a family income below the federal poverty level (FPL) reported being diagnosed with diabetes. Meanwhile, only 8.5 percent of respondents with a family income of at least 200% of the federal poverty level had diabetes.

Abstract (en): Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Moving to Opportunity (MTO) is a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas in five cities the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) the low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location; (2) the traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling; (3) the control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and whatever other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled. Families were tracked from baseline (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families. This data collection includes data from the 3,273 adult interviews completed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation. Using data from the long-term evaluation, the associated article reports that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood was associated in the long-term (10 to 15 years) with modest, but potentially important, reductions in the prevalence of extreme obesity and diabetes. The data contain all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the associated article (with the exception of a few mediator variables from the interim MTO evaluation) as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. All analysis of the data should be weighted using the total survey weight. The cell-level file includes a separate weight for each outcome and mediator measure that is the sum of weights for all observations in the cell with valid data for the measure (for example, wt_f_db_hba1c_diab_final is the weight for the glycated hemoglobin measure, mn_f_db_hba1c_diab_final). In the pseudo-individual file, mn_f_wt_totsvy is the average of the total survey weight variable for all observations in the cell. In the original individual-level file, the total survey weight (f_wt_totsvy) is calculated as the product of three component weights: (1) Randomization ratio weight -- At the start of the MTO program, random assignment (RA) ratios were set to produce equal numbers of leased-up families in the low-poverty and traditional voucher groups based on expected leased-up rates. The initial ratios were "8 to 3 to 5": eight low-poverty voucher group families to three traditional voucher families to five control families. During the demonstration program, these RA ratios were adjusted to accommodate higher than anticipated leased-up rates among low-poverty voucher group families. This weight ensures that the proportion of families in a given site is the same across all three treatment groups. This component weight value ranges from 0.59 to 2.09. (2) Survey sample selection weight -- For budgetary reasons, adults from only a random two-thirds of traditional voucher group households were selected for the long-term survey interview sample (while adults from all low-poverty voucher and control group families were selected), so this component weights up the selected traditional voucher group adults so that they are representative of all traditional voucher group adults. This weight component is equal to the inverse probability of selection into the subsample (~1.52). (3) Phase 2 subsample weight -- The long-term survey data collection was completed as a two-phase process. In the first phase, we sought to interview all selected respondents. Phase 2 of fielding was triggered when the response rate reached approximately 74 percent. In the second phase, we su...

Associations between U.S. population groups and diabetes drug use by poverty level.

ObjectiveIndia has the second largest diabetic population in the world. The chronic nature of the disease and high prevalence of co-existing chronic medical conditions or “co morbidities” makes diabetes management complex for the patient and for health care providers. Hence a strong need was felt to explore the problem of co morbidity among diabetics and its dimensions in primary health care practices.MethodThis cross sectional survey was carried out on 912 type 2 diabetes patients attending different urban primary health care facilities at Bhubaneswar. Data regarding existence of co morbidity and demographical details were elicited by a predesigned, pretested questionnaire“Diabetes Co morbidity Evaluation Tool in Primary Care (DCET- PC)”. Statistical analyses were done using STATA.ResultsOverall 84% had one ormore than one comorbid condition. The most frequent co morbid conditions were hypertension [62%], acid peptic disease [28%], chronic back ache [22%] and osteoarthritis [21%]. The median number of co morbid conditions among both males and females is 2[IQR = 2]. The range of the number of co morbid conditions was wider among males [0–14] than females [0–6]. The number of co morbidities was highest in the age group > = 60 across both sexes. Most of the male patients below 40 years of age had either single [53%] or three co morbidities [11%] whereas among female patients of the same age group single [40%] or two co morbidities [22%] were more predominantly present. Age was found to be a strong independent predictor for diabetes co morbidity. The odds of having co morbidity among people above poverty line and schedule caste were found to be[OR = 3.50; 95%CI 1.85–6.62]and [OR = 2.46; CI 95%1.16–5.25] respectively. Odds were increased for retired status [OR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.01–3.91] and obesity [OR = 3.96; 95%CI 1.01–15.76].ConclusionThe results show a high prevalence of co morbidities in patients with type 2 diabetes attending urban primary health care facilities. Hypertension, acid peptic disease, chronic back ache and arthritis being the most common, strategies need to be designed taking into account the multiple demands of co morbidities.

South Africa is experiencing a rapidly growing diabetes epidemic that threatens its healthcare system. Research on the determinants of diabetes in South Africa receives considerable attention due to the lifestyle changes accompanying South Africa’s rapid urbanization since the fall of Apartheid. However, few studies have investigated how segments of the Black South African population, who continue to endure Apartheid’s institutional discriminatory legacy, experience this transition. This paper explores the association between individual and area-level socioeconomic status and diabetes prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control within a sample of Black South Africans aged 45 years or older in three municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal. Cross-sectional data were collected on 3,685 participants from February 2017 to February 2018. Individual-level socioeconomic status was assessed with employment status and educational attainment. Area-level deprivation was measured using the most recent South African Multidimensional Poverty Index scores. Covariates included age, sex, BMI, and hypertension diagnosis. The prevalence of diabetes was 23% (n = 830). Of those, 769 were aware of their diagnosis, 629 were receiving treatment, and 404 had their diabetes controlled. Compared to those with no formal education, Black South Africans with some high school education had increased diabetes prevalence, and those who had completed high school had lower prevalence of treatment receipt. Employment status was negatively associated with diabetes prevalence. Black South Africans living in more deprived wards had lower diabetes prevalence, and those residing in wards that became more deprived from 2001 to 2011 had a higher prevalence diabetes, as well as diabetic control. Results from this study can assist policymakers and practitioners in identifying modifiable risk factors for diabetes among Black South Africans to intervene on. Potential community-based interventions include those focused on patient empowerment and linkages to care. Such interventions should act in concert with policy changes, such as expanding the existing sugar-sweetened beverage tax.

Significant high-rate spatial clusters of diabetes-related hospitalizations at the ZIP code tabulation area level in Florida, 2016–2019.

San Francisco Flood Health Vulnerability

Socioeconomic, Demographic, Health, and Housing Indicators

By City of San Francisco [source]

About this dataset

This dataset provides a comprehensive composite index that captures the relative vulnerability of San Francisco communities to the health impacts of flooding and extreme storms. Predominantly sourced from local governmental health, housing, and public data sources, this index is constructed from an array of socio-economic factors, exposure indices,Health indicators and housing attributes. Used as a valuable planning tool for both health and climate adaptation initiatives throughout San Francisco, this dataset helps to identify vulnerable populations within the city such as areas with high concentrations of children or elderly individuals. Data points included in this index include: census blockgroup numbers; the percentage of population under 18 years old; percentage of population above 65; percentage non-white; poverty levels; education level; yearly precipitation estimates; diabetes prevalence rate; mental health issues reported in the area; asthma cases by geographic location;; disability rates within each block group measure as well as housing quality metrics. All these components provide a broader understanding on how best to tackle issues faced within SF arising from any form of climate change related weather event such as floods or extreme storms

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset can be used to analyze the vulnerability of the population in San Francisco to the health impacts of floods and storms. This dataset includes a number of important indicators such as poverty, education, demographic, exposure and health-related information. These indicators can be useful for developing effective strategies for health and climate adaptation in an urban area.

To get started with this dataset: First, review the data dictionary provided in the attachments section of this metadata to understand each variable that you plan on using in your analysis. Second, see if there are any null or missing values in your columns by checking out ‘Null Value’ column provided in this metadata sheet and look at how they will affect your analysis - use appropriate methods to handle those values based on your goals and objectives. Thirdly begin exploring relationships between different variables using visualizations like pandas scatter_matrix() & pandas .corr() . These tools can help you identify potential strong correlations between certain variables that you may have not seen otherwise through simple inspection of the data.

Lastly if needed use modelling techniques like regression analysis or other quantitative methods like ANOVA’s etc., for further elaboration on understanding relationships between different parameters involved as per need basis

Research Ideas

• Developing targeted public health interventions focused on high-risk areas/populations as identified in the vulnerability index.
• Establishing criteria for insurance premiums and policies within high-risk areas/populations to incentivize adaption to climate change.
• Visual mapping of individual indicators in order to identify trends and correlations between flood risk and socioeconomic indicators, resource availability, and/or healthcare provision levels at a granular level

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

See the dataset description for more information.

Columns

File: san-francisco-flood-health-vulnerability-1.csv | Column name | Description | |:---------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Census Blockgroup | Unique numerical identifier for each block in the city. (Integer) | | Children | Percentage of population under 18 years of age. (Float) | | Children_wNULLvalues | Percentage of population under 18 years of age with null values. (Float) | | Elderly | Percentage of population over 65 years of age. (Float) | | Elderly_wNULLvalues | Percentage of population over 65 years of age with null values. (Float) | | NonWhite | Percentage of non-white population. (Float) ...

In 2024, 24.2 percent of adults in the United States with diagnosed diabetes who had family incomes between 100 percent and less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) reported using GLP-1 injectables. Meanwhile, roughly 29 percent of adults with diagnosed diabetes who had family incomes above 400 percent of the FPL reported using GLP-1 injectables.

The City of Laredo converted and geolocated the patient data (2104-2016) from the Gateway Community Center. The data was then related to Census Block Groups in the Laredo Area. The City wanted to study the patient distribution and prominent diagnosis for our area. We would like to refocus our community efforts in supporting those citizens who fall beneath the poverty line. We were focused on the prevalence of diabetes in our community, and we have seen a high percentage in areas of need. Gateway Community Center services Laredo and the surrounding areas. In total we had over 320,000 points of visits, and about 32,000 unique patients.

The goal is to predict the rate of heart disease (per 100,000 individuals) across the United States at the county-level from other socioeconomic indicators. The data is compiled from a wide range of sources and made publicly available by the United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (USDA ERS).

There are 33 variables in this dataset. Each row in the dataset represents a United States county, and the dataset we are working with covers two particular years, denoted a, and b We don't provide a unique identifier for an individual county, just a row_id for each row.

The variables in the dataset have names that of the form category_variable, where category is the high level category of the variable (e.g. econ or health). variable is what the specific column contains.

We're trying to predict the variable heart_disease_mortality_per_100k (a positive integer) for each row of the test data set.

Columns

area — information about the county

area_rucc — Rural-Urban Continuum Codes "form a classification scheme that distinguishes metropolitan counties by the population size of their metro area, and nonmetropolitan counties by degree of urbanization and adjacency to a metro area. The official Office of Management and Budget (OMB) metro and nonmetro categories have been subdivided into three metro and six nonmetro categories. Each county in the U.S. is assigned one of the 9 codes." (USDA Economic Research Service, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-continuum-codes/)

area_urban_influence — Urban Influence Codes "form a classification scheme that distinguishes metropolitan counties by population size of their metro area, and nonmetropolitan counties by size of the largest city or town and proximity to metro and micropolitan areas." (USDA Economic Research Service, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/urban-influence-codes/)

econ — economic indicators

econ_economic_typology — County Typology Codes "classify all U.S. counties according to six mutually exclusive categories of economic dependence and six overlapping categories of policy-relevant themes. The economic dependence types include farming, mining, manufacturing, Federal/State government, recreation, and nonspecialized counties. The policy-relevant types include low education, low employment, persistent poverty, persistent child poverty, population loss, and retirement destination." (USDA Economic Research Service, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/county-typology-codes.aspx)

econ_pct_civilian_labor — Civilian labor force, annual average, as percent of population (Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/lau/)

econ_pct_unemployment — Unemployment, annual average, as percent of population (Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/lau/)

econ_pct_uninsured_adults — Percent of adults without health insurance (Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/lau/) econ_pct_uninsured_children — Percent of children without health insurance (Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/lau/)

health — health indicators

health_pct_adult_obesity — Percent of adults who meet clinical definition of obese (National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion)

health_pct_adult_smoking — Percent of adults who smoke (Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System)

health_pct_diabetes — Percent of population with diabetes (National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Diabetes Translation)

health_pct_low_birthweight — Percent of babies born with low birth weight (National Center for Health Statistics)

health_pct_excessive_drinking — Percent of adult population that engages in excessive consumption of alcohol (Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, )

health_pct_physical_inacticity — Percent of adult population that is physically inactive (National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion)

health_air_pollution_particulate_matter — Fine particulate matter in µg/m³ (CDC WONDER, https://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/pm.html)

health_homicides_per_100k — Deaths by homicide per 100,000 population (National Center for Health Statistics)

health_motor_vehicle_crash_deaths_per_100k — Deaths by motor vehicle crash per 100,000 population (National Center for Health Statistics)

health_pop_per_dentist — Population per dentist (HRSA Area Resource File)

health_pop_per_primary_care_physician — Population per Primary Care Physician (HRSA Area Resource File)

demo — demographics information

demo_pct_female — Percent of population that is female (US Census Population Estimates)

demo_pct_below_18_years_of_age — Percent of population that is below 18 years of age (US Census Population Estimates)

demo_pct_aged_65_years_and_older — Percent of population that is aged 65 years or older (US Census Population Estimates)

dem...

The COVID-19 Vulnerability and Recovery Index uses Tract and ZIP Code-level data* to identify California communities most in need of immediate and long-term pandemic and economic relief. Specifically, the Index is comprised of three components — Risk, Severity, and Recovery Need with the last scoring the ability to recover from the health, economic, and social costs of the pandemic. Communities with higher Index scores face a higher risk of COVID-19 infection and death and a longer uphill economic recovery. Conversely, those with lower scores are less vulnerable.

The Index includes one overarching Index score as well as a score for each of the individual components. Each component includes a set of indicators we found to be associated with COVID-19 risk, severity, or recovery in our review of existing indices and independent analysis. The Risk component includes indicators related to the risk of COVID-19 infection. The Severity component includes indicators designed to measure the risk of severe illness or death from COVID-19. The Recovery Need component includes indicators that measure community needs related to economic and social recovery. The overarching Index score is designed to show level of need from Highest to Lowest with ZIP Codes in the Highest or High need categories, or top 20th or 40th percentiles of the Index, having the greatest need for support.

The Index was originally developed as a statewide tool but has been adapted to LA County for the purposes of the Board motion. To distinguish between the LA County Index and the original Statewide Index, we refer to the revised Index for LA County as the LA County ARPA Index.

*Zip Code data has been crosswalked to Census Tract using HUD methodology

Indicators within each component of the LA County ARPA Index are:Risk: Individuals without U.S. citizenship; Population Below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL); Overcrowded Housing Units; Essential Workers Severity: Asthma Hospitalizations (per 10,000); Population Below 200% FPL; Seniors 75 and over in Poverty; Uninsured Population; Heart Disease Hospitalizations (per 10,000); Diabetes Hospitalizations (per 10,000)Recovery Need: Single-Parent Households; Gun Injuries (per 10,000); Population Below 200% FPL; Essential Workers; Unemployment; Uninsured PopulationData are sourced from US Census American Communities Survey (ACS) and the OSHPD Patient Discharge Database. For ACS indicators, the tables and variables used are as follows:

Indicator

ACS Table/Years

Numerator

Denominator

Non-US Citizen

B05001, 2019-2023

b05001_006e

b05001_001e

Below 200% FPL

S1701, 2019-2023

s1701_c01_042e

s1701_c01_001e

Overcrowded Housing Units

B25014, 2019-2023

b25014_006e + b25014_007e + b25014_012e + b25014_013e

b25014_001e

Essential Workers

S2401, 2019-2023

s2401_c01_005e + s2401_c01_011e + s2401_c01_013e + s2401_c01_015e + s2401_c01_019e + s2401_c01_020e + s2401_c01_023e + s2401_c01_024e + s2401_c01_029e + s2401_c01_033e

s2401_c01_001

Seniors 75+ in Poverty

B17020, 2019-2023

b17020_008e + b17020_009e

b17020_008e + b17020_009e + b17020_016e + b17020_017e

Uninsured

S2701, 2019-2023

s2701_c05_001e

NA, rate published in source table

Single-Parent Households

S1101, 2019-2023

s1101_c03_005e + s1101_c04_005e

s1101_c01_001e

Unemployment

S2301, 2019-2023

s2301_c04_001e

NA, rate published in source table

The remaining indicators are based data requested and received by Advancement Project CA from the OSHPD Patient Discharge database. Data are based on records aggregated at the ZIP Code level:

Indicator

Years

Definition

Denominator

Asthma Hospitalizations

2017-2019

All ICD 10 codes under J45 (under Principal Diagnosis)

American Community Survey, 2015-2019, 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05

Gun Injuries

2017-2019

Principal/Other External Cause Code "Gun Injury" with a Disposition not "Died/Expired". ICD 10 Code Y38.4 and all codes under X94, W32, W33, W34, X72, X73, X74, X93, X95, Y22, Y23, Y35 [All listed codes with 7th digit "A" for initial encounter]

American Community Survey, 2015-2019, 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05

Heart Disease Hospitalizations

2017-2019

ICD 10 Code I46.2 and all ICD 10 codes under I21, I22, I24, I25, I42, I50 (under Principal Diagnosis)

American Community Survey, 2015-2019, 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05

Diabetes (Type 2) Hospitalizations

2017-2019

All ICD 10 codes under E11 (under Principal Diagnosis)

American Community Survey, 2015-2019, 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05

For more information about this dataset, please contact egis@isd.lacounty.gov.

Associations between U.S. population groups and vaccination by race/ethnicity, poverty level, insurance type, and education level.

The index is constructed using socioeconomic and demographic, exposure, health, and housing indicators and is intended to serve as a planning tool for health and climate adaptation. Steps for calculating the index can be found in in the "An Assessment of San Francisco’s Vulnerability to Flooding & Extreme Storms" located at https://sfclimatehealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/FloodVulnerabilityReport_v5.pdf.pdfData Dictionary: (see attachment here also: https://data.sfgov.org/Health-and-Social-Services/San-Francisco-Flood-Health-Vulnerability/cne3-h93g)

Field Name Data Type Definition Notes (optional)

Census Blockgroup Text San Francisco Census Block Groups

Children Numeric Percentage of residents under 18 years old. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

Chidlren_wNULLvalues Numeric Percentage of residents under 18 years old. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

Elderly Numeric Percentage of residents aged 65 and older. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

Elderly_wNULLvalues Numeric Percentage of residents aged 65 and older. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

NonWhite Numeric Percentage of residents that do not identify as white (not Hispanic or Latino). American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

NonWhite_wNULLvalues Numeric Percentage of residents that do not identify as white (not Hispanic or Latino). American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

Poverty Numeric Percentage of all individuals below 200% of the poverty level. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

Poverty_wNULLvalues Numeric Percentage of all individuals below 200% of the poverty level. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

Education Numeric Percent of individuals over 25 with at least a high school degree. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

Education_wNULLvalues Numeric Percent of individuals over 25 with at least a high school degree. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

English Numeric Percentage of households with no one age 14 and over who speaks English only or speaks English "very well". American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

English_wNULLvalues Numeric Percentage of households with no one age 14 and over who speaks English only or speaks English "very well". American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

Elevation Numeric Minimum elevation in feet. United States Geologic Survey 2011.

SeaLevelRise Numeric Percent of land area in the 100-year flood plain with 36-inches of sea level rise. San Francisco Sea Level Rise Committee, AECOM 77inch flood inundation layer, 2014.

Precipitation Numeric Percent of land area with over 6-inches of projected precipitation-related flood inundation during an 100-year storm. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, AECOM, 2015.

Diabetes Numeric Age-adjusted hospitalization rate due to diabetes; adults 18+. California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, 2004-2015.

MentalHealth Numeric Age-adjusted hospitalization rate due to schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, 2004-2015.

Asthma Numeric Age-adjusted hospitalization rate due to asthma; adults 18+. California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, 2004 - 2015.

Disability Numeric Percentage of total civilian noninstitutionalized population with a disability. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014.

Disability_wNULLvalues

Percentage of total civilian noninstitutionalized population with a disability. American Community Survey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

HousingQuality Numeric Annual housing violations, per 1000 residents. San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco Department of Building Inspections, San Francisco Fire Department, 2010 - 2012.

Homeless Numeric Homeless population, per 1000 residents. San Francisco Homeless Count 2015.

LivAlone Numeric Households with a householder living alone. American Community Surevey 2009 - 2014.

LivAlone_wNULLvalues Numeric Households with a householder living alone. American Community Surevey 2009 - 2014. Because the American Community Survey uses survey estimates, all data is attached to a margin of error. When the coefficient of variation is over .3, the SFDPH considers this data unstable and gives it a NULL value. However, because principal component analysis and the final development of the flood health index could not use NULL values, SFDPH used this unstable data for these limited purposes. For the purpose of transparency, SFDPH has included both datasets with NULL values and without NULL values.

FloodHealthIndex Numeric Comparative ranking of flood health vulnerability, by block group. The Flood Health Index weights the six socioeconomic and demographic indicators (Children, Elderly, NonWhite, Poverty, Education, English) as 20% of the final score, the three exposure indicators (Sea Level Rise, Precipitation, Elevation) as 40% of the final score, the four health indicators (Diabetes, MentalHealth, Asthma, Disability) as 20% of the final score, and the three housing indicators (HousingQuality, Homeless, LivAlone) as 20% of the final score. For methodology used to develop the final Flood Health Index, please read the San Francisco Flood Vulnerability Assessment Methodology Section.

FloodHealthIndex_Quintiles Numeric Comparative ranking of flood health vulnerability, by block group. The Flood Health Index weights the six socioeconomic and demographic indicators (Children, Elderly, NonWhite, Poverty, Education, English) as 20% of the final score, the three exposure indicators (Sea Level Rise, Precipitation, Elevation) as 40% of the final score, the four health indicators (Diabetes, MentalHealth, Asthma, Disability) as 20% of the final score, and the three housing indicators (HousingQuality, Homeless, LivAlone) as 20% of the final score. For methodology used to develop the final Flood Health Index, please read the San Francisco Flood

The notebook that generates this dataset is here: https://www.kaggle.com/johnjdavisiv/us-counties-weather-sociohealth-location-data

For an introduction to the data, check out this notebook: https://www.kaggle.com/johnjdavisiv/intro-to-the-us-counties-covid19-data

The 3,142 counties of the United States span a diverse range of social, economic, health, and weather conditions. Because of the COVID19 pandemic, over 2,400 of these counties have already experienced some COVID19 cases.

Combining county-level data on health, socioeconomics, and weather can help us address identify which populations are at risk for COVID19 and help prepare high-risk communities.

Temperature and humidity may affect the transmissibility of COVID19, but in the United States, warmer regions also tend to have markedly different socioeconomic and health demographics. As such, it's important to be able to control for factors like obesity, diabetes, access to healthcare, and poverty rates, since these factors themselves likely play a role in COVID19 transmission and fatality rates.

This dataset provides all of this information, formatted, cleaned, and ready for analysis. Most columns have little or no missing data. A small number have larger amounts of missing data; see the kernel that generated this dataset for details.

Introduction

Intensive care has played a pivotal role during the COVID-19 pandemic as many patients developed severe pulmonary complications. The availability of information in pediatric intensive care (PICUs) remains limited. The purpose of this study is to characterize COVID-19 positive admissions (CPAs) in the United States and to determine factors that may impact those admissions.

Materials and Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 dashboard virtual pediatric system) containing information regarding respiratory support and comorbidities for all CPAs between March and April 2020. The state level data contained 13 different factors from population density, comorbid conditions and social distancing score. The absolute CPAs count was converted to frequency using the state’s population. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the association between CPAs frequency and endpoints.

Results

A total of 2...

Over 38 million Americans experienced food insecurity in 2020 and a disproportionate number of those people, over 21 percent, were Black Americans (USDA, 2021). While Black people across the country experienced food insecurity at disproportionately high rates, the Deep South’s prevalence of food insecurity continues to outpace much of the rest of America with three of the top five food insecure states (Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas) comprising the Mississippi Delta (Henchy & Jacobs, 2020). There is a paradox at play in the Mississippi Delta region regarding its role as one of the top agricultural producers in the country but simultaneously home to some of the food insecure communities as well. Food insecurity is associated with a number of poor health outcomes including, but not limited to, decreased cognitive performance in children, increased anxiety, and depression in non-senior adults, as well as higher rates of diabetes, hypertension, and general increased rates of poor health (Gundersen, 2015). Black households in the Mississippi Delta experience a series of social determinants that contribute to the high prevalence of food insecurity in the region including poverty, racial residential segregation, social isolation, and lack of access to nutritious foods. Food Insecurity and its complexity of confounding factors leave researchers with a significant task to find leverage points at which community leaders, policy makers and other actors in the socioecological framework might reduce food insecurity in places with high food insecurity like the Mississippi Delta. This report recommends addressing food insecurity in the Delta through improving the local structure of information flows by offering education programs to boost enrollment in social welfare programs underutilized in the region.

Die Gesundheitsberichterstattung (GBE) des RKI informiert regelmäßig über die gesundheitliche Situation der Bevölkerung in Deutschland. Das Themenspektrum ist vielfältig und reicht von Gesundheitszustand und Einflussfaktoren auf die Gesundheit über Gesundheitsförderung, Prävention und gesundheitliche Versorgung bis hin zu den damit verbundenen Kosten.

Der Fokus des vorliegenden Datensatzes liegt auf Indikatoren zu nichtübertragbaren Erkrankungen (noncommunicable diseases, NCD), wie Diabetes mellitus, Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen, Krebs und psychischen Störungen sowie deren Einflussfaktoren.

Abstract

Purpose: The multi-country Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE) is run by the World Health Organization's Multi-Country Studies unit in the Innovation, Information, Evidence and Research Cluster. SAGE is part of the unit's Longitudinal Study Programme which is compiling longitudinal data on the health and well-being of adult populations, and the ageing process, through primary data collection and secondary data analysis. SAGE baseline data (Wave 0, 2002/3) was collected as part of WHO's World Health Survey http://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/en/index.html (WHS). SAGE Wave 1 (2007/10) provides a comprehensive data set on the health and well-being of adults in six low and middle-income countries: China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russian Federation and South Africa. Objectives: To obtain reliable, valid and comparable health, health-related and well-being data over a range of key domains for adult and older adult populations in nationally representative samples To examine patterns and dynamics of age-related changes in health and well-being using longitudinal follow-up of a cohort as they age, and to investigate socio-economic consequences of these health changes To supplement and cross-validate self-reported measures of health and the anchoring vignette approach to improving comparability of self-reported measures, through measured performance tests for selected health domains To collect health examination and biomarker data that improves reliability of morbidity and risk factor data and to objectively monitor the effect of interventions

Additional Objectives: To generate large cohorts of older adult populations and comparison cohorts of younger populations for following-up intermediate outcomes, monitoring trends, examining transitions and life events, and addressing relationships between determinants and health, well-being and health-related outcomes To develop a mechanism to link survey data to demographic surveillance site data To build linkages with other national and multi-country ageing studies To improve the methodologies to enhance the reliability and validity of health outcomes and determinants data To provide a public-access information base to engage all stakeholders, including national policy makers and health systems planners, in planning and decision-making processes about the health and well-being of older adults

Methods: SAGE's first full round of data collection included both follow-up and new respondents in most participating countries. The goal of the sampling design was to obtain a nationally representative cohort of persons aged 50 years and older, with a smaller cohort of persons aged 18 to 49 for comparison purposes. In the older households, all persons aged 50+ years (for example, spouses and siblings) were invited to participate. Proxy respondents were identified for respondents who were unable to respond for themselves. Standardized SAGE survey instruments were used in all countries consisting of five main parts: 1) household questionnaire; 2) individual questionnaire; 3) proxy questionnaire; 4) verbal autopsy questionnaire; and, 5) appendices including showcards. A VAQ was completed for deaths in the household over the last 24 months. The procedures for including country-specific adaptations to the standardized questionnaire and translations into local languages from English follow those developed by and used for the World Health Survey.

Content Household questionnaire 0000 Coversheet 0100 Sampling Information 0200 Geocoding and GPS Information 0300 Recontact Information 0350 Contact Record 0400 Household Roster 0450 Kish Tables and Household Consent 0500 Housing 0600 Household and Family Support Networks and Transfers 0700 Assets and Household Income 0800 Household Expenditures 0900 Interviewer Observations

Individual questionnaire 1000 Socio-Demographic Characteristics 1500 Work History and Benefits 2000 Health State Descriptions and Vignettes 2500 Anthropometrics, Performance Tests and Biomarkers 3000 Risk Factors and Preventive Health Behaviours 4000 Chronic Conditions and Health Services Coverage 5000 Health Care Utilization 6000 Social Cohesion 7000 Subjective Well-Being and Quality of Life (WHOQoL-8 and Day Reconstruction Method) 8000 Impact of Caregiving 9000 Interviewer Assessment

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

households and individuals

Universe

The household section of the survey covered all households in 19 of the 28 states in India which covers 96% of the population. Institutionalised populations are excluded. The individual section covered all persons aged 18 years and older residing within individual households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

World Health Survey Sampling India has 28 states and seven union territories. 19 of the 28 states were included in the design representing 96% of the population. India used a stratified multistage cluster sample design. Six states were selected in accordance with their geographic location and level of development. Strata were defined by the 6 states:(Assam, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal), and locality (urban or rural). There are 12 strata in total. The 2000 Census demarcation was used as the sampling frame. Two stage and three stage sampling was adopted in rural and urban areas, respectively. In rural areas PSUs(villages) were selected probability proportional to size. The measure of size being the 2001 Census population in the village. SSUs (households) were selected using systematic sampling. TSUs (individuals) were selected using Kish tables. In urban areas, PSUs(city wards) were selected probability proportional to size. SSUs(census enumeration blocks), two were randomly selected from each PSU. TSU (households) were selected using systematic sampling. QSU (individuals) were selected as in rural areas. A sample of 379 EAs was selected as the primary sampling units(PSU).

SAGE Sampling The SAGE sample was pre-determined as all PSUs and households selected for the WHS/SAGE Wave 0 survey were included. Exceptions are three PSUs in Assam which were replaced as they were inaccessible due to flooding. And a further six PSUs were omitted for which the household roster information was not available. In each selected EA, a listing of the households was conducted to classify each household into the following mutually exclusive categories: 1)Households with a WHS/SAGE Wave 0 respondent aged 50-plus: all members aged 50-plus including the WHS/SAGE Wave 0 respondent were eligible for the individual interview. 2)Households with a WHS/SAGE Wave 0 respondent aged 47-49: all members aged 50-plus including the WHS/SAGE Wave 0 respondent aged 47-49 was eligible for the individual interview. 3)Households with a WHS/SAGE Wave 0 female respondent aged 18-46: all females members aged 18-49 including the WHS/SAGE Wave 0 female respondent aged 18-46 were eligible for the individual interview. 4)Households with a WHS/SAGE Wave 0 male respondent aged 18-46: three households were selected using systematic sampling and one male aged 18-49 was eligible for the individual interview. In the households not selected, all members aged 50-plus were eligible for the individual interview.

Stages of selection Strata: State, Locality=12 PSU: EAs=375 surveyed SSU: Households=10424 surveyed TSU: Individual=12198 surveyed

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f] PAPI

Research instrument

The questionnaires were based on the WHS Model Questionnaire with some modification and many new additions. A household questionnaire was administered to all households eligible for the study. A Verbal Autopsy questionnaire was administered to households that had a death in the last 24 months. An Individual questionniare was administered to eligible respondents identified from the household roster. A Proxy questionnaire was administered to individual respondents who had cognitive limitations. A Womans Questionnaire was administered to all females aged 18-49 years identified from the household roster. The questionnaires were developed in English and were piloted as part of the SAGE pretest in 2005. All documents were translated into Hindi, Assamese, Kanada and Marathi. SAGE generic questionnaires are available as external resources.

Cleaning operations

Data editing took place at a number of stages including: (1) office editing and coding (2) during data entry (3) structural checking of the CSPro files (4) range and consistency secondary edits in Stata

Response rate

Household Response rate=88% Cooperation rate=92%

Individual: Response rate=68% Cooperation rate=92%

Sociodemographic factors that had statistically significant relationships with outcomes in regression analyses (outcomes: Presence of hypertension, raised blood sugar or diabetes, tobacco use, alcohol use, taking medications).