REGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STROKE MORTALITY AND INCIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES: SODIUM INTAKE, SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS AND RACE

Author(s):  
Suzanne Judd
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14

Abstract Background: Research has documented many geographic inequities in health. Research has also documented that the way one thinks about health and quality of life (QOL) affects one’s experience of health, treatment, and one’s ability to cope with health problems. Purpose: We examined United-States (US) regional differences in QOL appraisal (i.e., the way one thinks about health and QOL), and whether resilience-appraisal relationships varied by region. Methods: Secondary analysis of 3,955 chronic-disease patients and caregivers assessed QOL appraisal via the QOL Appraisal Profile-v2 and resilience via the Centers for Disease Control Healthy Days Core Module. Covariates included individual-level and aggregate-level socioeconomic status (SES) characteristics. Zone improvement plan (ZIP) code was linked to publicly available indicators of income inequality, poverty, wealth, population density, and rurality. Multivariate and hierarchical residual modeling tested study hypotheses that there are regional differences in QOL appraisal and in the relationship between resilience and appraisal. Results: After sociodemographic adjustment, QOL appraisal patterns and the appraisal-resilience connection were virtually the same across regions. For resilience, sociodemographic variables explained 26 % of the variance; appraisal processes, an additional 17 %; and region and its interaction terms, just an additional 0.1 %. Conclusion: The study findings underscore a geographic universality across the contiguous US in how people think about QOL, and in the relationship between appraisal and resilience. Despite the recent prominence of divisive rhetoric suggesting vast regional differences in values, priorities, and experiences, our findings support the commonality of ways of thinking and responding to life challenges. These findings support the wide applicability of cognitive-based interventions to boost resilience. Keywords: appraisal; resilience; cognitive; quality of life; societal; geographic Abbreviations: MANOVA = Multivariate Analysis of Variance; PCA = principal components analysis; QOL = quality of life; SES = socioeconomic status; US = United States; ZIP = Zone Improvement Plan (postal code)


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14

Background: Research has documented many geographic inequities in health. Research has also documented that the way one thinks about health and quality of life (QOL) affects one’s experience of health, treatment, and one’s ability to cope with health problems. Purpose: We examined United-States (US) regional differences in QOL appraisal (i.e., the way one thinks about health and QOL), and whether resilience-appraisal relationships varied by region. Methods: Secondary analysis of 3,955 chronic-disease patients and caregivers assessed QOL appraisal via the QOL Appraisal Profile-v2 and resilience via the Centers for Disease Control Healthy Days Core Module. Covariates included individual-level and aggregate-level socioeconomic status (SES) characteristics. Zone improvement plan (ZIP) code was linked to publicly available indicators of income inequality, poverty, wealth, population density, and rurality. Multivariate and hierarchical residual modeling tested study hypotheses that there are regional differences in QOL appraisal and in the relationship between resilience and appraisal. Results: After sociodemographic adjustment, QOL appraisal patterns and the appraisal-resilience connection were virtually the same across regions. For resilience, sociodemographic variables explained 26 % of the variance; appraisal processes, an additional 17 %; and region and its interaction terms, just an additional 0.1 %. Conclusion: The study findings underscore a geographic universality across the contiguous US in how people think about QOL, and in the relationship between appraisal and resilience. Despite the recent prominence of divisive rhetoric suggesting vast regional differences in values, priorities, and experiences, our findings support the commonality of ways of thinking and responding to life challenges. These findings support the wide applicability of cognitive-based interventions to boost resilience. Abbreviations: MANOVA = Multivariate Analysis of Variance; PCA = principal components analysis; QOL = quality of life; SES = socioeconomic status; US = United States; ZIP = Zone Improvement Plan (postal code)


Demography ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darwin A. Baluran ◽  
Evelyn J. Patterson

Abstract As the fastest growing racial group in the United States, understanding the health patterns of Asians is important to addressing health gaps in American society. Most studies have not considered the unique experiences of the ethnic groups contained in the Asian racial group, implying that Asians have a shared story. However, we should expect differences between the ethnic groups given the differences in their timing and place of migration, socioeconomic status, and racialized experiences in the United States. We estimate the life expectancy of the six largest Asian ethnic groups—Chinese, Asian Indians, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Koreans, and Japanese—analyzing data from the Multiple Cause of Death File (2012–2016) and the American Community Survey (2012–2016) in the United States at the national and regional levels. Nationally, Chinese had the highest life expectancy (males e0 = 86.8; females e0 = 91.3), followed by Asian Indians, Koreans, Japanese, Filipinos, and Vietnamese, generally reflecting the pattern expected given their educational attainment, our primary indicator of socioeconomic status. We also found regional differences in life expectancy, where life expectancy for Asians in the West was significantly lower than all other regions. These findings suggest the presence of underlying selection effects associated with settlement patterns among new and traditional destinations. Our results underline the necessity of studying the experiences of the different Asian ethnic groups in the United States, permitting a better assessment of the varying health needs within this diverse racial group.


Author(s):  
P. C. Kemeny

Although Presbyterians have long professed a strong commitment to church unity, Presbyterian denominations have often been divided by schism. Major disagreements over theology have always played a central role in precipitating these schisms. However, class, ethnic, gender, racial, and regional differences and also personal conflicts have often also contributed significantly to schisms. An examination of the 1843 Great Disruption in Scotland, the 1837 Old School–New School Presbyterian Church schism in the United States, the 1903 formation of the Independent Presbyterian Church of Brazil, and the 1952 rupture that led to the establishment of the Korean Presbyterian Church (Kosin) illustrate this argument.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0192513X2110179
Author(s):  
Sei-Young Lee ◽  
Ga-Young Choi

With the theory of feminist intersectionality, this study examined intimate partner violence (IPV) among Korean immigrant women focusing on gender norms, immigration, and socioeconomic status in the contexts of Korean culture. A total of 83 Korean immigrant women who were receiving a social service from non-profit agencies in ethnically diverse urban areas were recruited with a purposive sampling method. Hierarchical regressions were conducted to examine changes in variance explained by models. Having non-traditional gender norms, a college degree or higher education, immigrant life stresses, and living longer in the United States were positively associated with IPV while having higher income and being more fluent in English were negatively associated with IPV. Findings were discussed to understand Korean immigrant women’s internal conflict affected by their higher education and more egalitarian gender norms under the patriarchal cultural norms while experiencing immigrant life stresses and living in the United States. Implication for practice was also discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (18) ◽  
pp. 3378
Author(s):  
Chaitanya Rojulpote ◽  
Shivaraj Patil ◽  
Karthik Gonuguntla ◽  
Manish Kumar ◽  
Srinivas Nadadur ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 171 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin P. Chapman ◽  
Kevin Fiscella ◽  
Ichiro Kawachi ◽  
Paul R. Duberstein

Stroke ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1274-1279 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Cooper ◽  
C Sempos ◽  
S C Hsieh ◽  
M G Kovar

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110394
Author(s):  
Braeden Lovett ◽  
Alexandra Welschmeyer ◽  
James Dixon Johns ◽  
Sarah Mowry ◽  
Michael Hoa

Objective Social determinants of health (SDOHs), including but not limited to sex, race, socioeconomic status, insurance status, and education level, play a significant role in health disparities and affect health outcomes. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine health disparities in otology within the United States and highlight areas warranting further research. Data Sources PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE. Review Methods Our search encompassed all years through January 10, 2021. All peer-reviewed primary literature of any design and publication date regarding health disparities and otology outcomes in the United States was eligible for inclusion. Eligibility assessment was performed via 3 independent investigators. Results Of the 6326 unique abstracts identified, 188 studies underwent full-text review, and 52 remained in the final review. The most frequently examined otologic condition was hearing loss (36.5%), followed by cochlear implantation (28.8%) and infection/effusion (15.4%). Vertigo/dizziness (1.9%), Ménière’s disease (1.9%), and tinnitus (1.9%) were the least represented otologic conditions. Comprehensive articles on multiple disparity topics were the most common (n = 18), followed by articles on race/ethnicity (n = 11) and socioeconomic status (n = 9). Language (n = 2), education (n = 2), and gender (n = 1) were the least discussed. Over 5-fold the number of articles were published between 2011 and 2020 compared to the preceding decade (42 vs 8). Conclusion This study captures the existing literature regarding health disparities and outcomes in otology. The lack of robust data suggests the need for future quality studies aimed at investigating disparities in otologic care, as well as a broader push for recording and reporting SDOHs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document