Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 19 de 19
Filter
1.
PLOS global public health ; 2(12), 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2265124

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has had intense, heterogeneous impacts on different communities and geographies in the United States. We explore county-level associations between COVID-19 attributed deaths and social, demographic, vulnerability, and political variables to develop a better understanding of the evolving roles these variables have played in relation to mortality. We focus on the role of political variables, as captured by support for either the Republican or Democratic presidential candidates in the 2020 elections and the stringency of state-wide governor mandates, during three non-overlapping time periods between February 2020 and February 2021. We find that during the first three months of the pandemic, Democratic-leaning and internationally-connected urban counties were affected. During subsequent months (between May and September 2020), Republican counties with high percentages of Hispanic and Black populations were most hardly hit. In the third time period –between October 2020 and February 2021– we find that Republican-leaning counties with loose mask mandates experienced up to 3 times higher death rates than Democratic-leaning counties, even after controlling for multiple social vulnerability factors. Some of these deaths could perhaps have been avoided given that the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in preventing uncontrolled disease transmission, such as social distancing and wearing masks indoors, had been well-established at this point in time.

2.
Am J Public Health ; 113(6): 667-670, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2267242

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To examine whether, and if so how, US national and state survey response rates changed after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. We compared the change in response rates between 2020 and 2019 of 6 (3 social and economic, 3 health focused) major US national surveys (2 with state response rates). Results. All the ongoing surveys except 1 reported relative decreases (∼29%) in response rates. For example, the household response rate to the US Census American Community Survey decreased from 86.0% in 2019 to 71.2% in 2020, and the response rate of the US National Health Interview Survey decreased from 60.0% to 42.7% from the first to the second quarter of 2020. For all surveys, the greatest decreases in response rates occurred among persons with lower income and lower education. Conclusions. Socially patterned decreases in response rates pose serious challenges and must be addressed explicitly in all studies relying on data obtained since the onset of the pandemic. Public Health Implications. Artifactual reduction of estimates of the magnitude of health inequities attributable to differential response rates could adversely affect efforts to reduce these inequities. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(6):667-670. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307267).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Population Health , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Surveys and Questionnaires , Health Inequities
3.
PLOS Glob Public Health ; 2(12): e0000557, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196818

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has had intense, heterogeneous impacts on different communities and geographies in the United States. We explore county-level associations between COVID-19 attributed deaths and social, demographic, vulnerability, and political variables to develop a better understanding of the evolving roles these variables have played in relation to mortality. We focus on the role of political variables, as captured by support for either the Republican or Democratic presidential candidates in the 2020 elections and the stringency of state-wide governor mandates, during three non-overlapping time periods between February 2020 and February 2021. We find that during the first three months of the pandemic, Democratic-leaning and internationally-connected urban counties were affected. During subsequent months (between May and September 2020), Republican counties with high percentages of Hispanic and Black populations were most hardly hit. In the third time period -between October 2020 and February 2021- we find that Republican-leaning counties with loose mask mandates experienced up to 3 times higher death rates than Democratic-leaning counties, even after controlling for multiple social vulnerability factors. Some of these deaths could perhaps have been avoided given that the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in preventing uncontrolled disease transmission, such as social distancing and wearing masks indoors, had been well-established at this point in time.

4.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 16: 100384, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2181270

ABSTRACT

Background: Scant research, including in the United States, has quantified relationships between the political ideologies of elected representatives and COVID-19 outcomes among their constituents. Methods: We analyzed observational cross-sectional data on COVID-19 mortality rates (age-standardized) and stress on hospital intensive care unit (ICU) capacity for all 435 US Congressional Districts (CDs) in a period of adult vaccine availability (April 2021-March 2022). Political metrics comprised: (1) ideological scores based on each US Representative's and Senator's concurrent overall voting record and their specific COVID-19 votes, and (2) state trifectas (Governor, State House, and State Senate under the same political party control). Analyses controlled for CD social metrics, population density, vaccination rates, the prevalence of diabetes and obesity, and voter political lean. Findings: During the study period, the higher the exposure to conservatism across several political metrics, the higher the COVID-19 age-standardized mortality rates, even after taking into account the CD's social characteristics; similar patterns occurred for stress on hospital ICU capacity for Republican trifectas and US Senator political ideology scores. For example, in models mutually adjusting for CD political and social metrics and vaccination rates, Republican trifecta and conservative voter political lean independently remained significantly associated with an 11%-26% higher COVID-19 mortality rate. Interpretation: Associations between the political ideologies of US federal elected officials and state concentrations of political party power with population health warrant greater consideration in public health analyses and monitoring dashboards. Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

6.
Applied Sciences ; 11(16):7403, 2021.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1354909

ABSTRACT

Males are at higher risk relative to females of severe outcomes following COVID-19 infection. Focusing on COVID-19-attributable mortality in the United States (U.S.), we quantified and contrasted years of potential life lost (YPLL) attributable to COVID-19 by sex based on data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics as of 31 March 2021, specifically by contrasting male and female percentages of total YPLL with their respective percent population shares and calculating age-adjusted male-to-female YPLL rate ratios, both nationally and for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Using YPLL before age 75 to anchor comparisons between males and females and a novel Monte Carlo simulation procedure to perform estimation and uncertainty quantification, our results reveal a near-universal pattern across states of higher COVID-19-attributable YPLL among males compared to females. Furthermore, the disproportionately high COVID-19 mortality burden among males is generally more pronounced when measuring mortality burden in terms of YPLL compared to death counts, reflecting dual phenomena of males dying from COVID-19 at higher rates and at systematically younger ages relative to females. The U.S. COVID-19 epidemic also offers lessons underscoring the importance of cultivating a public health environment that recognizes sex-specific needs as well as different patterns in risk factors, health behaviors, and responses to interventions between men and women. Public health strategies incorporating focused efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccinations among men are particularly urged.

7.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 1007, 2021 05 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247583

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Identifying county-level characteristics associated with high coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) burden can help allow for data-driven, equitable allocation of public health intervention resources and reduce burdens on health care systems. METHODS: Synthesizing data from various government and nonprofit institutions for all 3142 United States (US) counties, we studied county-level characteristics that were associated with cumulative and weekly case and death rates through 12/21/2020. We used generalized linear mixed models to model cumulative and weekly (40 repeated measures per county) cases and deaths. Cumulative and weekly models included state fixed effects and county-specific random effects. Weekly models additionally allowed covariate effects to vary by season and included US Census region-specific B-splines to adjust for temporal trends. RESULTS: Rural counties, counties with more minorities and white/non-white segregation, and counties with more people with no high school diploma and with medical comorbidities were associated with higher cumulative COVID-19 case and death rates. In the spring, urban counties and counties with more minorities and white/non-white segregation were associated with increased weekly case and death rates. In the fall, rural counties were associated with larger weekly case and death rates. In the spring, summer, and fall, counties with more residents with socioeconomic disadvantage and medical comorbidities were associated greater weekly case and death rates. CONCLUSIONS: These county-level associations are based off complete data from the entire country, come from a single modeling framework that longitudinally analyzes the US COVID-19 pandemic at the county-level, and are applicable to guiding government resource allocation policies to different US counties.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Segregation , Humans , Pandemics , Rural Population , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
8.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(6): 1696-1701, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1169023

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Inequities in COVID-19 outcomes in the USA have been clearly documented for sex and race: men are dying at higher rates than women, and Black individuals are dying at higher rates than white individuals. Unexplored, however, is how sex and race interact in COVID-19 outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Use available data to characterize COVID-19 mortality rates within and between race and sex strata in two US states, with the aim of understanding how apparent sex disparities in COVID-19 deaths vary across race. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This observational study uses COVID-19 mortality data through September 21, 2020, from Georgia (GA) and Michigan (MI). MAIN MEASURES: We calculate age-specific rates for each sex-race-age stratum, and age-standardized rates for each race-sex stratum. We investigate the sex disparity within race groups and the race disparity within sex groups using age-standardized rate ratios, and rate differences. KEY RESULTS: Within race groups, men have a higher COVID-19 mortality rate than women. Black men have the highest rate of all race-sex groups (in MI: 254.6, deaths per 100,000, 95% CI: 241.1-268.2, in GA:128.5, 95% CI: 121.0-135.9). In MI, the COVID-19 mortality rate for Black women (147.1, 95% CI: 138.7-155.4) is higher than the rate for white men (39.1, 95% CI: 37.3-40.9), white women (29.7, 95% CI: 28.3-31.0), and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women. COVID-19 mortality rates in GA followed the same pattern. In MI, the male:female mortality rate ratio among Black individuals is 1.7 (1.5-2.0) while the rate ratio among White individuals is only 1.3 (1.2-1.5). CONCLUSION: While overall, men have higher COVID-19 mortality rates than women, our findings show that this sex disparity does not hold across racial groups. This demonstrates the limitations of unidimensional reporting and analyses and highlights the ways that race and gender intersect to shape COVID-19 outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ethnicity , Female , Georgia , Humans , Male , Michigan , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , White People
9.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(6)2021 03 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1143497

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in the United States has disproportionately impacted communities of color across the country. Focusing on COVID-19-attributable mortality, we expand upon a national comparative analysis of years of potential life lost (YPLL) attributable to COVID-19 by race/ethnicity (Bassett et al., 2020), estimating percentages of total YPLL for non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks, Hispanics, non-Hispanic Asians, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Natives, contrasting them with their respective percent population shares, as well as age-adjusted YPLL rate ratios-anchoring comparisons to non-Hispanic Whites-in each of 45 states and the District of Columbia using data from the National Center for Health Statistics as of 30 December 2020. Using a novel Monte Carlo simulation procedure to perform estimation, our results reveal substantial racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19-attributable YPLL across states, with a prevailing pattern of non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics experiencing disproportionately high and non-Hispanic Whites experiencing disproportionately low COVID-19-attributable YPLL. Furthermore, estimated disparities are generally more pronounced when measuring mortality in terms of YPLL compared to death counts, reflecting the greater intensity of the disparities at younger ages. We also find substantial state-to-state variability in the magnitudes of the estimated racial/ethnic disparities, suggesting that they are driven in large part by social determinants of health whose degree of association with race/ethnicity varies by state.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ethnicity , District of Columbia , Health Status Disparities , Hispanic or Latino , Humans , Life Expectancy , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
10.
PLoS Med ; 18(2): e1003541, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1119456

ABSTRACT

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003402.].

11.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(4)2021 02 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1069812

ABSTRACT

Lockdown aiming at slowing COVID-19 transmission has altered nature accessibility patterns, creating quasi-experimental conditions to assess if retracted nature contact and perceived nature deprivation influence physical and emotional wellbeing. We measure through on-line survey methods (n = 529) how pandemic mandates limiting personal movement and outdoor nature access within the United States affect self-assessed nature exposure, perceived nature deprivation, and subsequent flourishing as measured by the Harvard Flourishing Index. Results indicate that perceived nature deprivation strongly associates with local nature contact, time in nature, and access to municipal nature during the pandemic, after controlling for lockdown mandates, job status, household composition, and sociodemographic variables. Our hypothesis is that individuals with strong perceived nature deprivation under COVID-19 leads to diminished wellbeing proved true. Interaction models of flourishing showed positive modification of nature affinity with age and qualitative modification of nature deprivation with race. Our results demonstrate the potential of local nature contact to support individual wellbeing in a background context of emotional distress and social isolation, important in guiding public health policies beyond pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Mental Health/trends , Nature , Pandemics , Cities , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Psychological Distress , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
12.
Am J Public Health ; 110(12): 1850-1852, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067488

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To address evidence gaps in COVID-19 mortality inequities resulting from inadequate race/ethnicity data and no socioeconomic data.Methods. We analyzed age-standardized death rates in Massachusetts by weekly time intervals, comparing rates for January 1 to May 19, 2020, with the corresponding historical average for 2015 to 2019 stratified by zip code social metrics.Results. At the surge peak (week 16, April 15-21), mortality rate ratios (comparing 2020 vs 2015-2019) were 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4, 3.5) and 2.7 (95% CI = 1.4, 5.5) for the lowest and highest zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) poverty categories, respectively, with the 2020 peak mortality rate 1.1 (95% CI = 1.0, 1.3) times higher in the highest than the lowest poverty ZCTA. Similarly, rate ratios were significantly elevated for the highest versus lowest quintiles with respect to household crowding (1.7; 95% CI = 1.0, 2.9), racialized economic segregation (3.1; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.3), and percentage population of color (1.8; 95% CI = 1.6, 2.0).Conclusions. The COVID-19 mortality surge exhibited large inequities.Public Health Implications. Using zip code social metrics can guide equity-oriented COVID-19 prevention and mitigation efforts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Male , Massachusetts , Pandemics , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , Residence Characteristics , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Segregation , Socioeconomic Factors
14.
2020.
Non-conventional in English | Homeland Security Digital Library | ID: grc-740025

ABSTRACT

From the Abstract: Despite the paucity of adequate data on race/ethnicity - and no data on socioeconomic position - in US national data on COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] mortality, both investigative journalism and some state and local health departments are beginning to document evidence of the greater mortality burden of COVID-19 on communities of color and low-income communities. To date, such documentation has been in relation to deaths categorized as due to COVID-19. However, in a context when assignment of cause of death to COVID-19 is dynamic and incomplete, given developing scientific evidence, one important strategy for assessing differential impacts of COVID-19 is that of evaluating the overall excess of deaths, as compared to the same time period in prior years. We employ this approach in this working paper and provide a transparent, easy-to-replicate methodology that relies on the reported data (i.e., no model-based estimates or complex modeling assumptions) and that can be readily used by any local or state health agency to monitor the social patterning of excess mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key findings are that the surge in excess death rates, both relative and absolute, was evident starting in early April, and was greater in city/towns and ZCTAs [ZIP Code Tabulation Area] with higher poverty, higher household crowding, higher percentage of populations of color, and higher racialized economic segregation.COVID-19 (Disease);Public health case studies;Mortality

15.
Eur J Epidemiol ; 35(11): 995-1006, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-898062

ABSTRACT

The United States (US) has been among those nations most severely affected by the first-and subsequent-phases of the pandemic of COVID-19, the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. With only 4% of the worldwide population, the US has seen about 22% of COVID-19 deaths. Despite formidable advantages in resources and expertise, presently the per capita mortality rate is over 585/million, respectively 2.4 and 5 times higher compared to Canada and Germany. As we enter Fall 2020, the US is enduring ongoing outbreaks across large regions of the country. Moreover, within the US, an early and persistent feature of the pandemic has been the disproportionate impact on populations already made vulnerable by racism and dangerous jobs, inadequate wages, and unaffordable housing, and this is true for both the headline public health threat and the additional disastrous economic impacts. In this article we assess the impact of missteps by the Federal Government in three specific areas: the introduction of the virus to the US and the establishment of community transmission; the lack of national COVID-19 workplace standards and enforcement, and lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) for workplaces as represented by complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) which we find are correlated with deaths 16 days later (ρ = 0.83); and the total excess deaths in 2020 to date already total more than 230,000, while COVID-19 mortality rates exhibit severe-and rising-inequities in race/ethnicity, including among working age adults.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Federal Government , Social Responsibility , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
16.
PLoS Med ; 17(10): e1003402, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-881136

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the United States, non-Hispanic Black (NHB), Hispanic, and non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native (NHAIAN) populations experience excess COVID-19 mortality, compared to the non-Hispanic White (NHW) population, but racial/ethnic differences in age at death are not known. The release of national COVID-19 death data by racial/ethnic group now permits analysis of age-specific mortality rates for these groups and the non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (NHAPI) population. Our objectives were to examine variation in age-specific COVID-19 mortality rates by racial/ethnicity and to calculate the impact of this mortality using years of potential life lost (YPLL). METHODS AND FINDINGS: This cross-sectional study used the recently publicly available data on US COVID-19 deaths with reported race/ethnicity, for the time period February 1, 2020, to July 22, 2020. Population data were drawn from the US Census. As of July 22, 2020, the number of COVID-19 deaths equaled 68,377 for NHW, 29,476 for NHB, 23,256 for Hispanic, 1,143 for NHAIAN, and 6,468 for NHAPI populations; the corresponding population sizes were 186.4 million, 40.6 million, 2.6 million, 19.5 million, and 57.7 million. Age-standardized rate ratios relative to NHW were 3.6 (95% CI 3.5, 3.8; p < 0.001) for NHB, 2.8 (95% CI 2.7, 3.0; p < 0.001) for Hispanic, 2.2 (95% CI 1.8, 2.6; p < 0.001) for NHAIAN, and 1.6 (95% CI 1.4, 1.7; p < 0.001) for NHAP populations. By contrast, NHB rate ratios relative to NHW were 7.1 (95% CI 5.8, 8.7; p < 0.001) for persons aged 25-34 years, 9.0 (95% CI 7.9, 10.2; p < 0.001) for persons aged 35-44 years, and 7.4 (95% CI 6.9, 7.9; p < 0.001) for persons aged 45-54 years. Even at older ages, NHB rate ratios were between 2.0 and 5.7. Similarly, rate ratios for the Hispanic versus NHW population were 7.0 (95% CI 5.8, 8.7; p < 0.001), 8.8 (95% CI 7.8, 9.9; p < 0.001), and 7.0 (95% CI 6.6, 7.5; p < 0.001) for the corresponding age strata above, with remaining rate ratios ranging from 1.4 to 5.0. Rate ratios for NHAIAN were similarly high through age 74 years. Among NHAPI persons, rate ratios ranged from 2.0 to 2.8 for persons aged 25-74 years and were 1.6 and 1.2 for persons aged 75-84 and 85+ years, respectively. As a consequence, more YPLL before age 65 were experienced by the NHB and Hispanic populations than the NHW population-despite the fact that the NHW population is larger-with a ratio of 4.6:1 and 3.2:1, respectively, for NHB and Hispanic persons. Study limitations include likely lag time in receipt of completed death certificates received by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for transmission to NCHS, with consequent lag in capturing the total number of deaths compared to data reported on state dashboards. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed racial variation in age-specific mortality rates not fully captured with examination of age-standardized rates alone. These findings suggest the importance of examining age-specific mortality rates and underscores how age standardization can obscure extreme variations within age strata. To avoid overlooking such variation, data that permit age-specific analyses should be routinely publicly available.


Subject(s)
Asian People , Black or African American , Coronavirus Infections/ethnology , Health Status Disparities , Hispanic or Latino , Indians, North American , Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander , Pneumonia, Viral/ethnology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethnicity , Humans , Middle Aged , Mortality, Premature , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Racial Groups , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , White People
17.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 27 Suppl 1, COVID-19 and Public Health: Looking Back, Moving Forward: S43-S56, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-780582

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To overcome the absence of national, state, and local public health data on the unequal economic and social burden of COVID-19 in the United States. DESIGN: We analyze US county COVID-19 deaths and confirmed COVID-19 cases and positive COVID-19 tests in Illinois and New York City zip codes by area percent poverty, percent crowding, percent population of color, and the Index of Concentration at the Extremes. SETTING: US counties and zip codes in Illinois and New York City, as of May 5, 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates, rate differences, and rate ratios of COVID-19 mortality, confirmed cases, and positive tests by category of county and zip code-level area-based socioeconomic measures. RESULTS: As of May 5, 2020, the COVID-19 death rate per 100 000 person-years equaled the following: 143.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 140.9, 145.5) vs 83.3 (95% CI: 78.3, 88.4) in high versus low poverty counties (≥20% vs <5% of persons below poverty); 124.4 (95% CI: 122.7, 126.0) versus 48.2 (95% CI: 47.2, 49.2) in counties in the top versus bottom quintile for household crowding; and 127.7 (95% CI: 126.0, 129.4) versus 25.9 (95% CI: 25.1, 26.6) for counties in the top versus bottom quintile for the percentage of persons who are people of color. Socioeconomic gradients in Illinois confirmed cases and New York City positive tests by zip code-level area-based socioeconomic measures were also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Stark social inequities exist in the United States for COVID-19 outcomes. We recommend that public health departments use these straightforward cost-effective methods to report on social inequities in COVID-19 outcomes to provide an evidence base for policy and resource allocation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost of Illness , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Income/statistics & numerical data , Local Government , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Residence Characteristics/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Illinois/epidemiology , New York City/epidemiology , Race Factors , United States/epidemiology
18.
BMJ Open ; 10(9): e039886, 2020 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-740288

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To illustrate the intersections of, and intercounty variation in, individual, household and community factors that influence the impact of COVID-19 on US counties and their ability to respond. DESIGN: We identified key individual, household and community characteristics influencing COVID-19 risks of infection and survival, guided by international experiences and consideration of epidemiological parameters of importance. Using publicly available data, we developed an open-access online tool that allows county-specific querying and mapping of risk factors. As an illustrative example, we assess the pairwise intersections of age (individual level), poverty (household level) and prevalence of group homes (community-level) in US counties. We also examine how these factors intersect with the proportion of the population that is people of colour (ie, not non-Hispanic white), a metric that reflects histories of US race relations. We defined 'high' risk counties as those above the 75th percentile. This threshold can be changed using the online tool. SETTING: US counties. PARTICIPANTS: Analyses are based on publicly available county-level data from the Area Health Resources Files, American Community Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Atlas file, National Center for Health Statistic and RWJF Community Health Rankings. RESULTS: Our findings demonstrate significant intercounty variation in the distribution of individual, household and community characteristics that affect risks of infection, severe disease or mortality from COVID-19. About 9% of counties, affecting 10 million residents, are in higher risk categories for both age and group quarters. About 14% of counties, affecting 31 million residents, have both high levels of poverty and a high proportion of people of colour. CONCLUSION: Federal and state governments will benefit from recognising high intrastate, intercounty variation in population risks and response capacity. Equitable responses to the pandemic require strategies to protect those in counties at highest risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes and their social and economic impacts.


Subject(s)
Age Factors , Coronavirus Infections , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Family Characteristics , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Public Health , Survival Analysis , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cluster Analysis , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prevalence , Public Health/methods , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL