Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Vital Health Stat 4 ; (31): 1-30, 2001.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11682724

ABSTRACT

A workshop in July 2000 explored research needed to address methodological challenges for population estimates and vital rates arising from the revision of the standards for Federal data on race and ethnicity; the use of different standards for Census 2000 and vital records during the implementation of the revised standards; and underlying differences in the collection of race and ethnicity data in censuses and surveys and in vital records. Matching studies were proposed to compare race and ethnicity reports in vital records and in Census 2000 or survey responses. Work on vital records might include exploring enhanced collection of race and ethnicity data and documenting State vital statistics reporting mandates and practices. Key work on sources of error includes identifying, quantifying, and reporting on bias and random errors related to race and ethnicity in population estimates and vital rates. Also needed are comparisons of Census Bureau and State population estimates and more frequent tests of the accuracy of population estimates and projections. Studies on racial and ethnic identity were proposed to examine changes in reporting over time and to explore origins of racial and ethnic identities. More information on these issues should be developed for technical and nontechnical audiences.


Subject(s)
Data Collection/methods , Data Collection/standards , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Vital Statistics , Demography , Ethnicity/classification , Humans , Population Surveillance/methods , Racial Groups/classification , United States
3.
JAMA ; 270(8): 929, 1993 Aug 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8345634
4.
Am J Public Health ; 81(11): 1456-65, 1991 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-1835309

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The national objectives in Healthy People 2000, drafted by health professionals aware of currently available public health interventions, represent a wealth of information about near-term future mortality and morbidity. METHODS: Life table methods were used to calculate the impact of projected changes in mortality and activity limitation rates on life expectancy and expected disability years. RESULTS: Meeting the mortality objectives would increase life expectancy at birth by 1.5 to 2.1 years, raising life expectancy to 76.6 to 77.2 years. In addition, meeting the target for disability from chronic conditions would increase the number of years of life without activity limitations from 66.8 years to 69.3-69.7 years. If the targets for coronary heart disease and unintentional injury were changed to reflect recent trends, a greater improvement in life expectancy at birth would be achieved: from 1.8 to 2.7 years to 76.9 to 77.8 years. CONCLUSION: Meeting the targets would have an important demographic impact. Including changes in the coronary heart disease and injuries targets, life expectancy in the year 2000 would be above the middle of the ranges used in current Census Bureau projections.


Subject(s)
Health Priorities , Health Promotion , Life Expectancy , Mortality , United States Public Health Service , Aged , Cause of Death/trends , Disabled Persons , Heart Diseases/prevention & control , Humans , Infant , Infant Mortality/trends , Life Tables , Organizational Objectives , United States/epidemiology , Wounds and Injuries/prevention & control
5.
Rev Infect Dis ; 10(2): 406-19, 1988.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-2836940

ABSTRACT

With the history of the U.S. federal budget for fiscal year 1986 as a vehicle, the usual processes in the executive branch and the Congress that establish health research priorities and the unusual developments that have shaped priorities for AIDS are described. In the 3 years between the initial formulation of the AIDS budget and its execution, there were numerous revisions and evidence of poor communication between scientists and policy makers. On the basis of this analysis, two recommendations are made: the director of the National Institutes of Health and the heads of other U.S. Public Health Service agencies should have discretionary funds to use for AIDS activities; and better channels of communication between the Congress, the Public Health Service, and outside biomedical researchers should be established for consultation on priorities for AIDS research.


Subject(s)
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/economics , Financing, Government , Research Support as Topic , Budgets , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Humans , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Research , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...