How Education Shapes Indigenous Health Inequalities in the USA and Mexico.

Indigenous peoples around the world face significant health disparities relative to the dominant groups in their countries, yet the magnitude and patterns of health disparities vary across countries. We use data from the National Health Interview Survey and Mexican Family Life Survey to examine the health of Indigenous peoples in Mexico and American Indians and Alaska Natives in the USA and to evaluate how they fare relative to the majority populations in their countries (non-Indigenous Mexicans and non-Hispanic Whites, respectively). We assess disparities in self-rated health and activity limitations, with a focus on how Indigenous health disparities intersect with educational gradients in health. Regression analyses reveal three primary findings. First, Indigenous health disparities are larger in the USA than in Mexico. Second, differences in educational attainment account for most of the differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations in Mexico, but less than half in the USA. Third, in both countries, health is moderated by educational attainment such that between-group disparities are largest at the highest levels of education. However, for Indigenous Mexicans there is a "cross-over" in which Indigenous Mexicans report better health at the lowest level of education. Overall, this study finds a weak relationship between education and Indigenous health, and raises the question about the validity of using traditional measures of SES in Indigenous contexts.

The Missing Mortality Advantage for European Immigrants to the United States in the Early Twentieth Century.

Immigrant populations typically have lower mortality rates and longer life expectancies than their nonimmigrant counterparts. This immigrant mortality advantage has been a recurrent finding in demographic and population health research focused on contemporary waves of immigration. However, historical data suggest that European immigrants to the United States in the early twentieth century had worse health and higher rates of mortality, yet it remains unclear why a mortality advantage was absent for immigrants during this period. This article combines Vital Statistics records and Lee-Carter mortality models to analyze mortality by nativity status for the U.S. White population from 1900 to 1960, examining variation by age, sex, time, and place. Contrary to contemporary expectations of a foreign-born mortality advantage, White immigrants had higher mortality rates in the early 1900s, with the largest foreign-born disadvantage among the youngest and oldest populations. Although foreign-born and U.S.-born White mortality rates trended toward convergence over time, the foreign-born mortality penalty remained into the 1950s. A decomposition analysis finds that immigrants' concentration in cities, which had higher rates of infectious disease mortality, accounted for nearly half of the nativity difference in 1900, and this place effect declined in subsequent decades. Additional evidence, such as a spike in mortality inequalities during the 1918 influenza pandemic, suggests that common explanations for the immigrant mortality advantage may be less influential in a context of high risk from infectious disease.

Diminished Returns in Europe: Socioeconomic Status and Ethno-Racial Health Disparities Across 30 Countries in the European Social Survey.

Ethnic and racial minorities in many countries experience worse relative health outcomes and earlier mortality compared to national averages or outcomes of the majority population. Although socioeconomic status often contributes to a portion of ethno-racial health disparities, there are many unanswered questions about the relationship between socioeconomic status and ethno-racial health disparities across contexts. Recent scholarship in the USA has found support for a "diminished returns" effect in which the socioeconomic health gradient is systematically smaller for marginalized groups, yet it is unclear whether this pattern exists in other national contexts. This study tests the interaction between socioeconomic status and ethno-racial minority status in 30 countries across six waves of the European Social Survey. The results include evidence of the diminished returns pattern, particularly for populations with origins in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. Multilevel mixed-effects models find variation across countries in the interaction between socioeconomic status and ethno-racial minority status. The findings suggest racism and socioeconomic status interact to affect health and health disparities in multiple contexts and highlight the importance of cross-national comparison to further understand variation across countries.

Health effects of Muslim racialization: Evidence from birth outcomes in California before and after September 11, 2001.

Although researchers have made progress in understanding how discrimination affects health outcomes, challenges remain in efforts to analyze the distribution of discrimination-linked stress as a population-level risk factor. Discrimination often does not align with categorical comparisons but is racialized in practice. This study explicitly tests the effects of such racialized discrimination by using the increase in anti-Muslim discrimination following the attacks of September 11, 2001 as a natural experiment. Sociological scholarship suggests anti-Muslim discrimination has been racialized in a way that affects a variety of Middle Eastern and South Asian populations who are often targeted based on physical appearance, rather than religious identification. Using a name-matching algorithm to classify mothers based on name characteristics, I examine birth outcomes for mothers with ancestry from the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and a subset of South Asian Sikhs. I find that rates of low birth weight births increased for both Middle Eastern and North African (1.15 RR, 95% CI: 1.00- 1.31) and South Asian Sikh (1.61 RR, 95% CI: 1.06-2.40) mothers in the 37 weeks following September 11, relative to the same period one year prior. The results highlight how processes of racialization can distribute discrimination-linked stress as a risk factor in ways that are overlooked when relying on institutionalized racial, ethnic, or religious categories to study disparities.

Immigrant health trajectories in historical context: Insights from European immigrant childhood mortality in 1910.

Recent studies of immigrant health have focused on an apparent paradox in which some new immigrants arrive healthier than expected but exhibit poorer health outcomes with duration of residence. Although a variety of explanations have been put forth for this epidemiological pattern, questions remain about the socio-historical generalizability of the empirical findings and accompanying theoretical explanations. By examining childhood mortality patterns of European immigrants to the United States in the early 20th century, this study tests hypotheses from current immigrant health literature in a previous era of immigration. In contrast with post-1965 immigrant groups, European arrivals did not have better outcomes than their U.S.-born white counterparts. Rather, their rates corresponded to a "middle tier" status in between U.S.-born black and white populations. Analysis of post-migration trajectories returned mixed results that similarly differ from contemporary patterns. Many new immigrant groups had higher rates of excess childhood mortality than their U.S-born counterparts, but outcomes appear to have improved with duration of residence or among the second generation. These findings suggest socio-historical variation in the context of reception may act as a "fundamental cause" of immigrant health and mortality outcomes.

Institutions, Incorporation, and Inequality: The Case of Minority Health Inequalities in Europe.

Scholars interested in the relationship between social context and health have recently turned attention further "upstream" to understand how political, social, and economic institutions shape the distribution of life chances across contexts. We compare minority health inequalities across 22 European countries ( N = 199,981) to investigate how two such arrangements-welfare state effort and immigrant incorporation policies-influence the distribution of health and health inequalities. We examine two measures of health from seven waves of the European Social Survey. Results from a series of multilevel mixed-effects models show that minority health inequalities vary across contexts and persist after accounting for socioeconomic differences. Cross-level interaction results show that welfare state effort is associated with better health for all groups but is unrelated to levels of inequality between groups. In contrast, policies aimed at protecting minorities from discrimination correlate with smaller relative health inequalities.

Public or private? The role of the state and civil society in health and health inequalities across nations.

Social scientists have long recognized that macro-level factors have the potential to shape the health of populations and individuals. Along these lines, they have theorized about the role of the welfare state in creating more equal opportunities and outcomes and how this intervention may benefit health. More recently, scholars and policymakers alike have pointed out how the involvement of civil society actors may replace or complement any state effort. Using data from the World Values Surveys and the European Values Study, combined with national-level indicators for welfare state and civil society involvement, we test the impact of each sector on health and health inequalities in 25 countries around the world. We find that both have a statistically significant effect on overall health, but the civil society sector may have a greater independent influence in societies with weaker welfare states. The health inequalities results are less conclusive, but suggest a strong civil society may be particularly beneficial to vulnerable populations, such as the low income and unemployed. Our paper represents an early step in providing empirical evidence for the impact of the welfare state and civil society on health and health inequalities.

Contextualizing Disparities: The Case for Comparative Research on Social Inequalities in Health.

PURPOSE: Research on healthcare disparities is making important descriptive and analytical strides, and the issue of disparities has gained the attention of policymakers in the US, other nation-states, and international organizations. Still, disparities scholarship remains US-centric and too rarely takes a cross-national comparative approach to answering its questions. The US-centricity of disparities research has fostered a fixation on race and ethnicity that, although essential to understanding health disparities in the United States, has truncated the range of questions researchers investigate. In this article, we make a case for comparative research that highlights its ability to identify the institutional factors may affect disparities. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We discuss the central methodological challenges to comparative research. After describing current solutions to such problems, we use data from the World Values Survey to show the impact of key social fault lines on self-assessed health in Europe and the U.S. FINDINGS: The negative impact of SES on health is more generalizable across context, than the impact of race/ethnicity or gender. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Our analysis includes a limited number of countries and relies on one measure of health. ORIGINALITY/VALUE OF PAPER: The paper represents a first step in a research agenda to understand health inequalities within and across societies.