Dataset Information

Association of Human Mobility Restrictions and Race/Ethnicity-Based, Sex-Based, and Income-Based Factors With Inequities in Well-being During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

An accurate understanding of the distributional implications of public health policies is critical for ensuring equitable responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and future public health threats.

Objective

To identify and quantify the association of race/ethnicity-based, sex-based, and income-based inequities of state-specific lockdowns with 6 well-being dimensions in the United States.

Design, setting, and participants

This pooled, repeated cross-sectional study used data from 14 187 762 households who participated in phase 1 of the population-representative US 2020 Household Pulse Survey (HPS). Households were invited to participate by email, text message, and/or telephone as many as 3 times. Data were collected via an online questionnaire from April 23 to July 21, 2020, and participants lived in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia.

Exposures

Indicators of race/ethnicity, sex, and income and their intersections.

Main outcomes and measures

Unemployment; food insufficiency; mental health problems; no medical care received for health problems; default on last month's rent or mortgage; and class cancellations with no distance learning. Race/ethnicity, sex, income, and their intersections were used to measure distributional implications across historically marginalized populations; state-specific, time-varying population mobility was used to measure lockdown intensity. Logistic regression models with pooled repeated cross-sections were used to estimate risk of dichotomous outcomes by social group, adjusted for confounding variables.

Results

The 1 088 314 respondents (561 570 [51.6%; 95% CI, 51.4%-51.9%] women) were aged 18 to 88 years (mean [SD], 51.55 [15.74] years), and 826 039 (62.8%; 95% CI, 62.5%-63.1%) were non-Hispanic White individuals; 86 958 (12.5%; 95% CI, 12.4%-12.7%), African American individuals; 86 062 (15.2%; 95% CI, 15.0%-15.4%), Hispanic individuals; and 50 227 (5.6%; 95% CI, 5.5%-5.7%), Asian individuals. On average, every 10% reduction in mobility was associated with higher odds of unemployment (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4), food insufficiency (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2), mental health problems (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1), and class cancellations (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2). Across most dimensions compared with White men with high income, African American individuals with low income experienced the highest risks (eg, food insufficiency, men: OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.8-3.7; mental health problems, women: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.8-2.1; medical care inaccessibility, women: OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.6-1.9; unemployment, men: OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 2.5-3.2; rent/mortgage defaults, men: OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 4.7-7.1). Other high-risk groups were Hispanic individuals (eg, unemployment, Hispanic men with low income: OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.5-3.4) and women with low income across all races/ethnicities (eg, medical care inaccessibility, non-Hispanic White women: OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.7-2.0).

Conclusions and relevance

In this cross-sectional study, African American and Hispanic individuals, women, and households with low income had higher odds of experiencing adverse outcomes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and stay-at-home orders. Blanket public health policies ignoring existing distributions of risk to well-being may be associated with increased race/ethnicity-based, sex-based, and income-based inequities.

SUBMITTER: Chakrabarti S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8027913 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesDespite growing diversity among the aging population and extensive previous research on racial/ethnic minority caregivers, little research has been conducted on the potentially unique experiences and outcomes of informal caregivers of foreign-born care recipients. Using nationally representative data and the Stress Process Model, the current study examined the differences in caregiver outcomes (care burden, psychological well-being, and self-rated health) by care recipient nativity status (U.S.-born vs. foreign-born) and the extent to which caregiver outcomes vary by care recipient nativity status and caregiver race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, and Others).Research design and methodsThe current study used Round 5 of the National Health and Aging Trends Study and the National Study of Caregiving (N = 1,436). We conducted ordinary least squares regression to analyze the differences in caregiver's outcomes by care recipient nativity status and caregiver race/ethnicity and to investigate the impacts of the inclusion of caregiving factors (background factors, primary stressors, secondary stressors, and resources).ResultsRegression analyses showed that only care burden significantly varied by care recipient nativity status after controlling for covariates. Caregivers of foreign-born care recipients reported a higher burden. However, when interactions of care recipient nativity status × caregiver race/ethnicity were introduced, non-Hispanic black and Hispanic caregivers of foreign-born care recipients were more likely to report better psychological well-being and self-rated health compared to their counterparts. Across caregiver groups, better caregiver-care recipient relationship quality and less caregiver chronic conditions were associated with less burden and better caregiver psychological well-being and self-rated health.Discussion and implicationsCare recipient nativity status and caregiver race/ethnicity may have complex effects on caregiving experiences. Given the observed significant interaction effects for caregiver psychological well-being and self-rated health, cultural factors may affect the extent to which these caregivers appraise their caregiving. Future research should delve into the appropriate ways to assess care stress as well as resilience among each caregiver group. Our results indicate the need for research, education, and practice that assess cultural and within-group differences among caregivers and inform needed changes to structural barriers.

Project description:Importance:Health equity is an often-cited goal of public health, included among the 4 overarching goals of the Department of Health and Human Services' Healthy People 2020. Yet it is difficult to find summary assessments of national progress toward this goal. Objectives:To identify variation in several measures of health equity from 1993 to 2017 in the United States and to test whether there are significant time trends. Design, Setting, and Participants:Survey study using 25 years of data, from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2017, from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to assess trends in health equity and health justice by race/ethnicity, sex, and income in 3 categories by year. Main Outcomes and Measures:Health equity was assessed separately for each of 2 health constructs: healthy days-the average of physical and mental healthy days over the previous 30 days-and general health in 5 categories, rescaled to approximate a continuous variable. For each health construct, average health was calculated along with 4 measures of health equity: disparities across 3 income groups; black-white disparities; health justice-a measure of the correlation of health outcomes with income, race/ethnicity and sex; and a summary health equity metric. Results:Among the 5 456 006 respondents, the mean (SD) age was 44.5 (12.7) years; 3 178 688 (58.3%) were female; 4 163 945 (76.3%) were non-Latinx white; 474 855 (8.7%) were non-Latinx black; 419 542 (7.7%) were Latinx; and 397 664 (7.3%) were of other race/ethnicity. The final sample included 5 456 006 respondents for self-reported health and 5 349 527 respondents for healthy days. During the 25-year period, the black-white gap showed significant improvement (year coefficient: healthy days, 0.021; 97.5% CI, 0.012 to 0.029; P < .001; self-reported health, 0.030; 97.5% CI, 0.025 to 0.035; P < .001). The health equity metric for self-reported health showed no significant trend. For healthy days, the Health Equity Metric declined over time (year coefficient: healthy days, -0.025; 97.5% CI, -0.033 to -0.017; P < .001). Health justice declined over time (year coefficient: healthy days, -0.045; 97.5% CI, -0.053 to -0.038; P < .001; self-reported health, -0.035; 97.5% CI, -0.046 to-0.023; P < .001), and income disparities worsened (year coefficient: healthy days, -0.060; 97.5% CI, -0.076 to -0.044; P < .001; self-reported health, -0.029; 97.5% CI, -0.046 to -0.012; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:Results of this analysis suggest that there has been a clear lack of progress on health equity during the past 25 years in the United States. Achieving widely shared goals of improving health equity will require greater effort from public health policy makers, along with their partners in medicine and the sectors that contribute to the social determinants of health.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Few studies have investigated air pollution exposure disparities by race/ethnicity and income across criteria air pollutants, locations, or time. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to quantify exposure disparities by race/ethnicity and income throughout the contiguous United States for six criteria air pollutants, during the period 1990 to 2010. METHODS:We quantified exposure disparities among racial/ethnic groups (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic (any race), non-Hispanic Asian) and by income for multiple spatial units (contiguous United States, states, urban vs. rural areas) and years (1990, 2000, 2010) for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter ≤2.5μm (PM2.5; excluding year-1990), particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter ≤10μm (PM10), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). We used census data for demographic information and a national empirical model for ambient air pollution levels. RESULTS:For all years and pollutants, the racial/ethnic group with the highest national average exposure was a racial/ethnic minority group. In 2010, the disparity between the racial/ethnic group with the highest vs. lowest national-average exposure was largest for NO2 [54% (4.6 ppb)], smallest for O3 [3.6% (1.6 ppb)], and intermediate for the remaining pollutants (13%-19%). The disparities varied by U.S. state; for example, for PM2.5 in 2010, exposures were at least 5% higher than average in 63% of states for non-Hispanic Black populations; in 33% and 26% of states for Hispanic and for non-Hispanic Asian populations, respectively; and in no states for non-Hispanic White populations. Absolute exposure disparities were larger among racial/ethnic groups than among income categories (range among pollutants: between 1.1 and 21 times larger). Over the period studied, national absolute racial/ethnic exposure disparities declined by between 35% (0.66μg/m3; PM2.5) and 88% (0.35 ppm; CO); relative disparities declined to between 0.99× (PM2.5; i.e., nearly zero change) and 0.71× (CO; i.e., a ∼29% reduction). DISCUSSION:As air pollution concentrations declined during the period 1990 to 2010, absolute (and to a lesser extent, relative) racial/ethnic exposure disparities also declined. However, in 2010, racial/ethnic exposure disparities remained across income levels, in urban and rural areas, and in all states, for multiple pollutants. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8584.