Kota Krishna Kiran, Eppink Samuel, Gant Sumner Zanetta, Chesson Harrell, McCree Donna Hubbard
Division of HIV Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Divsion of STD Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; and.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2025 Feb 1;98(2):114-122. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000003541.
We compared racial and ethnic disparities in HIV diagnosis rates among adults in census tracts with the most disadvantaged vs. the most advantaged levels of social determinants of health.
In this ecologic analysis, we used the National HIV Surveillance System data from 2021 and social determinants of health data from 2017-2021 American Community Survey. We measured racial and ethnic disparities stratified by sex in the most disadvantaged quartiles and advantaged quartiles for (1) poverty, (2) education level, (3) median household income, and (4) insurance coverage. We calculated 8 relative disparity measures [Black-to-White rate ratio, Hispanic/Latino-to-White rate ratio, index of disparity (ID), population-weighted ID, mean log deviation, Theil index, population attributable proportion, Gini coefficient] and 4 absolute disparity measures (Black-to-White rate difference, Hispanic/Latino-to-White rate difference, absolute ID, and population-weighted absolute ID).
Comparing the most disadvantaged quartiles with the most advantaged quartiles, all 4 absolute disparity measures decreased, but 7 of the 8 relative disparity measures increased: the median percentage decreases in the absolute measures for men and women, respectively, were 38.1% and 47.6% for poverty, 12.4% and 42.6% for education level, 43.6% and 44.0% for median household income, and 44.2% and 45.4% for insurance coverage. The median percentage increases in the relative measures for men and women, respectively, were 44.3% and 61.3% for poverty, 54.9% and 95.3% for education level, 19.6% and 90.0% for median household income, and 32.8% and 46.4% for insurance coverage.
Racial and ethnic disparities in the most disadvantaged and the most advantaged quartiles highlight the need for strategies addressing the root causes of disparities.
我们比较了在健康的社会决定因素处于最不利水平与最有利水平的普查区中,成年人艾滋病毒诊断率的种族和族裔差异。
在这项生态分析中,我们使用了2021年的国家艾滋病毒监测系统数据以及2017 - 2021年美国社区调查的健康社会决定因素数据。我们按性别分层,测量了在(1)贫困、(2)教育水平、(3)家庭收入中位数和(4)保险覆盖方面,最不利四分位数和最有利四分位数中的种族和族裔差异。我们计算了8种相对差异指标[黑人与白人的发病率比、西班牙裔/拉丁裔与白人的发病率比、差异指数(ID)、人口加权ID、平均对数偏差、泰尔指数、人群归因比例、基尼系数]和4种绝对差异指标(黑人与白人的发病率差、西班牙裔/拉丁裔与白人的发病率差、绝对ID和人口加权绝对ID)。
将最不利四分位数与最有利四分位数进行比较,所有4种绝对差异指标均下降,但8种相对差异指标中有7种上升:男性和女性绝对指标的中位数百分比下降分别为,贫困方面38.1%和47.6%,教育水平方面12.4%和42.6%,家庭收入中位数方面43.6%和44.0%,保险覆盖方面44.2%和45.4%。男性和女性相对指标的中位数百分比上升分别为,贫困方面44.3%和61.3%,教育水平方面54.9%和95.3%,家庭收入中位数方面19.6%和90.0%,保险覆盖方面32.8%和46.4%。
最不利和最有利四分位数中的种族和族裔差异凸显了制定应对差异根源策略的必要性。