|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Bexar County, Texas and Wayne County, Michigan. | TopThe Health Resources and Services Administration [HRSA] (2000) has identified Bexar County (where San Antonio is located) and Wayne County (where Detroit is located) as peer counties based on frontier status and population size (there are 34 counties in the peer group). Similar to the cities' data, Bexar County has a population of 1,332,547 with 7% black or African American, 56% Hispanic, and 29% white. Wayne County has a population of 2,127,987 with 42% black or African American, 3% Hispanic, and 53% white. In comparison with their peer counties, both counties compared negatively (i.e., had numbers reflecting poorer health status) in the following categories: very low birth weight, premature births, teen mothers (<18), infant mortality, homicide, stroke, and self-rated health status (HRSA, 2000). In addition, there is a sizable population in Wayne and Bexar Counties (745,571 and 412,160 respectively) that can be designated as vulnerable. This HRSA designation refers to people who may face unique health risks and barriers to care (such as people over 25 with no high school diploma, unemployed individuals, people with severe work disabilities, those suffering from major depression, and recent drug users). Washtenaw County, where the UM-SON is located, was not included from a comparison perspective because the numbers of minorities are not as high as Wayne County. Yet, UM-SON researchers frequently use both counties for the bases of their intervention research. In addition, Washtenaw County has the highest growing Asian population in the State of Michigan (6.3%); the national average is 3.6%. Compared to Washtenaw County's 14.1% overall increase in Asian population in the decade, the Asian population in Ann Arbor, where the University of Michigan is located, increased by 75.4%. In Ann Arbor 12% of the population is Asian (Davis, 2001).  Texas and Michigan. | TopInteresting comparisons can be made at the state level. For example, A study by Waidmann and Rajan (2000) examined race and ethnic disparities in a wide variety of measures of access to and utilization of health care services, paying particular attention to state-level differences. Two of the 13 states in the study were Michigan and Texas. The study used data from the National Survey of American Families, a continuing, nationwide household survey with interviews in approximately 45,000 civilian households in the 13 states. The study concentrated on disparities of the two largest US minority groups: African Americans (12.3% of the U.S. Population) and Latinos (12.5%). Table 1: Means of variables by Race/Ethnicity in Michigan and Texas (2000 data) | top
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Send Comments to: Carrie Braden, PhD, RN, FAAN About Mesa | MESA Team | Mesa News | Research | Learning Activities | Resources Research Centers | Texas / Michigan Specific Information | Contact US  © 2007UTHSCSA - School of Nursing 
Links provided from Health Science Center School of Nursing pages to other websites do not constitute or imply an |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
racial groups differ by location. An examination of disparities in Michigan and Texas show differences in the degree and origin of disparities, while at the same time, offers opportunities for sharing strategies, population samples and outcomes.