3167.5: Monday, October 22, 2001 - Board 6

Abstract #32088

Great Lakes states health statistics for Areas of Concern in the United States

Autumn J Workman, MPH1, Diane S. Henshel, PhD1, and David Carpenter, MD2. (1) School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, SPEA 441, 1315 E 10th Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, 812-332-8846, aworkman@indiana.edu, (2) Environmental Health and Toxicology, SUNY at Albany, One University Place, B Wing, Room B242, Rensselaer, NY 12144

Our goal for this study was to assess the availability of health data in the eight Great Lakes states, IL, IN, MI, MN, NY, OH, PA, and WI. Our aims were to: 1) identify the status of health database development and collection practices in each state and Area of Concern (AOC) municipality; 2) identify the accessibility of appropriate public health databases; 3) characterize, if possible, database quality; and 4) identify barriers to database access and information on database quality. To quantify accessibility, we ranked the state databases on several parameters that affect their research usefulness. The New York public health databases and registries stand out among these states for completeness and researcher accessibility. The Illinois and Wisconsin databases rank just below that of New York, followed by the Michigan and Pennsylvania databases. The Indiana databases are difficult to access. Ohio data are not accessible for its Great Lakes region, although the public health data are available for the rest of the state. The Minnesota databases do not always present information at the individual level, and are therefore of minimal use to researchers trying to correlate data across multiple endpoints. In sum, there is little consistency in the collection of and availability of public health information across the eight Great Lakes states, making it more difficult for researchers to compare and use public health data region-wide.

Learning Objectives: -Identify the challenges posed in the comparison of health statistics across jurisdictional boundaries. -Compare differences in health surviellance data collection among the seven US Great Lakes states. -Develop a strategy for studies involving health statistics from multiple jurisdictions.

Keywords: Environmental Health, Data/Surveillance

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: Data "products" from Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.

The 129th Annual Meeting of APHA