OCR Text |
Show Data Section Editors Note The Data Section provides a general overview of data relating to health in Utah. When available, data for the United States is provided for comparison. In most cases, data is reported over a period of time to give the reader a sense of trends in Utah and the nation. The Data Section is divided into four subsections: Demographics, Health Status, Risk Factors, and Health Care Costs, Access, and Quality. To assist readers interested in acquiring information about particular topics, such as hospital information or information on adolescents, a list of subject headings can be found in the Topical Index on the following page. Underneath each subject heading in the Topical Index is a list of tables in the Data Section containing related information, and the page number on which it can be found. Utahns generally enjoy good health relative to the rest of the United States. Utah continues to have the lowest rates of smoking in the nation and compares favorably in other measures of healthy behaviors. This may contribute to Utah's relatively low rates for certain chronic health problems such as lung cancer and heart diseases. However, Utah compares less favorably in other areas. Utah's mortality rate for diabetes mellitus, pneumonia, and influenza are higher than national averages. Suicide mortality rates and incidence of rape in Utah are also above US rates. In addition, the Wasatch front ranks well below national air quality standards for a number of pollutants. This year's Data Section continues to incorporate additional data by county. While most Utahns live along the Wasatch Front, 22 percent of the state's population is spread over a very large, geographically diverse area. Since including data about the state as a whole may not represent those Utahns, data provided by county allows a more targeted look at the status of Utah residents. Health care, in particular, requires examination, since the availability of health care varies depending upon location within the state. This data is often reported by health district, which serves to group Utahns sharing similar health care access issues. This year's Data Section reports health care data by county or by health district, depending on which reporting method was used by the source. This year, particular attention was paid to data reporting methods. Several different methods were used throughout the journal. Primarily, four methods of data acquisition were used, and readers should be aware of potential drawbacks in interpreting data from each method. Predominantly, national and local annual publications were used as sources. While very reliable, published data is often very specific in scope, limiting its usefulness for a wide audience. Survey information and press releases were also used, particularly in the Health Status subsection. Data acquired from survey information or press releases can be biased if the survey audience is small or not representative of the whole, and may contain some bias from other aspects of the survey method. Information reported directly from doctors and hospitals is also used, more frequently in the Health Care Costs, Access, and Quality subsection. This information is dependent partially upon the amount of information doctors and hospitals are willing to release, and could also reflect a bias. The Demographics subsection in particular makes use of data from the United States Census. While considered by many to be the data standard, the Census is only reported every ten years. In any publication drawing data from a large variety of sources, it is important to question the methods of data acquisition. Cautious of the drawbacks inherent with each method, this year's Data Section editorial staff has worked to make the data presented here as impartial and as useful as possible. For further utility, each table has its source reported on the same page. The Data Section Editor would like to thank the concerted efforts of the data subsection editors and the data assistants; Their diligence is particularly appreciated. The members of the Data Advisory Committee have been an invaluable resource this year, as always, and without their assistance and interest the Data Section could not exist. 62 |