Search results

Showing 1 – 15 of 15 results.
Curated
Restricted

National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO), 2000-2001 (ICPSR 4455)

Released/updated on: 2006-05-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01
The National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO) examined relationships among physician organization characteristics and the implementation of care management processes (CMP) aimed at improving outcomes and reducing costs for the treatment of four chronic diseases: asthma, congestive heart failure (CHF), depression, and diabetes. To that end, NSPO conducted this national survey of medical groups and independent practice associations (IPA) with 20 or more physicians. An IPA is defined as an organization through which physicians contract with managed care plans. Examples of CMPs include evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, protocols and pathways, case and care management systems, and disease management, demand management, and health promotion programs. Interviews were conducted with the medical director, president, or chief executive officer of each surveyed physician organization. The survey collected data on (1) practice type, size, age, location, and ownership, (2) governance, management, and use of computerized data systems, (3) revenue and overall financial position, (4) physician compensation models, (5) relationships with health plans and degree of risk assumption, and (6) care management and clinical practice -- particularly in regard to asthma, CHF, depression, and diabetes.
Curated
Restricted

National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness II (NSPO2), 2006-2007 (ICPSR 29801)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2006-01-01--2007-01-01

The National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO) was designed to improve understanding of evidence-based care management processes (CMPs) as they relate to physician organizations (POs), that is, independent practice associations (IPAs) and medical groups. Since the first NSPO survey of physician organizations in 2000-2001 (NSPO1, archived as ICPSR 4455), considerable investments have been made by a number of different sources, including the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the California Healthcare Foundation, and The Commonwealth Fund, to bring about improved care for the chronically ill. This survey, the second NSPO survey of IPAs and medical groups (NSPO2), examined the extent to which the investments in quality improvement were translated into action. NSPO2 assessed the status of CMPs and preventive services use as well as their key drivers in 2006-2007 and the extent to which these factors have changed over time. As in the first NSPO survey, NSPO2 focused on the treatment of four chronic diseases: asthma, congestive heart failure (CHF), depression, and diabetes. Topics covered by the survey include practice type, size, age, ownership, and number of locations; clinical information systems; care management and clinical practice; activities of health insurance plans in chronic illness care; performance incentives; preventative care and health promotion; and organizational culture.

This collection has two data files. The first file contains the NSPO2 survey data, while the second contains a crosswalk between the NSPO1 and NSPO2 case identification numbers which can be used to link the data of the POs that responded to both surveys. Altogether, 369 of the 1,104 POs that responded to NSPO1 also responded to NSPO2.

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Developing the PROMIS-Preference Score for Monitoring Population Health Outcomes, United States, 2017 (ICPSR 37516)

Released/updated on: 2020-03-25
Geographic coverage: United States

This is a United States nationally representative survey of 4142 respondents age 18 and older from the National Opinion Research Center Amerispeak panel. The study survey includes self rated health, 4 summary measures of health, questions about chronic conditions, and questions about social determinants of health. Basic demographic information is included in this study regarding age, education, race/ethnicity, gender, household size, housing type, household income, marital status, and employment status.

The National Opinion Research Center also provided the latitude and longitude of the participant's household which were used to get census tract level information and scores from walkscore.com (walkability, transportation, and opportunity scores).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Multi-Network Practice and Outcome Variation Examination Study (MPROVE) in 6 United States, 2012-2013 (ICPSR 36447)

Released/updated on: 2020-01-27
Geographic coverage: United States
Local health departments (LHDs) have essential roles in promoting physical activities intended to reduce obesity. The resulting array of community interventions includes activities such as community education, school-based programs, individual services, and healthy built environments. Little research exists, however, regarding how these interventions impact community health. Our objective was to explore associations between physical activity (PA) program approaches with local prevalence rates of obesity and PA engagement. Unique public health services data on obesity prevention were obtained from 218 LHDs from six states in 2012. This subset of the MPROVE study investigated the reach, volume, and scope of public health delivery in the area of chronic disease prevention of obesity. The Public Health Activities and Services Tracking (PHAST) team continues to refine the MPROVE measures in consultation with public health practitioners and researchers, with hopes of standardizing a nationwide system for reporting public health activities and services. The Multi-Network Public Health Practice and Outcome Variation Examination (MPROVE) study supports six established public health practice-based research networks (PBRNs) in implementing a collaborative research study of local public health delivery using the collective infrastructure of multiple PBRNs. Each PBRN comprises multiple local and state public health agencies that operate within the state, along with a university-based research center located in the state. The research project will involve creation of a multi-network registry of local public health delivery measures and analysis of the measures to investigate geographic variation in service delivery across a large and diverse collection of public health settings represented within the networks of the participating PBRNs. The study will focus on public health delivery measures in three domains of activity: communicable disease control, chronic disease prevention, and environmental health protection. While not comprehensive, these three domains are representative of the breadth of activities carried out by public health systems across the U.S. and are designed to address priority population health outcomes. These domains also represent areas where significant measurement development activities are already underway within one or more public health PBRNs that can be expanded and replicated across networks.
Curated

State Foodborne Illness Reporting Laws, 2011-2013 (ICPSR 34935)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2011-01-01--2013-01-01

The primary goal of this project was to create a comprehensive database of all state regulations and legislation that can be used by food safety stakeholders to efficiently analyze relevant foodborne illness-related legislation. To that end, project staff compiled state statutes and regulations pertaining to foodborne illness reporting requirements and coded many of their features in a database. The coded information covers reporting requirements for establishments and healthcare providers; investigation authority over establishments and individuals; enforcement regarding suspected/confirmed foods; protection of patient and business confidentiality; and reporting requirements for illness caused by specific pathogens such as Campylobacter, Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens, Cryptosporidium, Cyclospora, Listeria monocytogenes, Norovirus, Salmonella (nontyphoidal), Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157:H7, Shigella, Staphylococcus aureus, Toxoplasma gondii, Vibrio, and Yersinia. Additional information recorded in the data include state population size; state per capita income; state participation in the Foodborne Diseases Surveillance Network (FoodNet), Environmental Health Specialist Network (EHS-Net), and Food Emergency Response Network (FERN); and whether or not the state has a FDA FoodCORE regional program, Food Safety Integrated Center for Excellence (FSICE), or FDA Rapid Response Team (RRT) grant.

This data collection comprises a Microsoft Access database with 44 data tables and the Final Exported Dataset which was derived from the database. The Access database contains a draft of the information in the Final Exported Dataset and some information not included in it. The Final Exported Dataset describes the laws and regulations that were current in 2013. The Access database covers the period 2011-2013.

To facilitate the use of this data collection, every data table in the Access database is also provided as a separate data file (Datasets 3-46). In addition, the codebook includes copies of the data entry forms in the Access database .

Curated
Restricted

Integrated Public Health Surveys, 2010-2011 (ICPSR 33822)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2010-01-01--2011-01-01

This collection comprises a single data file which was produced as part of the data harmonization efforts of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The file contains merged data from five sources:

  1. 2010 National Profile of Local Health Departments, a survey of local health departments conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO).

  2. 2011 National Profile Survey of Local Boards of Health, a survey of local boards of health conducted by the National Association of Local Boards of Health (NALBOH).

  3. 2010 State and Territorial Public Health Survey, a survey of state and United States territory health departments conducted by the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO).

  4. 2011 County Health Rankings, a compilation of county-level health measures and within-state county health rankings produced by the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute.

  5. 2010 Census Demographic Profile Summary File, a series of tables with housing and population data from the 2010 Census.

Produced by matching data from the last four sources to the NACCHO data, the data file contains one case for each of the 2,107 local health departments (LHD) that responded to the NACCHO survey. Each LHD's record in the file includes the ASTHO data for its state health department and the NALBOH data for its local board of health (LBH), if it had a LBH and the LBH responded to the NALBOH survey. (If a LHD had multiple LBHs, then the first one in the NALBOH data was matched to the LHD). In addition, county (or county equivalent)-level data from the County Health Rankings and Census Demographic Profile Summary File were matched to the records of the 1,535 LHDs represented in the data file with a jurisdiction covering a single county or county equivalent.

Curated
Restricted

National Profile of Local Health Departments, 2010 (ICPSR 32922)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions. The core questions covered governance, funding, workforce (staffing levels, occupations employed, top executive education and licensure, and percentages of staff by race and Hispanic origin), LHD activities, and community health assessment and health improvement planning. The surveyed LHD activities include immunization, screening for diseases and conditions, treatment for communicable diseases, maternal and child health, epidemiology and surveillance activities, population-based primary prevention activities, and regulation, inspection and/or licensing activities. Topics covered by Module 1 included quality improvement, familiarity with a voluntary national accreditation program for state and local health departments, sharing of resources with other LHDs, emergency preparedness, and information technology. Module 2 examined human resources, policy-making and advocacy, access to health care services, practice-based research, health impact assessments, public health and law, and use of public health reports.
Curated
Restricted

National Profile of Local Health Departments, 2013 (ICPSR 34990)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions. The core questions covered governance, funding, workforce (staffing levels, occupations employed, top executive education and licensure), LHD activities, community health assessment and health improvement planning, use of the Community Guide of Preventive Services, and policy-making and advocacy. The surveyed LHD activities include immunization, screening for diseases and conditions, treatment for communicable diseases, maternal and child health, epidemiology and surveillance activities, population-based primary prevention activities, and regulation, inspection and/or licensing activities. Topics covered by Module 1 included quality improvement, accreditation through the Public Health Accreditation Board, sharing of resources across LHDs, human resources issues, partnerships and collaboration with other organizations in the community, practice-based research, health impact assessments, use of the County Health Rankings reports, and collaboration with public health institutes. Module 2 examined emergency preparedness, public health informatics, access to health care services, and health disparities.
Curated
Restricted

National Profile of Local Health Departments, United States, 2016, Restricted-Use Level 1 Data (ICPSR 37144)

Released/updated on: 2018-10-23
Geographic coverage: United States

Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions.

Data from the National Profile of Local Health Departments survey are used by:

  1. LHD staff members to compare their LHD or those within their states to others nationwide;
  2. Policymakers at the local, state, and federal levels to inform public health policy and support projects to improve local public health practice;
  3. Universities to educate future public health workforce members about LHDs;
  4. Researchers to address questions about public health practice; and
  5. NACCHO staff to develop programs and resources that meet the needs of LHDs and to advocate effectively for LHDs.

Data included as part of this collection includes the Public-Use (Restricted-Use Level 1) data of the National Profile of Local Health Departments 2016 study. The dataset includes 1930 cases for 1112 variables.

Curated
Restricted

National Profile of Local Health Departments, United States, 2016, Restricted-Use Level 2 Data (ICPSR 37145)

Released/updated on: 2018-10-23
Geographic coverage: United States

Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions.

Data from the National Profile of Local Health Departments survey are used by:

  1. LHD staff members to compare their LHD or those within their states to others nationwide;
  2. Policymakers at the local, state, and federal levels to inform public health policy and support projects to improve local public health practice;
  3. Universities to educate future public health workforce members about LHDs;
  4. Researchers to address questions about public health practice; and
  5. NACCHO staff to develop programs and resources that meet the needs of LHDs and to advocate effectively for LHDs.

Data included as part of this collection includes the Restricted-Use (Restricted-Use Level 2) data of the National Profile of Local Health Departments 2016 study. The dataset includes 1930 cases for 1116 variables.

Curated
Restricted
Simple Crosstabs

National Profile of Local Health Departments, [United States], 2019 (ICPSR 38046)

Released/updated on: 2022-07-11
Geographic coverage: United States
Conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the purpose of this survey of local health departments (LHDs) was to advance and support the development of a database for LHDs to describe and understand their structure, function, and capacities. A core set of questions was submitted to every LHD. In addition, some LHDs received one of two randomly assigned modules of supplemental questions. The core questions covered governance, funding, workforce (staffing levels, occupations employed, top executive education and licensure), LHD activities, community health assessment and health improvement planning, accreditation through the Public Health Accreditation Board, and policy-making and advocacy. The surveyed LHD activities include immunization, screening for diseases and conditions, treatment for communicable diseases, maternal and child health, epidemiology and surveillance activities, population-based primary prevention activities, and regulation, inspection and/or licensing activities. Topics covered by Module 1 included LHD interaction with academic institutions, Partnerships and collaboration, Cross-jurisdictional sharing of services, Emergency preparedness, and Access to healthcare services. Module 2 examined additional issues related to jurisdiction and governance, community health assessment and planning, human resources issues, quality improvement, public health informatics, and use of the Community Guide of Preventive Services.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

ASTHO Profile Survey of State and Territorial Public Health, United States, 2022 (ICPSR 39285)

Released/updated on: 2025-06-16
Geographic coverage: Puerto Rico, United States, Marshall Islands, Guam, Virgin Islands of the United States, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Micronesia (Federated States)

The 2022 ASTHO Profile Survey is a survey conducted by the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) to gather information on state, territorial, and freely associated state public health agencies (S/THAs) and their activities, structure, and resources. The Profile aims to define the scope of S/THA services, identify variations in practice among public health agencies, and contribute to the development of best practices in governmental public health. The Profile began in 2007 and was fielded on average every three years between 2007 and 2022. The data collected through the Profile represent the breadth of work overseen by health agencies and shows how the public health field has shifted in response to societal changes and emergent needs. Data also reflect the structural nuances and limitations in which agencies conduct their work.

Changes may be made to the dataset after it is archived. Please contact [email protected] to request the most updated datasets. Additional information on the study can be found by visiting the ASTHO Profile Survey website.

Curated
Restricted

Pathways to Adulthood: A Three-Generation Urban Study, 1960-1994: [Baltimore, Maryland] (ICPSR 2420)

Released/updated on: 2019-11-26
Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland
Time period: 1960-01-01--1994-01-01
This collection incorporates both prospective and retrospective data on three generations of families initially living in inner-city Baltimore, Maryland. The prospective data were selected from data collected as part of the Johns Hopkins Collaborative Perinatal Study (JHCPS), a survey of pregnant women seeking prenatal care and delivery at Johns Hopkins Hospital during 1960-1964. JHCPS studied these women (the first-generation mothers, abbreviated as G1) and the children born to them during 1960-1965 (the second-generation children, abbreviated as G2) until the children were 8 years old. The retrospective data come from a follow-up study, conducted in 1992-1994, of G1, G2, and the children born to G2 (the third-generation children, abbreviated as G3). Data from JHCPS on G1 include obstetrical and reproductive history at registration for prenatal care, sociological/family history variables at or around delivery of G2, observations of mother with child when G2 was 4 months old and 8 months old, and family history, demographic, and sociological variables when G2 was age 7. For G2, the data from JHCPS include delivery room observations at birth, pediatric examination data at age 4 months, developmental evaluation data at age 8 months, pediatric-neurological examination data at age 12 months, language, hearing, and speech evaluation summary data at age 36 months, psychological, behavior profile, physical growth, and other tests at age 48 months, psychological, motor, behavior, neurological, vision, physical, and other tests at age 7-1/2 years, and language, hearing, and speech evaluations, physical growth, interval medical history, and other tests at age 8 years. Retrospective data from the follow-up study on G1 include variables on education, employment, family composition, health and health care usage, housing conditions, income and income sources, marital status, partnerships and changes, neighborhood characteristics at registration to JHCPS and current, and reproductive history. For G2, data from the follow-up include information on aspirations, education, schooling, employment, family composition, health and health care usage, housing conditions, income and income sources, legal problems, living arrangements, marriage, partnership and changes, neighborhood characteristics at birth, at ages 11/12 and 16/17, and current, reproductive history, social relationships, smoking, and substance abuse. Data for the assessed third-generation children, i.e., G3s who were 7-8 years old during the follow-up period, include information on cognitive development, academic achievement and behavior, prenatal care, health, day care, and parental aspirations.
Curated

State Health Policy Research Dataset (SHEPRD): 1980-2010 (ICPSR 34789)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1980-01-01--2010-01-01
This dataset was developed to study trends in the adoption of state public health laws during 1980-2010. Specifically, the dataset covers annual trends in seatbelt laws, speed limits for passenger vehicles on rural interstates, minimum legal drinking ages, drunk driving laws, laws prohibiting the purchase of alcohol on Sundays, regulations for registering purchased kegs and/or prohibitions against selling kegs, beer taxes and total alcohol tax revenues, motorcycle and bicycle helmet laws, cigarette taxes, cigarette advertising bans, bans on workplace smoking, bans on smoking in restaurants and bars, and tobacco taxes (total revenue). The dataset contains information about these laws for each year between 1980 and 2010, inclusive. In addition, it contains variables that describe the social, economic, demographic, health care, political, and crime chacteristics of the states in each of these years.
The following results may be significantly less relevant compared to results above.
Curated

National Hospice Study: Patient and Facility Data, [1980-1983] (ICPSR 8466)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1980-01-01--1983-01-01
The purpose of the National Hospice Study was to examine the impact of hospice care on the quality of life of patients and their families and the health care cost incurred by patients. The National Hospice Study consists of two distinct, but interrelated, primary data collection components. The first relates to patient level studies of the costs incurred by patients and their families during the final phases of terminal cancer as well as the quality of life that they experienced during this period. The second component of the study relates to comparisons of the hospices that had received special demonstration funding from the Health Care Financing Adminstration for reimbursement of costs incurred by Medicare patients and those that had not. To address the issue of the desirability of reimbursing for hospice under Medicare, data from a large number of hospice and nonhospice patients were gathered. Patients were identified via the sites of care serving them, both hospice and nonhospice. Three types of data were collected: (1) facility level characteristics for a sample of all hospices nationwide, (2) census of intake and discharge characteristics for all patients served by those hospices during the study period, and (3) an extensive interview schedule regarding the quality of care and adequacy of Medicare reimbursement programs was conducted in both hospice and nonhospice settings with a sample of those patients fulfilling certain selection criteria (as well as their primary care person and family).