Use and Perceived Impact of the County Health Rankings Report in Florida and North Carolina

Winterbauer, Nancy L.; Rafferty, Ann P.; Tucker, Ashley; Jones, Katherine A.; Tucker-McLaughlin, Mary

doi:10.1097/phh.0000000000000320

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four studies have evaluated CH-Rankings utilization, but all have been atheoretical and limited to closed-ended surveys of health department officials in only three states (Peppard et al, 2008;Rohan et al, 2009;Winterbauer, Rafferty, Tucker, Jones, & Tucker-McLaughlin, 2015;Winterbauer, Sorensen, & Tidwell, 2012).…”

Section: The County Health Rankingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although studies have been conducted to refine the CH-Rankings methodology (Courtemanche, Soneji, & Tchernis, 2015; Hood, Gennuso, Swain, & Catlin, 2016) and examine associations between CH-Ranking indicators and population health outcomes (McCullough & Leider, 2016; Peyer, Welk, Bailey-Davis, & Chen, 2016), relatively little research has explored how the CH-Rankings are used in real-world settings. Four studies have evaluated CH-Rankings utilization, but all have been atheoretical and limited to closed-ended surveys of health department officials in only three states (Peppard et al, 2008; Rohan et al, 2009; Winterbauer, Rafferty, Tucker, Jones, & Tucker-McLaughlin, 2015; Winterbauer, Sorensen, & Tidwell, 2012).…”

Section: The County Health Rankingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Uses of Population Health Rankings in Local Policy Contexts: A Multisite Case Study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population health rankings are a common strategy to spur evidence-informed health policy making, but little is known about their uses or impacts. The study aims were to (1) understand how and why the County Health Rankings (CH-Rankings) are used in local policy contexts, (2) identify factors that influence CH-Rankings utilization, and (3) explore potentially negative impacts of the CH-Rankings. Forty-four interviews were conducted with health organization officials and public policy makers in 15 purposively selected counties. The CH-Rankings were used instrumentally to inform internal planning decisions, conceptually to educate the public and policy makers about determinants of population health, and politically to advance organizational agendas. Factors related to organizational capacity, county political ideology, and county rank influenced if, how, and why the CH-Rankings were used. The CH-Rankings sometimes had the negative impacts of promoting potentially ineffective interventions in politically conservative counties and prompting negative media coverage in some counties with poor rank.

show abstract

Section: The County Health Rankingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The County Health Rankingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uses of Population Health Rankings in Local Policy Contexts: A Multisite Case Study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Local governments also regularly use the CHRs. In a survey of Florida and North Carolina health departments, Winterbauer et al (2016) find that the CHRs are used to educate staff, engage with the media, and inform policy. In addition to local stakeholders, policymakers, and government groups using the CHRs to support and design health interventions, the CHRs are often used in grant applications.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the spatial distribution of health rankings in the United States

Davis

Gordan²,

Tchernis

2021

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both the prevalence and importance of rankings have grown considerably in cases where a characteristic cannot be captured using a single variable. A prime candidate for the use of rankings is county-level health in the United States. Given county health's multidimensional nature, researchers, policymakers, and other stakeholders regularly use rankings to combine information from multiple sources into a single outcome. The most commonly used county health rankings (CHRs) are the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute's (UWPHI's) CHRs.Since 2010, the CHRs have been used to allocate scarce resources, design health policy, and demonstrate need for health improving interventions. In 2012, the San Bernardino County Health department used the CHRs to support their Healthy Communities initiatives program, offering $100,000 dollar seed grants to participating counties (County Health Rankings and Roadmaps, 2012a). In Lima Ohio, Active Allen County relied on the CHRs to engage with the Ohio Department of Public Health and local stakeholders to improve health in their county, receiving a $1.2 million Community Transformation grant from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (County Health Rankings and Roadmaps, 2013). The Greater Flint Health Coalition implemented a 10-year County Health Rankings Action Plan to

show abstract

Measuring Subcounty Differences in Population Health Using Hospital and Census-Derived Data Sets: The Missouri ZIP Health Rankings Project

Nagasako

Waterman

Reidhead

et al. 2018

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ContextMeasures of population health at the subcounty level are needed to identify areas for focused interventions and to support local health improvement activities.ObjectiveTo extend the County Health Rankings population health measurement model to the ZIP code level using widely available hospital and census-derived data sources.DesignRetrospective administrative data study.SettingMissouri.PopulationMissouri FY 2012–2014 hospital inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department discharge encounters (N = 36 176 377) and 2015 Nielsen data.Main Outcome MeasuresZIP code–level health factors and health outcomes indices.ResultsStatistically significant measures of association were observed between the ZIP code–level population health indices and published County Health Rankings indices. Variation within counties was observed in both urban and rural areas. Substantial variation of the derived measures was observed at the ZIP code level with 20 (17.4%) Missouri counties having ZIP codes in both the top and bottom quintiles of health factors and health outcomes. Thirty of the 46 (65.2%) counties in the top 2 county quintiles had ZIP codes in the bottom 2 quintiles.ConclusionsThis proof-of-concept analysis suggests that readily available hospital and census-derived data can be used to create measures of population health at the subcounty level. These widely available data sources could be used to identify areas of potential need within counties, engage community stakeholders, and target interventions.

show abstract

Use and Perceived Impact of the County Health Rankings Report in Florida and North Carolina

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

Uses of Population Health Rankings in Local Policy Contexts: A Multisite Case Study

Uses of Population Health Rankings in Local Policy Contexts: A Multisite Case Study

Measuring the spatial distribution of health rankings in the United States

Measuring Subcounty Differences in Population Health Using Hospital and Census-Derived Data Sets: The Missouri ZIP Health Rankings Project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About