Rationale, Procedures, and Response Rates for the 2015 Administration of NCI's Health Information National Trends Survey: HINTS-FDA 2015.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) developed the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) to monitor population trends in cancer communication practices, information preferences, health risk behaviors, attitudes, and cancer knowledge. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized HINTS as a unique data resource for informing its health communication endeavors and partnered with NCI to field HINTS-FDA 2015. HINTS-FDA 2015 was a self-administered paper instrument sent by mail May 29 to September 8, 2015, using a random probability-based sample of U.S. postal addresses stratified by county-level smoking rates, with an oversampling of high and medium-high smoking strata to increase the yield of current smokers responding to the survey. The response rate for HINTS-FDA 2015 was 33% (N = 3,738). The yield of current smokers (n = 495) was lower than expected, but the sampling strategy achieved the goal of obtaining more former smokers (n = 1,132). Public-use HINTS-FDA 2015 data and supporting documentation have been available for download and secondary data analyses since June 2016 at http://hints.cancer.gov . NCI and FDA encourage the use of HINTS-FDA for health communication research and practice related to tobacco-related communications, public knowledge, and behaviors as well as beliefs and actions related to medical products and dietary supplements.

The Hispanic mortality advantage and ethnic misclassification on US death certificates.

OBJECTIVES: We tested the data artifact hypothesis regarding the Hispanic mortality advantage by investigating whether and to what degree this advantage is explained by Hispanic origin misclassification on US death certificates. METHODS: We used the National Longitudinal Mortality Study, which links Current Population Survey records to death certificates for 1979 through 1998, to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, and net ascertainment of Hispanic ethnicity on death certificates compared with survey classifications. Using national vital statistics mortality data, we estimated Hispanic age-specific and age-adjusted death rates, which were uncorrected and corrected for death certificate misclassification, and produced death rate ratios comparing the Hispanic with the non-Hispanic White population. RESULTS: Hispanic origin reporting on death certificates in the United States is reasonably good. The net ascertainment of Hispanic origin is just 5% higher on survey records than on death certificates. Corrected age-adjusted death rates for Hispanics are lower than those for the non-Hispanic White population by close to 20%. CONCLUSIONS: The Hispanic mortality paradox is not explained by an incongruence between ethnic classification in vital registration and population data systems.

The validity of race and Hispanic origin reporting on death certificates in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: This report presents the results of an evaluation study of the validity of race and Hispanic origin reporting on death certificates in the United States and its impact on race- and Hispanic origin-specific mortality estimates. METHODS: The National Longitudinal Mortality Study (NLMS) was used to evaluate death certificate classification of race and Hispanic origin by comparing death certificate with survey race-ethnicity classifications for a sample of decedents identified in NLMS. NLMS consists of a series of annual Current Population Survey files (1973 and 1978-1998) linked to death certificates for years 1979-1998. To identify and measure the effect of race-ethnicity misclassification on death certificates on mortality estimates, pooled 1999-2001 vital statistics mortality data and population data from the 2000 census were used to estimate and compare observed and corrected (for death certificate misclassification) race-ethnicity specific death rates. RESULTS: Race and ethnicity reporting on the death certificate continues to be excellent for the white and black populations. It remains poor for the American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) population but is reasonably good for the Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander (API) populations. Decedent characteristics such as place of residence and nativity have an important effect on the quality of reporting on the death certificate. The effects of misclassification on mortality estimates were most pronounced for the AIAN population, where correcting for misclassification reverses a large AIAN over white mortality advantage to a large disadvantage. Among the Hispanic and API populations, adjustment for death certificate misclassification did not significantly affect minority-majority mortality differentials.

Income inequality and mortality: a multilevel prospective study of 521 248 individuals in 50 US states.

BACKGROUND: Some of the most consistent evidence in favour of an association between income inequality and health has been among US states. However, in multilevel studies of mortality, only two out of five studies have reported a positive relationship with income inequality after adjustment for the compositional characteristics of the state's inhabitants. In this study, we attempt to clarify these mixed results by analysing the relationship within age-sex groups and by applying a previously unused analytical method to a database that contains more deaths than any multilevel study to date. METHODS: The US National Longitudinal Mortality Study (NLMS) was used to model the relationship between income inequality in US states and mortality using both a novel and previously used methodologies that fall into the general framework of multilevel regression. We adjust age-sex specific models for nine socioeconomic and demographic variables at the individual level and percentage black and region at the state level. RESULTS: The preponderance of evidence from this study suggests that 1990 state-level income inequality is associated with a 40% differential in state level mortality rates (95% CI = 26-56%) for men 25-64 years and a 14% (95% CI = 3-27%) differential for women 25-64 years after adjustment for compositional factors. No such relationship was found for men or women over 65. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between income inequality and mortality is only robust to adjustment for compositional factors in men and women under 65. This explains why income inequality is not a major driver of mortality trends in the United States because most deaths occur at ages 65 and over. This analysis does suggest, however, the certain causes of death that occur primarily in the population under 65 may be associated with income inequality. Comparison of analytical techniques also suggests coefficients for income inequality in previous multilevel mortality studies may be biased, but further research is needed to provide a definitive answer.