Life Expectancy for White, Black, and Hispanic Race/Ethnicity in U.S. States: Trends and Disparities, 1990 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Life expectancy (LE) differences within and between states by race/ethnicity have not been examined. OBJECTIVE: To estimate LE for selected race/ethnicity groups in states from 1990 to 2019. DESIGN: Cross-sectional time-series analysis. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Deidentified death records and Census data were used to construct regression models with smoothed time series of mortality from 1990 to 2019. MEASUREMENTS: LE at birth, by sex and year, for subgroups of people reporting Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, or non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Disparities in LE across states were 8.0 years for females and 12.2 years for males in 1990 and 7.9 years for females and 7.8 years for males in 2019. When race/ethnicity groups were accounted for, disparities across states were 20.7 years for females and 24.5 years for males in 1990, decreasing to 18.5 years for females and 23.7 years for males in 2019. Disparities across states increased within each race/ethnicity group between 1990 and 2019, with the largest increase for non-Hispanic White males and the smallest for Hispanic females. The disparity between race/ethnicity groups within states decreased for most of the 23 states with estimates for all 3 groups but increased for females in 7 states and males in 5 states. LIMITATION: Because of small sample size, LE was not estimated for 37 of 153 state-race/ethnicity groups. CONCLUSION: Disparity in LE across states was greater when race/ethnicity groups were considered. Disparities across all state-race/ethnicity groups in general have decreased over the past 3 decades. Within each race/ethnicity group, disparities across states have increased. Although racial/ethnic disparities decreased in most of the 23 states for which LE was estimated for all 3 groups, they increased for females in 7 states and males in 5 states. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Measuring human capital: a systematic analysis of 195 countries and territories, 1990-2016.

BACKGROUND: Human capital is recognised as the level of education and health in a population and is considered an important determinant of economic growth. The World Bank has called for measurement and annual reporting of human capital to track and motivate investments in health and education and enhance productivity. We aim to provide a new comprehensive measure of human capital across countries globally. METHODS: We generated a period measure of expected human capital, defined for each birth cohort as the expected years lived from age 20 to 64 years and adjusted for educational attainment, learning or education quality, and functional health status using rates specific to each time period, age, and sex for 195 countries from 1990 to 2016. We estimated educational attainment using 2522 censuses and household surveys; we based learning estimates on 1894 tests among school-aged children; and we based functional health status on the prevalence of seven health conditions, which were taken from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016). Mortality rates specific to location, age, and sex were also taken from GBD 2016. FINDINGS: In 2016, Finland had the highest level of expected human capital of 28·4 health, education, and learning-adjusted expected years lived between age 20 and 64 years (95% uncertainty interval 27·5-29·2); Niger had the lowest expected human capital of less than 1·6 years (0·98-2·6). In 2016, 44 countries had already achieved more than 20 years of expected human capital; 68 countries had expected human capital of less than 10 years. Of 195 countries, the ten most populous countries in 2016 for expected human capital were ranked: China at 44, India at 158, USA at 27, Indonesia at 131, Brazil at 71, Pakistan at 164, Nigeria at 171, Bangladesh at 161, Russia at 49, and Mexico at 104. Assessment of change in expected human capital from 1990 to 2016 shows marked variation from less than 2 years of progress in 18 countries to more than 5 years of progress in 35 countries. Larger improvements in expected human capital appear to be associated with faster economic growth. The top quartile of countries in terms of absolute change in human capital from 1990 to 2016 had a median annualised growth in gross domestic product of 2·60% (IQR 1·85-3·69) compared with 1·45% (0·18-2·19) for countries in the bottom quartile. INTERPRETATION: Countries vary widely in the rate of human capital formation. Monitoring the production of human capital can facilitate a mechanism to hold governments and donors accountable for investments in health and education. FUNDING: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.