Analysis of data from Michigan assesses two different ways to see how a geographic location's underlying characteristics align with incidence and mortality
When it comes to assessing COVID-19's impact on a specific geographic location, and using that information to prioritize resources such as vaccine and coronavirus testing, two different systems of measuring social disadvantage have been used. One, the Social Vulnerability Index, has already been used in Michigan to prioritize vaccination, while the other, called the Area Deprivation Index, has not.
A new analysis by IHPI members Renuka Tipirneni, M.D., M.S., and Paula Lantz, Ph.D., M.S., together with Monita Karmakar, Ph.D., M.S., uses data from Michigan to compare the two.
They find that both ADI and SVI had similar associations with COVID-19 incidence and mortality overall, though ADI had stronger associations with mortality. The SVI includes four sub-indicies, and the analysis shows that two of them were associated with COVID-19 incidence, while the other two were associated with mortality.
The authors say that this shows that ADI can be used as an alternative to SVI, but with the caveat that SVI is more useful for larger geographic areas because it focuses on the county level, while ADI is better for targeting smaller areas because it includes data at the level of neighborhoods, but lacks data on race/ethnicity.
Read the full brief report at this link (PDF):