The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
September 2021 (Volume 99)
Quarterly Article
Jonathan Purtle
Rennie Joshi
Félice Lê-Scherban
Rosie Mae Henson
Ana V. Diez Roux
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Oct 4, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
Context: A substantive body of research has explored what factors influence elected officials’ opinions about health issues. However, no studies have assessed the potential influence of the health of an elected official’s constituents. We assessed whether the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparity within a city was associated with the opinions of that city’s mayoral official (i.e., mayor or deputy mayor) about health disparities in their city.
Methods: The independent variable was the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparity in US cities. The magnitude was determined by linking 2010-2015 estimates of life expectancy and median household income for 8,434 census tracts in 224 cities. The dependent variables were mayoral officials’ opinions from a 2016 survey about the existence and fairness of health disparities in their city (n = 224, response rate 30.3%). Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for characteristics of mayoral officials (e.g., ideology) and city characteristics.
Findings: In cities in the highest income-based life expectancy disparity quartile, 50.0% of mayoral officials “strongly agreed” that health disparities existed and 52.7% believed health disparities were “very unfair.” In comparison, among mayoral officials in cities in the lowest disparity quartile 33.9% “strongly agreed” that health disparities existed and 22.2% believed the disparities were “very unfair.” A 1-year-larger income-based life expectancy disparity in a city was associated with 25% higher odds that the city’s mayoral official would “strongly agree” that health disparities existed (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25; P = .04) and twice the odds that the city’s mayoral official would believe that such disparities were “very unfair” (OR = 2.24; P <.001).
Conclusions: Mayoral officials’ opinions about health disparities in their jurisdictions are generally aligned with, and potentially influenced by, information about the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparities among their constituents.
Keywords: health disparities, urban health, small area estimation, local policymaking.
Read on Wiley Online Library
