| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE |
At the time of this study, Hannah L. F. Cooper was with the Medical and Health Research Association of New York City, Inc, New York, NY, the National Development and Research Institutes, Inc, New York, and the Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, New York. Samuel R. Friedman was with the National Development and Research Institutes, Inc, and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md. Barbara Tempalski and Risa Friedman were with the National Development and Research Institutes, Inc.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Hannah L.F. Cooper, ScD, Postdoctoral Fellow, NDRI, 71 West 23rd St, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10010 (e-mail: cooper{at}ndri.org).
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
Objectives. We analyzed the relations of two 1990 dimensions of racial residential segregation (isolation and concentration) with 1998 injection drug use prevalence among Black adult residents of 93 large US metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs).
Methods. We estimated injection drug use prevalence among Black adults in each MSA by analyzing 3 databases documenting injection drug users’ encounters with the health care system. Multiple linear regression methods were used to investigate the relationship of isolation and concentration to the natural logarithm of Black adult injection drug use prevalence, controlling for possible confounders.
Results. The median injection drug use prevalence was 1983 per 100000 Black adults (interquartile range: 1422 to 2759 per 100000). The median isolation index was 0.48 (range: 0.05 to 0.84): in half the MSAs studied, the average Black resident inhabited a census tract where 48% or more of the residents were Black. The multiple regression model indicates that an increase of 0.50 in the isolation index was associated with a 23% increase in injection drug use prevalence among Black adults. Concentration was unrelated to the outcome.
Conclusions. Residential isolation is positively related to Black injection drug use prevalence in MSAs. Research into the pathways linking isolation to injection drug use is needed.
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
Few studies, however, have pursued related lines of inquiry.18,23–25 This omission is striking when placed within the broader context of public health, a discipline that has increasingly emphasized the structural determinants of health and health-related behaviors.26–29 The microlevel focus of research on drug use patterns among Blacks is, however, consonant with the larger body of research into the etiology of licit and illicit drug use and dependence in the general population, a body of research that has tended to locate the causes of drug use and abuse within the individual, family, and peer group.17 This microlevel orientation is also evident in drug-related interventions: the 2 principal methods of addressing active drug use and addiction, drug treatment programs and, particularly for Black Americans, the criminal justice system, primarily target individuals.30–32
Our analysis investigates the relations of 2 dimensions of racial residential segregation, namely, residential isolation and concentration, to the subsequent prevalence of injection drug use among Black adults residing within 93 large US metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). Residential segregation has been found to adversely affect the physical and mental health status of Black populations across the life course.33–39 Although no research has yet investigated the association of segregation with injection drug use prevalence among Black adults, available studies allow us to trace a pathway linking these 2 phenomena.
Black residents of segregated communities are at elevated risk of depression, anxiety, and general psychological distress.40,41 These mental health outcomes, in turn, create vulnerability to both engaging in injection drug use and sniffing or snorting injectable drugs such as heroin and cocaine.42–49
Research regarding the relation of structural factors to drug use in the general population also testifies to the relevance of structural determinants: rates of unemployment, poverty, arrest, and neighborhood disorder have been found to be associated with patterns of injection drug use and heroin and cocaine use in various geographically defined communities.50–55 Because segregation concentrates and amplifies material deprivation in Black communities,56 this research collectively suggests that segregation may contribute to the prevalence of injection drug use in Black urban populations.
Our examination of the relation of each of 2 segregation dimensions to injection drug use prevalence among Black adults reflects emerging recognition in public health that residential segregation is a multidimensional construct. Until recently, public health research on segregation and health has almost exclusively conceptualized residential segregation as a unidimensional phenomenon consisting of unevenness (defined as the extent to which the racial composition of an MSA deviates from that of its constituent neighborhoods57,58) and operationalized using the dissimilarity index.39,59–62 However, Massey and Denton’s57 1988 factor analysis of 20 segregation measures found that segregation is instead a highly complex phenomenon consisting of multiple dimensions, including but not limited to unevenness, isolation, and concentration, each signaling a particular spatial configuration.
This complexity has historical roots: although the overarching origins of racial residential segregation lie largely in efforts to restore and maintain White supremacy in the wake of emancipation, its multidimensional nature is in part a product of variations across geographic areas in the specific methods employed to perpetuate this supremacy.56,63–65 Acevedo-Garcia and others39,60–62 have thus recommended expanding inquiries into segregation and health beyond the current focus on unevenness to include these additional dimensions. The index of dissimilarity has itself been questioned because of concerns about its conceptual links to health and interpretability.39,60,62,66 The following paragraphs review the definitions of the 2 segregation dimensions studied here, namely residential isolation and concentration, and trace their possible relation to injection drug use.
Isolation refers to the extent of potential intraracial contact for a group in its residential area and thus, reflects a combination of the percentage of the overall population constituted by that group in an MSA and its distribution across the MSA’s neighborhoods.57,58 Some have hypothesized that isolation is the segregation dimension that holds the most relevance for health, and higher Black isolation has been associated with poorer self-reported health and higher mortality and homicide rates among Black Americans.39,59,6
MSAs with high levels of Black isolation were often produced through White violence and legal actions, including zoning laws and restrictive covenants, designed to exclude Black individuals and families from historically majority-White neighborhoods.56,68–71 Ongoing discrimination by the real estate and banking industries against Black individuals seeking to buy or lease homes outside majority-Black neighborhoods has perpetuated Black residential isolation.56,72
Drawing on past research that indicates that isolated Black areas can suffer disproportionately high rates of unemployment, poverty, and violence,73,74 each of which has been linked to injection drug use or other of injectable drugs,50–55,75,76 we posited that MSAs with elevated Black isolation would have a relatively high prevalence of injection drug use among Black adults.
Concentration refers to "the relative amount of physical space occupied by a minority group in the urban environment."57(p289) As Black migration to cities increased between 1870 and 1970,56,65 Whites’ refusal to permit Blacks to live outside strictly delineated areas created highly concentrated Black neighborhoods as existing housing units were divided and subdivided to create new homes for the burgeoning Black population.56,69
Midcentury urban renewal programs that relocated large numbers of Black households from "renewed" areas to majority-Black neighborhoods compounded this concentration.56,65 As has been suggested previously,24,77 we posited that the overcrowded conditions that can characterize concentrated Black areas would contribute to the prevalence of injection drug use, in part by creating intensely stressful living conditions.
Further, the urban renewal programs that produced some concentrated Black communities might have disrupted social networks and institutions, both in the renewed community and the new host community, for a prolonged period.78 Such disruptions have been linked to increased injection drug use and injectable drug use.77,79–81
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
Defined by the US Census Bureau, MSAs are adjacent counties that include at least 1 central city home to 50 000 or more people that collectively form a single cohesive socioeconomic unit.85,86 To be included in our sample, MSAs had to have been home to at least 500 000 residents in 1993. Ninety-six MSAs met this criterion. Three MSAs, however, lacked sufficient data on injection drug use among Black adults and were dropped from the sample. The boundaries of 50 MSAs changed between 1990 and 199887; all measures were operationalized using 1998 boundaries.
Measures
Segregation.
Massey and colleagues58 have identified the isolation and relative concentration indexes as valid measures of their respective constructs. The isolation index captures, for the average member of racial/ethnic group X in an MSA, the percentage of individuals sharing his or her residential census tract who are also in group X (Table 1
).66,88,89
|
).57 As Massey and Denton90 note, this area-based measure also reflects tract population density: because tract boundaries are partially determined by population size, tracts with a smaller surface area are usually more concentrated than larger tracts. Where MSA boundaries remained constant between 1990 and 1998, index values were obtained from the 1990 Census. Otherwise, we calculated values using 1990 US Census Summary Tape File 1 data. Injection drug use prevalence among Black adults. It is difficult to estimate injection drug use prevalence in geographic areas because injection drug use is both illegal and heavily stigmatized.91–94 Our calculation method estimated the 1998 prevalence of injection drug use among Black adults in each of the 93 MSAs in a 4-stage process: (1) estimating the proportion of injection drug users in each MSA who are Black, (2) calculating the number of injection drug users, regardless of race, in each MSA, (3) calculating the prevalence of injection drug use among Black adults with project data produced in stages 1 and 2 combined with US Census data on the number of Black and White adults in each MSA in 1998, and (4) validating our injection drug use prevalence estimates. Project stages 1 and 2 have been described in detail elsewhere.14,95
In stage 1, we calculated the proportion of injection drug users who were Black in 1998 in each of 3 databases that documented injection drug users’ encounters with the health care system and then averaged these database-specific percentages to create a single estimate for each MSA.14 The 3 databases analyzed were the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration’s (drug) Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s HIV Counseling and Testing Database (CTS) and AIDS Public Information Database (APID) (Table 2).
|
In stage 2, to calculate the number of injection drug users in each MSA, we first adjusted the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse estimate of the number of past-year injection drug users nationwide to account for underreporting of injection drug use and undercoverage of injection drug users.95–97 The adjusted nationwide figure was then apportioned to each of the 93 MSAs studied with the use of data on national and MSA-specific patterns of utilization of injection drug use-related services and past MSA-specific injection drug use estimates.95
In stage 3, we calculated the number of Black injection drug users in each MSA by multiplying the proportion of injection drug users in the MSA who were Black (from stage 1) by the estimated number of past-year injection drug users in that MSA (from stage 2). We then calculated race-specific injection drug use prevalence estimates by dividing the number of Black injection drug users in each MSA by the total number of Black adults aged 19 through 65 years in that MSA in 1998, obtained from the US Census.
In stage 4, we investigated our estimates’ validity by correlating them with 2 theoretically related variables, the prevalence of heroin and cocaine overdose fatalities (calculated using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Multiple Cause of Death database) and of injection-related AIDS among Black adults (calculated using the APID).
Because the prevalences of injection drug use, overdose mortality, and AIDS among Black adults were each highly correlated with the region of the country in which the MSA was located and the MSA population size and racial composition, we used partial correlation methods to validate our prevalence estimates that controlled for these factors. Recognizing possible circularities inherent in analyzing the relation between injection drug use prevalence (calculated with APID data) and the prevalence of injection drug use-related AIDS, we examined the relation between the prevalence of injection-related AIDS and injection drug use prevalence calculated both with and without APID data.
Potential confounders. Past literature suggests that MSA population size, racial/ethnic composition (percentage Black and percentage White), and geographic region might confound the relation between segregation and Black injection drug use prevalence.50,56 These variables were calculated using 1990 Census data.
Analysis
Multiple linear regression methods were used to test our hypotheses. We conducted extensive exploratory data analysis and regression diagnostics to ensure that the data met our model’s assumptions, and to gain a comprehensive understanding of key variables’ distributions and interrelations.101,102 Because the distributions of Black injection drug use prevalence and population size were skewed, they were transformed with a natural logarithmic function. Observations that had undue influence in the multiple regression analysis, assessed with the DFFITS (difference in fit, standardized) test, were reweighted.101
An examination of variance inflation factors in the multiple regression model indicated that the 2 segregation measures were not collinear and thus could be simultaneously included in the model.101 The percentage of MSA residents who were Black was, however, collinear with the isolation index (variation inflation factor = 3.5) in this model, a relation rooted in the index’s incorporation of MSA racial composition (Table 1).57 The variable denoting the percentage of residents who were Black was therefore dropped from the main analysis to increase the point estimates’ precision.101
To investigate the extent to which the observed relation between isolation and Black injection drug use prevalence was an artifact of MSA racial composition, we ran a second regression model that incorporated the percentage Black and compared the magnitude of the relation of isolation to injection drug use prevalence across the 2 regression models.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
). Injection drug use prevalence among Black adults ranged considerably (interquartile range = 1422 to 2759 per 100 000). The validation analysis indicated that these injection drug use prevalence estimates were positively and significantly associated with the prevalences of overdose deaths (R = 0.31; P = .003) and injection-related AIDS among Black adults (R = 0.49; P < .001); the latter correlation persisted when injection drug use prevalence estimates were recalculated without APID data (R = 0.47; P < .0001).
|
). As in other research on US MSAs,56 values were high on both segregation measures. In 47 of the 93 MSAs studied, the isolation index indicated that the average Black adult or child lived in a census tract in which at least 48% of the tract population was Black (Table 3; note that this is lower than published values of the isolation index for 1990 calculated using 1990, rather than 1998, MSA boundaries56). In 50% of the MSAs sampled, the relative concentration index was 0.72 or greater, exceeding the 0.60 cutoff point Massey and colleagues58 used to identify high levels of segregation in this dimension.
Bivariate regression analyses indicated that the isolation index was not associated with the natural logarithm of injection drug use prevalence among Black adults (Table 4). However, once we controlled for MSA sociodemographic characteristics and region, particularly the West, where isolation was low and Black injection drug use prevalence high, a positive relation between the isolation index and the natural logarithm of injection drug use prevalence among Black adults emerged (Table 4).
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
There are multiple pathways through which Black residential isolation could be linked to injection drug use prevalence among Black adults in MSAs. Unlike concentrated Black census tracts, which are primarily characterized by elevated poverty rates, isolated Black tracts tend to be associated with multiple indicators of social and material disadvantage, including poverty, unemployment, and violence.67,73,74 Each of these characteristics, alone or in combination, could create vulnerability to injection drug use.
Exposure to community violence creates a risk of illicit drug use (including heroin and cocaine use), perhaps because witnesses or victims of violence use drugs to manage subsequent depression, fear, and anxiety.76 Likewise, poverty may promote the transition to (and continuation of ) injecting among active drug users because injection drug use is a more efficient drug administration method than sniffing or snorting.49 Moreover, evidence suggests that injectable drugs are more overtly available in disadvantaged neighborhoods than they are elsewhere.103
Another interpretation of our findings is also possible. Isolated Black census tracts may protect against injection drug use by creating a place where Black residents encounter on a daily basis organizations fostering a positive Black identity; endure little White-initiated interpersonal discrimination; and seek and offer solace and racial solidarity in the face of racial inequality and discrimination. The absence of these protections may create vulnerability to injection drug use among Black individuals living outside isolated Black census tracts,104–111 though this risk may be offset by the greater access these individuals tend to have to socioeconomic resources and a reduced exposure to violence.24
Further research is needed to elucidate the pathways through which elevated isolation is associated with injection drug use prevalence and to determine, as we could not in this ecological study of MSAs, whether the relation is evident only among Black residents of isolated Black tracts, Black individuals residing outside such tracts, or both.
Two additional avenues of research are also possible. First, a positive relation between residential isolation and injection drug use prevalence may exist in other racial/ ethnic groups. Puerto Ricans, who appear to have the highest prevalence of cocaine use of all Latino groups,112 are also the sole racial/ ethnic group experiencing a level of isolation that approaches that of Black Americans.56 Research is needed to determine whether isolation promotes injection drug use among Puerto Ricans, and perhaps other racial/ ethnic groups.
Our findings also suggest an additional line of inquiry: studying the extent to which Black isolation shapes the distribution of injection drug use-related health problems across Black urban populations by elevating the prevalence of injection drug use. This inquiry is particularly pressing given the high prevalence of overdose deaths and injection drug use-related AIDS borne by Black Americans.2–11 Collectively, the results of this research could help injection drug users and their allies identify communities in need of drug-related health services, including drug treatment and syringe exchange programs.
Our findings must be understood in the light of their limitations, which lie principally in the study’s ecological and cross-sectional design and measurement of injection drug use prevalence among Black adults. Because our unit of analysis was the MSA, we could not investigate the role of neighborhood- or individual-level factors, such as socioeconomic status, gender, and age, as confounders or modifiers of the relation between MSA-level residential isolation (or concentration) and Black injection drug use prevalence.27,29 Multilevel research into these possibilities should address these limitations. Additionally, although we used a lagged cross-sectional design in which predictors predated the outcome, the possibility of autocorrelation precludes assessing the causal direction of our findings.
Our service-based method of calculating injection drug use prevalence leaves room for an alternative interpretation of our findings: although it is possible that residential isolation produces a higher prevalence of injection drug use, it is also possible that isolation results in a higher prevalence of health problems among injection drug users and thus, greater use of drug-related services. Possibly countering this bias, however, is the fact that isolated Black areas of segregated MSAs tend to be medically underserved,113 and CTS and TEDS capture individuals accessing routine or nonemergency health services.
We place our findings in the context of past research regarding racial inequality, discrimination, and health. Our analysis suggests that injection drug use should be added to the growing list of the adverse health behaviors and outcomes among Black Americans that may be generated by racial inequality and discrimination.114,115
Further and more specifically, this analysis also adds a new dimension to the body of research documenting the relation between inequitable and discriminatory racial relations and licit and illicit drug use and abuse. Investigators have concluded that Black adolescents and adults who report higher levels of interpersonal or everyday discrimination are more likely to report lifetime smoking, smoking more frequently, and engaging in problem drinking than other Black individuals.104–110 Likewise, Black adults reporting higher levels of internalized racism also report consuming more alcohol than other Black adults.19 Our findings extend this body of research by concluding that structural, in addition to intrapsychic and interpersonal, manifestations of racial inequality and discrimination may adversely shape injection drug use rates among Black adults.
If substantiated by additional research, our finding that a structural factor is related to Black injection drug use prevalence may also bear consequences for US domestic drug policy. As noted earlier, the criminal justice system, which locates cause within the individual and calls it culpability, plays a major role in the US government’s response to illicit drug use among Black Americans that dwarfs its role in addressing the drug use of White Americans.30–32 If, as our research suggests, the cause of injection drug use among Black adult urban residents lies partially in isolation, related prevention and intervention efforts may also benefit from altering social structures—and, more broadly, from eradicating racial inequality and discrimination in the United States—rather than from arresting and incarcerating large numbers of Black individuals.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
The authors thank Greg Falkin and Holly Hagan for their invaluable comments on this article. We also thank the US Census Bureau for calculating the segregation indexes and making them publicly available.
Human Participant Protection
The human subjects committee of the National Development and Research Institutes, Inc. approved all analyses.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Note. The points of view, opinions, and conclusions in this article do not necessarily represent the official position of the US Government, the Medical and Health Research Association, or National Development and Research Institutes, Inc.
Contributors
H. L. F. Cooper originated the study, created the prevalence estimates, conducted all analysis-testing hypotheses, and wrote the article. S. R. Friedman contributed substantially to the analyses, interpretation, and framing and created the original estimates. B. Tempalski and R. Friedman helped create and validate these estimates and contributed substantially to interpretations and framing.
Accepted for publication December 19, 2005.
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONReferences |
|---|
2. Tardiff K, Gross E, Wu J. Analysis of cocaine-positive fatalities. J Forensic Sci.1989;34:53–63.[Web of Science][Medline]
3. Emergency Department Trends From the Drug Abuse Warning Network, Final Estimates 1995–2002. Rockville, Md: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2003.
4. Harlow K. Patterns of rates of mortality from narcotics and cocaine overdose in Texas, 1976–1987. Public Health Rep.1990;105:455–462.
5. Galea S, Ahern J, Tardiff K, et al. Racial/ethnic differences in overdose mortality trends in New York City, 1990–1998. J Urban Health.2003;80:201–211.[Web of Science][Medline]
6. Friedman SR, Sotheran JL, Abdul-Quader A, et al. The AIDS epidemic among Blacks and Hispanics. Milbank Q.1987;65:455–499.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
7. Friedman SR, Quimby E, Sufian M, Abdul-Quader A, Des Jarlais DC. Racial aspects of the AIDS epidemic. Calif Sociologist.1988;11:55–68.
8. Novick DM, Trigg HL, Des Jarlais DC, Friedman SR, Vlahov D, Kreek MJ. Cocaine injection and ethnicity in parenteral drug users during the early years of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic in New York City. J Med Virol.1989;29:181–185.[Web of Science][Medline]
9. Selik RM, Castro KG, Pappaioanou M, Buehler JW. Birthplace and the risk of AIDS among Hispanics in the United States. Am J Public Health.1989;79: 836–839.
10. Selik RM, Castro KG, Pappaioanou M. Racial/ ethnic differences in the risk of AIDS in the United States. Am J Public Health.1988;78:1539–1545.
11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cases of HIV infection and AIDS in the United States, 2001. HIV AIDS Surveill Rep.2002;13(2):1–44.
12. Johnson BD, Mulffler J. Sociocultural Issues. In: Lowinson JH, Ruiz P, Millman RB, Langrod JG, eds. Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive Textbook. 3rd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1997:107–118.
13. Roberts A. Psychiatric comorbidity in White and African-American illicit substance abusers: evidence for differential etiology. Clin Psychol Rev.2000;20: 667–677.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
14. Cooper H, Friedman SR, Tempalski B, Friedman R, Keem M. Racial/ethnic disparities in injection drug use in large US metropolitan areas. Ann Epidemiol.2005; 15:326–334.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
15. Friedman SR. Sociopharmacology of drug use: initial thoughts. Int J Drug Policy.2002;13:341–347.[CrossRef]
16. Fullilove MT. Perceptions and misperceptions of race and drug use. JAMA.1993;269:1034.
17. Galea S, Nandi A, Vlahov D. The social epidemiology of substance use. Epidemiol Rev.2004;26: 36–52.
18. Lillie-Blanton M, Anthony J, Schuster CR. Probing the meaning of racial/ethnic group comparisons in crack cocaine smoking. JAMA.1993;269:993–997.
19. Taylor J, Jackson B. Factors affecting alcohol consumption in Black women, part II. Int J Addict.1990; 25:1415–1427.[Web of Science][Medline]
20. Wingo LK. Substance abuse in African American women. J Cultural Diversity.2001;8:21–25.
21. King G. The "race" concept in smoking: a review of the research on African Americans. Soc Sci Med.1997;45:1075–1087.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
22. Saunders-Phillips K. Factors influencing HIV/ AIDS in women of color. Public Health Rep.2002;117: S151–S156.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
23. Fuller C, Borrell L, Latkin CA, et al. Effects of race, neighborhood, and social network on age at initiation of injection drug use. Am J Public Health.2005; 95:689–695.
24. Jones-Webb R, Snowden L, Herd D, Short B, Hannan P. Alcohol-related problems among Black, Hispanic, and White men: the contribution of neighborhood poverty. J Stud Alcohol.1997;58:539–545.[Web of Science][Medline]
25. Delva J, Mathiesen S, Kamata A. Use of illegal drugs among mothers across racial/ethnic groups in the United States: a multilevel analysis of individual and community-level influences. Ethn Dis.2001;11: 614–625.[Medline]
26. Berkman L, Kawachi I. A historical framework for social epidemiology. In: Berkman L, Kawachi I, eds. Social Epidemiology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2000:3–12.
27. Diez-Roux A. Investigating neighborhood and area effects on health. Am J Public Health.2001;91: 1783–1789.
28. Diez-Roux A. Multilevel analysis in public health research. Annu Rev Public Health.2000;21:171–192.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
29. Diez-Roux A. Bringing context back into epidemiology: variables and fallacies in multilevel analysis. Am J Public Health.1998;88:216–222.
30. Harrison PM, Beck AJ. Prisoners in 2002. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2003:1–14. Bureau of Justice statistics bulletin.
31. Drucker E. Population impact of mass incarceration under New York’s Rockefeller drug laws: an analysis of years of life lost. J Urban Health.2002;79:1–10.
32. Drucker E. Drug prohibition and public health: 25 years of evidence. Public Health Rep.1999;114: 14–29.
33. Hart K, Kunitz S, Sell R, Mukamel D. Metropolitan governance, residential segregation, and mortality among African-Americans. Am J Public Health.1998; 88:434–438.
34. Jackson S, Anderson R, Johnson N, Sorlie P. The relation of residential segregation to all-cause mortality: a study in Black and White. Am J Public Health.2000; 90:615–617.
35. Polednak A. Trends in US urban Black infant mortality, by degree of residential segregation. Am J Public Health.1996;86:723–726.
36. Acevedo-Garcia D. Zip code–level risk factors for tuberculosis: neighborhood environment and residential segregation in New Jersey, 1985–1992. Am J Public Health.2001;91:734–741.[Abstract]
37. LaVeist T. Linking residential segregation to the infant-mortality race disparity in US cities. Sociol Soc Res.1989;73:90–94.[Web of Science]
38. LaVeist T. Segregation, poverty, and empowerment: health consequences for African-Americans. In: LaVeist T, ed. Race, Ethnicity, and Health: A Public Health Reader. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass, 2002: 76–96.
39. Subramanian S, Acevedo-Garcia D, Osypuk TL. Racial residential segregation and geographic heterogeneity in Black/White disparity in poor self-rated health in the US: a multilevel statistical analysis. Soc Sci Med.2005;60:1667–1679.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
40. Aneshensel CS, Sucoff CA. The neighborhood context of adolescent mental health. J Health Soc Behav.1996;37:293–311.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
41. Schultz A, Williams DR, Israel B, et al. Unfair treatment, neighborhood effects, and mental health in the Detroit metropolitan area. J Health Soc Behav.2000;41:314–332.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
42. Crofts N, Louie R, Rosenthal D, Jolley D. The first hit: circumstances surrounding initiation into injecting. Addiction.1996;91:1187–1196.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
43. Irwin KL, Edlin B, Faruque S, et al. Crack cocaine smokers who turn to drug injection: characteristics, factors associated with injection, and implications for HIV transmission. The Multicenter Crack Cocaine and HIV Infection Study Team. Drug Alcohol Depend.1996;42: 85–92.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
44. Khantzian E. The self-medication hypothesis of substance abuse disorders: a reconsideration and recent applications. Harvard Rev Psychiatry.1997;4: 231–244.[Web of Science][Medline]
45. Dunn J, Laranjeira R. Transition in the route of cocaine administration—characteristics, direction, and associated variables. Addiction.1999;94:813–824.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
46. Weinberg N, Glantz M. Child psychopathology risk factors for drug abuse: overview. J Clin Child Psychol.1999;28:290–297.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
47. Swendsen J, Merikangas K. The comorbidity of depression and substance use disorders. Clin Psychol Rev.2000;20:173–189.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
48. Fuller C, Vlahov D, Arria A, Ompad D, Garfein R, Strathdee SA. Factors associated with adolescent initiation of injection drug use. Public Health Rep.2001;116: 136–145.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
49. Neaigus A, Miller M, Friedman SR, et al. Potential risk factors for the transition to injecting among non-injection heroin users: a comparison of former injectors and never injectors. Addiction.2001;96:847–860.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
50. Friedman SR, Tempalski B, Cooper H, Keem M, Friedman R, Flom PL. Structural factors to guide structural intervention: predictors of injection drug use population size, HIV prevalence among IDUs, and prevention program coverage for IDUs. Paper presented at: XV International Conference on AIDS; July 13, 2004; Bangkok, Thailand.
51. Hunt L, Chambers C. The heroin epidemics: a study of heroin use in the United States, 1965–1975. New York, NY: Spectrum; 1976.
52. Duncan SC, Duncan TE, Strycker LA. A multilevel analysis of neighborhood context and youth alcohol and drug problems. Prev Sci.2002;3:125–133.[CrossRef][Medline]
53. Nurco D, Shaffer J, Cisin I. An ecological analysis of the interrelationships among drug abuse and other indices of social pathology. Int J Addict.1984;19: 441–451.[Web of Science][Medline]
54. Bell DC, Carlson JW, Richard AJ. The social ecology of drug use: a factor analysis of an urban environment. Subst Use Misuse.1998;33:2201–2217.[Web of Science][Medline]
55. Boardman JD, Finch BK, Ellison CG, Williams DR, Jackson JS. Neighborhood disadvantage, stress, and drug use among adults. J Health Soc Behav.2001;42: 151–165.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
56. Massey D, Denton N. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the American Underclass. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 1993.
57. Massey D, Denton N. The dimensions of residential segregation. Soc Forces.1988;67:281–315.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
58. Massey D, White MJ, Phua V-C. The dimensions of segregation revisited. Sociol Methods Res.1996;25: 172–206.[Abstract]
59. Collins C, Williams DR. Segregation and mortality: the deadly effects of racism? Sociol Forum.1999;14: 495–523.[CrossRef]
60. Acevedo-Garcia D, Lochner K, Osypuk TL, Subramanian S. Future directions in residential segregation and health research: a multilevel approach. Am J Public Health.2003;93:215–221.
61. Acevedo-Garcia D. Residential segregation and the epidemiology of infectious diseases. Soc Sci Med.2000;51:1143–1161.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
62. Acevedo-Garcia D, Lochner K. Residential segregation and health. In: Kawachi I, Berkman L, eds. Neighborhoods and Health. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003:265–281.
63. Du Bois WEB. Black Reconstruction in America. 1860–1880. New York, NY: Meridian Books, 1962.
64. Foner E. Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877. New York, NY: Perennial Classics; 2002. Commager HS, Morris RB, eds. The New American Nation Series.
65. Lemann N. The Promised Land: The Great Migration and How it Changed America. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 1991.
66. Lieberson S, Carter DK. Temporal changes and urban differences in residential segregation: a reconsideration. Am J Sociol.1982;88:296–310.[CrossRef]
67. Peterson R, Krivo L. Racial segregation and Black urban homicide. Soc Forces.1993;71:1001–1026.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
68. McMurry LO. To Keep the Waters Troubled: The Life of Ida B. Wells. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.
69. Boyle K. Arc of Justice: A Saga of Race, Civil Rights, and Murder in the Jazz Age. New York, NY: Henry Holt; 2004.
70. Massey D, Mullen BP. Process of Hispanic and Black spatial assimilation. Am J Sociol.1984;89: 836–873.[CrossRef]
71. Legal Affairs History. Available at: http://www.naacp.org/legal/legal_history.html. Accessed June 19, 2006.
72. Bonilla-Silva E. White supremacy and racism in the post-civil rights era. Boulder, Colo: Lynne Riener; 2001.
73. Denton N. Are African Americans still hypersegregated? In: Bullard R, Grigsby J, Lee C, Feagin JR, eds. Residential Apartheid: The American Legacy. Los Angeles, Calif: CAAS Publications; 1994:49–81. CAAS Urban Policy Series; Vol 2.
74. Galster GC, Mikelsons M. The geography of metropolitan opportunity: a case study of neighborhood conditions confronting youth in Washington, DC. Housing Policy Debate.1995;6:73–102.[Web of Science]
75. Dee TS. Alcohol abuse and economic conditions: evidence from repeated cross-sections of individual-level data. Health Econ.2001;10:257–270.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
76. Vermeiren R, Schwarb-Stone M, Deboutte D, Leckman PE, Ruchkin V. Violence exposure and substance use in adolescents: findings from three countries. Pediatrics.2003;111:535–540.
77. Wallace D, Wallace R. A Plague on Your Houses: How New York Was Burned Down and National Public Health Crumbled. New York, NY: Verso, 1998.
78. Fullilove MT. Root shock: the consequences of African American dispossession. J Urban Health.2001; 78:72–80.[Web of Science][Medline]
79. Rhodes T, Singer M, Bourgois P, Friedman SR, Strathdee S. The social structural production of HIV risk among injecting drug users. Soc Sci Med.2005: 61:1026–1044.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
80. Friedman SR, Curtis R, Neaigus A, Jose B, Des Jarlais DC. Social networks, drug injectors’ lives and HIV/AIDS. New York, New York: Kluwer/Plenum, 1999.
81. Sterk-Elifson C, Elifson KW. Someone to count on: homeless, male drug users and their friendship relations. Urban Anthropol.1992;21:235–251.
82. Mellor JM, Milyo J. Is exposure to income inequality a public health concern? Lagged effects of income inequality on individual and population health. Health Serv Res.2003;1:137–151.
83. Lyson T, Torres R, Welsh R. Scale of agricultural production, civic engagement, and community welfare. Soc Forces.2001;80:311–327.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
84. Blakely T, Lochner K, Kawachi I. Metropolitan area income inequality and self-rated health—a multilevel study. Soc Sci Med.2002;54:65–77.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
85. Standards for defining metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. 65 Federal Register 82228–82238 (2000).
86. State and Metropolitan Area Data Book, 1997–1998. Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census; 1998.
87. Historical Metropolitan Area Definitions. Available at: http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/pastmetro.html. Vol 2005. Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census; 2005. Accessed June 19, 2006.
88. Lieberson S, Carter DK. A model for inferring the voluntary and involuntary causes of residential segregation. Demography.1982;19:511–526.[Web of Science][Medline]
89. Bell W. A probability model for the measurement of ecological segregation. Soc Forces.1954;32: 357–364.[Medline]
90. Massey D, Denton N. The elusive quest for the perfect index of concentration: reply to Egan, Anderton, and Weber. Soc Forces.1998;76:1123–1133.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
91. Larson A, Stevens A, Wardlaw G. Indirect estimates of "hidden" populations: capture-recapture methods to estimate the numbers of heroin users in the Australian Capital Territory. Soc Sci Med.1994;39: 823–831.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
92. Larson A, Bammer G. Why? Who? How? Estimating numbers of illicit drug users: lessons from a case study from the Australian Capital Territory. Aust N Z J Public Health.1996;20:493–499.[Web of Science][Medline]
93. Hickman M, Cox S, Harvey J, et al. Estimating the prevalence of problem drug use in inner London: a discussion of three capture-recapture studies. Addiction.1999;94:1653–1662.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
94. Cox S, Shipley M. Counting the uncatchable? An epidemiological method for counting drug misusers. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol.1997;32:19–23.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
95. Friedman SR, Tempalski B, Cooper H, et al. Estimating number of injecting drug users in metropolitan areas for structural analyses of community vulnerability and for assessing relative degrees of service provision for injecting drug users. J Urban Health.2004;81: 377–400.[Web of Science][Medline]
96. Turner C, Ku L, Rogers S, Lindberg L, Pleck J, Sonenstein F. Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science.1998;280:867–873.
97. Wright D, Gfroerer J. Ratio estimation of hardcore drug users. J Official Stat.1997;13:401–416.
98. HIV Counseling and Testing in Publicly Funded Sites. Annual Report. 1997–1998. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1999.
99. Treatment Episode Data Set. Available at: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu:8080/SAMHDA-SERIES/00056.xml. Accessed June 19, 2006.
100. AIDS Public Information Data Set. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000:1–52.
101. Fox J. Regression Diagnostics. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage; 1991. Lewis-Beck MS, ed. Quantitative Applications in the Social Science; Vol 79.
102. Hartwig F, Dearing BE. Exploratory Data Analysis. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage; 1979. Weber RE, ed. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences; Vol 16.
103. Crum R, Lillie-Blanton M, Anthony JC. Neighborhood environment and opportunity to use cocaine and other drugs in late childhood and early adolescence. Drug Alc Depend.1996;43:155–161.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
104. Yen I, Ragland D, Greiner B, Fisher J. Racial discrimination and alcohol-related behavior in urban transit operators: findings from the San Francisco Muni Health and Safety Study. Public Health Rep.1999;114: 448–458.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
105. Martin JK, Tuch SA, Roman PM. Problem drinking patterns among African-Americans: the impacts of reports of discrimination, perceptions of prejudice, and "risky" coping strategies. J Health Soc Behav.2003;44: 408–425.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
106. Bennet GC, Yaus Wolin K, Robinson EL, Fowler S, Edwards CL. Perceived racial/ethnic harassment and tobacco use among African-American young adults. Am J Public Health.2005;95:238–240.
107. Richman JA, Flaherty JA, Rospenda KM. Perceived workplace harassment experiences and problem drinking among physicians: broadening the stress/alienation perspective. Addiction.1996;91:391–403.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
108. Landrine H, Klonoff EA. Racial discrimination and cigarette smoking among Blacks: findings from two studies. Ethn Dis.2000;10:195–202.[Medline]
109. Guthrie BJ, Young AM, Williams DR, Boyd CJ, Kinter EK. African American girls’ smoking habits and day-to-day experiences with racial discrimination. Nurs Res.2002;51:183–190.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
110. Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, Cleveland MJ, Wills TA, Brody G. Perceived discrimination and substance use in African American parents and their children: a panel study. J Pers Soc Psychol.2004;86:517–529.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
111. Caldwell CH, Sellers RM, Bernat D, Zimmerman MA. Racial identity, parental support, and alcohol use in a sample of academically at-risk African-American high school students. Am J Community Psychol.2004; 34:71–82.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
112. Amaro H, Whitaker R, Coffman G, Heeren T. Acculturation and marijuana and cocaine use: findings from HHANES. 1982–1984. Am J Public Health.1990;80:54–60.
113. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR. Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.
114. LaVeist T. Race, Ethnicity, and Health: A Public Health Reader. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
115. Polednak A. Trends in US urban Black infant mortality, by degree of racial segregation. Am J Public Health.1996;86:723–726.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. R. Kramer and C. R. Hogue Is Segregation Bad for Your Health? Epidemiol. Rev., June 9, 2009; (2009) mxp001v2. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
