It Is Not Just the Southeast—Geographically Pervasive Racial Disparities in Neisseria gonorrhoeae Between Non-Hispanic Black and White US Women

Le résumé fourni par la source

Racial disparities in female gonorrhea rates are not confined to the Southeast; both relative and absolute disparities are equivalent or larger in areas of the Northeast, Midwest, and West. Background Spatial analyses of gonorrhea morbidity among women often highlight the Southeastern United States but may not provide information on geographic variation in the magnitude of racial disparities; such maps also focus on geographic space, obscuring underlying population characteristics. We created a series of visualizations depicting both county-level racial disparities in female gonorrhea diagnoses and variations in population size. Methods We calculated county- and region-level race-specific relative rates (RelR) and between-race rate differences (RDs) and rate ratios (RRs) comparing gonorrhea case rates in non-Hispanic Black (NHB) versus non-Hispanic White (NHW) women. We then created proportional symbol maps with color representing counties' RelR/RD/RR category and symbol size representing counties' female population. Results Gonorrhea rates among NHB women were highest in the Midwest (718.7/100,000) and West (504.8), rates among NHW women were highest in the West (74.1) and Southeast (72.1). The RDs were highest in the Midwest (654.6 excess cases/100,000) and West (430.7), whereas the RRs were highest in the Northeast (12.4) and Midwest (11.2). Nearly all US counties had NHB female rates ≥3× those in NHW women, with NHB women in most highly populated counties experiencing ≥9-fold difference in gonorrhea rates. Conclusions Racial disparities in gonorrhea were not confined to the Southeast; both relative and absolute disparities were equivalent or larger in magnitude in areas of the Northeast, Midwest, and West. Our findings help counter damaging regional stereotypes, provide evidence to refocus prevention efforts to areas of highest disparities, and suggest a useful template for monitoring racial disparities as an actionable public health metric.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.