Author: School of Social Work
Last saved by: Sekar Thiagarajan
Company: University of Washington

TABLES

Table 1. Major Factors in Child Mortality, 1900

________________________________________________________________________
Factor			Risk			Protective		Mortality Differential

Race			Black			White			.30
Urban Context		City>25,000		Town<5,000		.30
Regional Context	New England		South Atlantic		.22
Unemployment	Husband Unempl	Husband Empl		.16
Housing Tenure	Rents Home		Owns Farm Clear	.16
Shared Housing	Boarders Present	No Boarders		.15
Occupation		Laborer		Farmer			.15
Paternal Literacy	Husband Illiterate	Husband Lit		.12
Maternal Literacy	Wife Illiterate		Wife Literate		.10
________________________________________________________________________

Note: The above 9 factors are identified by Preston and Haines (1991, p. 175) as the most discriminating with respect to 1900 child mortality. The criterion for selection Preston and Haines utilized was that each factor accounted for at least 5 percent of the variance in child mortality when all the other variables found to be related to child mortality were controlled. 

Table 2. Demographic Correlates of Infant Mortality Decline
(1929 Birth Registration States, N=44)
________________________________________________________________________

1920 Household Level
Variables in Order of 					Partial Correlations
Relationship to Child Mortality	Correlations		(1910 IMR Controlled)
Proportion Females 15-44 Black	 .418**		-.195
Proporion MMHH in Cities>25,000	-.228			 .134
New England State			 .098			 .020
Proportion of MMHH Unemployed	-.756**		-.524**
Proportion of MMHH Rent Home	 .307*			-.157
#Boarders/Family Households	-.435**		-.345*
Proportion of MMHH Laborers	-.095			-.511**
Proportion of MMHH Illiterate	  .094			-.318*
Proportion of MF Illiterate		 .174			-.490**
Proportion of MF Speak No English	-.494**		-.507** 

Household Income
MMHH Mdn Occ. Income Score	-.181			-.131

Public Health Resources
Years of Birth Registration		-.309*			  .171
Physicians/1000 Persons		-.157			  .079
Typhoid Fever Rate Decline		 .285			-.205		
________________________________________________________________________
Note: The household-level variables are selected on the basis of the Preston and Haines (1991) analysis of the major correlates of child mortality in 1900, as shown on Table 1. Each variable was found by Preston and Haines to be positively correlated with child mortality (expressed as the life table function q5 or the cumulative probability of dying before age 5), which suggests they should be negatively correlated with the decline in infant mortality. The exception is the English speaking ability of married females, which Preston and Haines speculated may have become more important after 1900 as better information on effective maternal child health practices became widely available to the public. 
  *p<.05
**p<.01

Table 3. Demographic Predictors of Infant Mortality Decline: Stepwise Regression
	  Results 
	(1929 Birth Registration States, N=44)

________________________________________________________________________

Control Variable		
				   		b	  SE	 	B	 t-value
1910 IMR				         .747	     .068	.807	10.936

Significant Predictors
Proportion of MMHH Unemployed	-611.324	141.080	-.295	-4.333
Proportion of MF Illiterate		  -88.087	  23.634	-.222	-3.727
Proportion of MMHH Laborers	  -84.518	  26.050	-.177	-3.244

Intercept				     4.036	  11.209		   .360
Adjusted R= .886

Variables Excluded			β		t-value
#Boarders/Family Households	-.021		-.335
Proportion of MMHH Illiterate	 .013		 .172
Proportion MF Speak No English	-.065		 .373

Descriptives: Significant Predictors
					Mean		S.D.		Min		Max
Control Variable			121.18		26.25		68.00		170.00

Predictors
Proportion of MMHH Unemployed	.03		.01		.01		.07
Proportion of MF Illiterate		.07		.06		.01		.28
Proportion of MMHH Laborers	.16		.05		.08		.34
________________________________________________________________________

Table 4. Change Modeling of Predictors

________________________________________________________________________
					Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
					Observed	Favorable 	Favorable
Fixed Components			Mean		Unit Change	SD Change
Intercept				    4.03		    4.03		   4.03
IMR 1910				  90.52		  90.52		 90.52

Change Components					Adjusted Effects
Proportion MMHH Unemployed	-18.34		-12.23		-12.23
Proportion MF Illiterate		 - 6.16		  -5.28		    -.88
Proportion MMHH Laborers		-13.52		-12.68		-  9.30

Estimated Decline			 56.53		 64.36		 72.14
________________________________________________________________________

Note: The actual observed average decline in state infant mortality rates was 55.60 infant deaths per thousand, thus confirming the fit of Model 1.		

Table 5. Analysis of Sheppard-Towner Program Effects 1910-1930
(N=44 States)

________________________________________________________________________
Model: =a+β1X1+β2X2+β3X3+βi
= residual of 1930 IMR predicted by 1910 IMR
β1=Proportion of MMHH Unemployed
β2=Proportion of MF Illiterate
β3=Proportion of MMHH Laborers
βi=Program Activity
Baseline Adjusted R= .563
(=a+β1X1+β2X2+β3X3)
				  β 	t-value		Change in Adjusted R-Squared
Child Health Conference	 .148	  1.49		.013
Classes for Girls		 .157	  1.47		.012
Classes for Women		-.038	-  .35		.010
Classes for Midwives		-.167 	-1.66		.018
PHN Home Visits		 .165	  1.65		.018
Literature Distribution	 .101	  1.00		.000
Public Demonstrations	 .001	   .01		.029
Professional Staffing		 .157	  1.59 		.016	
Child Health Centers		-.030	 - .28		.010
Perinatal Letters		 .116	  1.16		.004
Institutional Visits		-.123	 -1.21		.004
County Coverage		-.045	-   .44		.009
Total Program Activity	 .146	   1.41		.053
________________________________________________________________________
Note: A negative coefficient indicates a beneficial effect, in that a positive residual represents an observed 1930 IMR that is above that predicted by the 1910 IMR.