Measuring disadvantage: A systematic comparison of United States small-area disadvantage indices

Extensive evidence demonstrates the effects of area-based disadvantage on a variety of life outcomes, such as increased mortality and low economic mobility. Despite these well-established patterns, disadvantage, often measured using composite indices, is inconsistently operationalized across studies. To address this issue, we systematically compared 5 U.S. disadvantage indices at the county-level on their relationships to 24 diverse life outcomes related to mortality, physical health, mental health, subjective well-being, and social capital from heterogeneous data sources. We further examined which domains of disadvantage are most important when creating these indices. Of the five indices examined, the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and Child Opportunity Index 2.0 (COI) were most related to a diverse set of life outcomes, particularly physical health. Within each index, variables from the domains of education and employment were most important in relationships with life outcomes. Disadvantage indices are being used in real-world policy and resource allocation decisions; an index's generalizability across diverse life outcomes, and the domains of disadvantage which constitute the index, should be considered when guiding such decisions.

Automated summary

Extensive evidence shows that area-based disadvantage has negative effects on various life outcomes, including increased mortality and low economic mobility. However, the measurement of disadvantage using composite indices is inconsistent across studies. To address this issue, we compared 5 U.S. disadvantage indices at the county-level and their relationships with 24 diverse life outcomes. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and Child Opportunity Index 2.0 (COI) were found to be most related to a wide range of life outcomes, particularly physical health.