Capturing cognitive health disparities on the national and state level using 2023 proposed federal racial and ethnic categories: the case for a Middle Eastern and North African checkbox

Abstract Background Most research on cognitive difficulties in the US focus on minoritized groups that are part of the federal minimum reporting guidelines, include White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI) individuals. Research has begun to describe cognitive difficulties among Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) adults, but it is limited because they are defined as White. In 2023, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed adding a separate checkbox for MENA individuals. Our objective was to estimate and compare the odds of cognitive difficulties among MENA adults compared to White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, AI/AN, NH/OPI adults in the US and four states (California, New York, Michigan, and Texas) after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. Method We analyzed data from the 2017‐2021 American Community Survey (ages≥45 years; n = 7,284,988). Cognitive difficulties (yes/no) among adults (ages 45+ years) who self‐identified their race/ethnicity from one of the six minimum reporting categories (White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, AI/AN, NH/OPI) were compared to those who reported a MENA ancestry/birthplace. Result MENA adults in the US had greater odds of reporting cognitive difficulties compared to White, Black, Hispanic, Asian and AI/AN adults, but there was no difference when compared to NH/OPI adults after adjusting for covariates. In California, MENA adults had higher odds of cognitive difficulties compared to White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, and NH/OPI adults. In New York, MENA adults had higher odds of cognitive difficulties compared to Asian adults. MENA adults in New York had lower odds of cognitive difficulties when compared to Black, Hispanic/Latino, and AI/AN adults. In Michigan, MENA adults had lower odds of cognitive difficulties than Black, but higher odds than Hispanic/Latino and Asian adults. In Texas, MENA adults had higher cognitive difficulties compared to White, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian adults. Conclusion This study expands on previous research uncovering cognitive difficulties among Arab Americans using the 2023 OMB proposal to include MENA as a checkbox as part of the minimum reporting standards for race/ethnicity in the US. It also provides the first state‐based estimates of cognitive difficulties among MENA adults living in California, New York, Michigan, and Texas.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.090540
Primary Topic
Migration, Health and Trauma
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Capturing cognitive health disparities on the national and state level using 2023 proposed federal racial and ethnic categories: the case for a Middle Eastern and North African checkbox

Alexandra Smith, Tiffany B. Kindratt
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Migration, Health and Trauma
article

Capturing cognitive health disparities on the national and state level using 2023 proposed federal racial and ethnic categories: the case for a Middle Eastern and North African checkbox

Alexandra Smith, Tiffany B. Kindratt
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Most research on cognitive difficulties in the US focus on minoritized groups that are part of the federal minimum reporting guidelines, include White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI) individuals. Research has begun to describe cognitive difficulties among Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) adults, but it is limited because they are defined as White. In 2023, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed adding a separate checkbox for MENA individuals. Our objective was to estimate and compare the odds of cognitive difficulties among MENA adults compared to White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, AI/AN, NH/OPI adults in the US and four states (California, New York, Michigan, and Texas) after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. Method We analyzed data from the 2017‐2021 American Community Survey (ages≥45 years; n = 7,284,988). Cognitive difficulties (yes/no) among adults (ages 45+ years) who self‐identified their race/ethnicity from one of the six minimum reporting categories (White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, AI/AN, NH/OPI) were compared to those who reported a MENA ancestry/birthplace. Result MENA adults in the US had greater odds of reporting cognitive difficulties compared to White, Black, Hispanic, Asian and AI/AN adults, but there was no difference when compared to NH/OPI adults after adjusting for covariates. In California, MENA adults had higher odds of cognitive difficulties compared to White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, and NH/OPI adults. In New York, MENA adults had higher odds of cognitive difficulties compared to Asian adults. MENA adults in New York had lower odds of cognitive difficulties when compared to Black, Hispanic/Latino, and AI/AN adults. In Michigan, MENA adults had lower odds of cognitive difficulties than Black, but higher odds than Hispanic/Latino and Asian adults. In Texas, MENA adults had higher cognitive difficulties compared to White, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian adults. Conclusion This study expands on previous research uncovering cognitive difficulties among Arab Americans using the 2023 OMB proposal to include MENA as a checkbox as part of the minimum reporting standards for race/ethnicity in the US. It also provides the first state‐based estimates of cognitive difficulties among MENA adults living in California, New York, Michigan, and Texas.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S7)
The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Migration, Health and Trauma
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.