Read on Twitter
I believe this is a pretty risky pilot/study to launch.
Namely, because the n is so small that a single additional infant or maternal death would represent a 170% and 1901% *increase* in death rate, respectively. Analysis
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="đ" title="RĂŒckhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: RĂŒckhand Zeigefinger nach unten"> (1/x) https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1305639662313119745">https://twitter.com/LondonBre...
Namely, because the n is so small that a single additional infant or maternal death would represent a 170% and 1901% *increase* in death rate, respectively. Analysis
This article cites the Black infant death rate at 9.6 per 1000 births. Or 0.0096.
Note that the Press Release from the Mayor& #39;s office did not state absolute death rates. Instead, it mentioned % of overall infant deaths (~15%) (2/x) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/26/black-maternal-mortality-babies-san-francisco-crisis">https://www.theguardian.com/world/201...
Note that the Press Release from the Mayor& #39;s office did not state absolute death rates. Instead, it mentioned % of overall infant deaths (~15%) (2/x) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/26/black-maternal-mortality-babies-san-francisco-crisis">https://www.theguardian.com/world/201...
The press release also that the black death rate is 2x that of whites.
The Chronicle used the same stats.
https://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-london-breed-announces-launch-pilot-program-provide-basic-income-black-and-pacific">https://sfmayor.org/article/m...
The Chronicle used the same stats.
https://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-london-breed-announces-launch-pilot-program-provide-basic-income-black-and-pacific">https://sfmayor.org/article/m...
I reached out to the SF Chronicle and asked why there were not more stats in the article.
I wanted to know how bad this situation is.
Especially since Marc Benioff is referring to it as an epidemic. https://twitter.com/Benioff/status/1305705806050992128?s=20">https://twitter.com/Benioff/s...
I wanted to know how bad this situation is.
Especially since Marc Benioff is referring to it as an epidemic. https://twitter.com/Benioff/status/1305705806050992128?s=20">https://twitter.com/Benioff/s...
The Chronicle did not share much more but did say that there were 430 Black & PI births in SF per year.
So I ran the numbers.
430 * 0.0096 indicates that there are ~4.13 Black & PI infant deaths a year.
This is 4.13 too many.
So I ran the numbers.
430 * 0.0096 indicates that there are ~4.13 Black & PI infant deaths a year.
This is 4.13 too many.
The national maternal death rate is about 17 in 100,000 and *significantly* higher for black women - at 37 per 100,000. I was floored by that delta. Frankly, it made me feel ill.
That death rate would indicate that there are 0.16 Black & PI maternal deaths/year in SF.
(6/x)
That death rate would indicate that there are 0.16 Black & PI maternal deaths/year in SF.
(6/x)
Looking at these numbers I understood why the study felt off to me. Given only 150 women will be in the pilot, a single additional death could really skew the numbers.
One additional infant death --> 169% increase
One additional maternal death --> 1901% increase.
(7/x)
One additional infant death --> 169% increase
One additional maternal death --> 1901% increase.
(7/x)
You can& #39;t run a study where you only look at the results if they are positive.
In this case, a single negative result (additional death) could lead to catastrophic conclusions -- namely that giving assistance to Black & PI mothers leads to a massive increase in death. (8/x)
In this case, a single negative result (additional death) could lead to catastrophic conclusions -- namely that giving assistance to Black & PI mothers leads to a massive increase in death. (8/x)
I am left with a few questions:
1) Is this actually a pilot/study?
2) If yes, why aren& #39;t we ensuring it& #39;s set up for statistically significant results/success?
3) If not, then why are we calling it a pilot?
https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1305639663114137601
(9/x)">https://twitter.com/LondonBre...
1) Is this actually a pilot/study?
2) If yes, why aren& #39;t we ensuring it& #39;s set up for statistically significant results/success?
3) If not, then why are we calling it a pilot?
https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1305639663114137601
(9/x)">https://twitter.com/LondonBre...
4) Did we consider the potentially negative political consequences of this study?
I saw tweets last night that were astounding.
The right is claiming that this is a violation of the 14th amendment, and race-based wealth distribution. https://twitter.com/CassandraRules/status/1306078265933692934">https://twitter.com/Cassandra...
I saw tweets last night that were astounding.
The right is claiming that this is a violation of the 14th amendment, and race-based wealth distribution. https://twitter.com/CassandraRules/status/1306078265933692934">https://twitter.com/Cassandra...
5) If the goal is to study how to save the lives of infants and mothers, why not focus the $2.2M on the highest risk mothers?
If the $1000/month worked, we could have a solid case for massive expansion of the program - to all Blacks, PIs, Latinos, etc.
If the $1000/month worked, we could have a solid case for massive expansion of the program - to all Blacks, PIs, Latinos, etc.
I am befuddled as to how this is framed as a pilot.
Rather - it feels like a way to bring attention to two very serious problems:
1) The severe income inequality of Blacks & PIs in SF.
2) Very small Black & PI populations that are likely shrinking.
(12/x)
Rather - it feels like a way to bring attention to two very serious problems:
1) The severe income inequality of Blacks & PIs in SF.
2) Very small Black & PI populations that are likely shrinking.
(12/x)
