A Novel Method for Evaluating and Comparing Community Health Reports

This study assessed the comprehensiveness and efficiency of existing Flint area public health community data using a novel method. One hundred thirty-eight community public health data reports were identified and screened for inclusion from Internet searches and community partner interviews.

Forty-two Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-based health metrics were adopted as a standard for unbiased comparison. For each report, a percentage "match-to-standard" was calculated (i.e., we calculated the percentage of CDC recommended metrics that were covered in the report). The two locally generated reports with the highest match-to-standard scores were compared for overlap.

There were 138 initially identified reports, and 110 unique reports remained after duplicates were removed. Twenty public health data reports met inclusion criteria and were included in the final sample. The top local public health data report yielded a 59.5% match-to-standard, indicating a 23.8% gap in current Flint area community data. Evaluation across all reports yielded an 89.3% match-to-standard with a 10.7% gap. An overlap of 70% exists between the two local reports with the highest match-to-standard scores.

This research identified key health metrics not captured by current locally generated Flint public health reports. The 23.8% gap indicates an opportunity to improve local public health data report comprehensiveness. The 70% overlap across the two local reports with greatest match-to-standard scores generated locally, indicates potential duplication and an opportunity to improve efficiency.