Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Med Care. 2012 Mar;50(3):210–216. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182407c8a

Table 2.

Facility characteristics by vulnerability index (facility population characteristics).

N % with ultrasound services % with biopsy services % affiliated with academic medical center % for profitb
Number of facilities 139 89.9 61.2 10.1 32.3
Educationa
 Non-vulnerable 107 88.8 61.7 10.3 34.0
 Vulnerable 32 93.8 59.4 9.4 25.9
Race/ethnicitya
 Non-vulnerable 113 88.5 61.1 9.7 34.6
 Vulnerable 26 96.2 61.5 11.5 21.7
Rural/urban residenceac
 Non-vulnerable 92 89.1 56.5 13.0 45.0
 Vulnerable 47 91.5 70.2 4.3 10.6
Incomeac
 Non-vulnerable 87 87.4 59.8 13.8 37.7
 Vulnerable 52 94.2 63.5 3.9 24.0
Composite vulnerability scored
 0 58 82.8 48.3 15.5 51.9
 1 35 97.1 77.1 5.7 15.2
 2 22 95.5 72.7 4.6 16.7
 3 18 94.4 77.8 11.0 33.3
 4 6 83.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
a

Facilities serving vulnerable women include those serving: < 83% of the facility population completed high school; > 30% of the facility population are minorities; average percentage of rural residences among the facility population is > 52%; and average median household income among the facility population is < $45,000.

b

% among facilities not missing ‘for profit’ status (12 facilities were missing this information)

c

Rural residence and income are generated from area-level data

d

Composite vulnerability scores were calculated by adding 1 for each of the vulnerability indices met.