Table 1
Health of Haitian Immigrants, by Pre-Migration Exposure to the Duvalier Regimea.
| Health | Pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime,b No. (%) | No pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime, No. (%) | P Valuec |
|---|---|---|---|
| Males (n = 2 438) | |||
| Excellent | 545 (24.27) | 70 (36.46) | <.001 |
| Very good | 759 (33.79) | 72 (37.50) | |
| Good | 686 (30.54) | 43 (22.40) | |
| Fair | 194 (8.638) | 4 (2.083) | |
| Poor | 62 (2.760) | 3 (1.562) | |
| Total | 2246 (100) | 192 (100) | |
| Females (n = 2 800) | |||
| Excellent | 552 (21.21) | 79 (39.90) | <.001 |
| Very good | 818 (31.44) | 67 (33.84) | |
| Good | 824 (31.67) | 41 (20.71) | |
| Fair | 278 (10.68) | 6 (3.030) | |
| Poor | 130 (4.996) | 5 (2.525) | |
| Total | 2602 (100) | 198 (100) | |
[i] a Table entries are counts and frequencies of Haitian immigrants in the United States.
b Individuals who were born in Haiti before or during the Duvalier regime and migrated to the United States during or after the Duvalier regime.
c P values are from chi-square tests.
Table 2
Decades of the Duvalier Regime in Haiti and Immigrant Health in the United Statesa.
| Health status | Average Marginal Effect (95% Confidence Interval)b | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Males (n = 2 438) | Females (n = 2 800) |
| Unadjusted | ||
| Excellent | –0.0731 [–0.0884, –0.0577] | –0.0846 [–0.0980, –0.0712] |
| Very good | –0.0178 [–0.0227, –0.0128] | –0.0281 [–0.0337, –0.0226] |
| Good | 0.0482 [0.0379, 0.0584] | 0.0496 [0.0415, 0.0577] |
| Fair | 0.0293 [0.0222, 0.0364] | 0.0356 [0.0290, 0.0422] |
| Poor | 0.0134 [0.00936, 0.0174] | 0.0275 [0.0216, 0.0335] |
| Adjustedc | ||
| Excellent | –0.0293 [–0.0529, –0.00582] | –0.0280 [–0.0481, –0.00786] |
| Very good | –0.00680 [–0.0123, –0.00130] | –0.00864 [–0.0149, –0.00238] |
| Good | 0.0194 [0.00381, 0.0350] | 0.0166 [0.00461, 0.0286] |
| Fair | 0.0116 [0.00226, 0.0209] | 0.0114 [0.00320, 0.0197] |
| Poor | 0.00519 [0.000959, 0.00943] | 0.00859 [0.00231, 0.0149] |
[i] a Table entries are average marginal effects and 95% confidence intervals from ordered probit regressions of the distribution of health status on the number of decades of pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime. For each individual, the number of decades of pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime includes those years of the Duvalier regime during or after their year of birth and before or during their year of migration.
b Estimates and 95% confidence intervals are weighted by the sampling probabilities.
c Adjustments are for the observed distributions of age, age squared, and age cubed.
Table 3
Decades since the Duvalier Regime in Haiti and Immigrant Health in the United Statesa.
| Health status | Average Marginal Effect (95% Confidence Interval)b | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Males (n = 2 246) | Females (n = 2 602) |
| Unadjusted | ||
| Excellent | –0.0290 [–0.0476, –0.0104] | –0.0463 [–0.0623, –0.0302] |
| Very good | –0.00795 [–0.0133, –0.00256] | –0.0182 [–0.0249, –0.0114] |
| Good | 0.0191 [0.00685, 0.0314] | 0.0273 [0.0179, 0.0367] |
| Fair | 0.0123 [0.00422, 0.0204] | 0.0212 [0.0134, 0.0289] |
| Poor | 0.00553 [0.00174, 0.00933] | 0.0160 [0.00976, 0.0221] |
| Adjustedc | ||
| Excellent | 0.0331 [0.0116, 0.0546] | 0.0234 [0.00554, 0.0413] |
| Very good | 0.00875 [0.00299, 0.0145] | 0.00870 [0.00205, 0.0153] |
| Good | –0.0219 [–0.0361, –0.00769] | –0.0140 [–0.0248, –0.00326] |
| Fair | –0.0139 [–0.0229, –0.00477] | –0.0104 [–0.0184, –0.00242] |
| Poor | –0.00612 [–0.0103, –0.00197] | –0.00769 [–0.0136, –0.00180] |
[i] a Table entries are average marginal effects and 95% confidence intervals from ordered probit regressions of the distribution of health status on the number of decades since pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime. For each individual, pre-migration residence in Haiti during the Duvalier regime includes those years of the Duvalier regime during or after their year of birth and before or during their year of migration from Haiti to the United States.
b Estimates and 95% confidence intervals are weighted by the sampling probabilities.
c Adjustments are for the observed distributions of age, age squared, and age cubed.
Table 4
Duvalier Regime in Haiti and Immigrant Education and Income in the United Statesa.
| Average Marginal Effect (95% Confidence Interval)b | ||
|---|---|---|
| Decades of the Duvalier regime | ||
| Males (n = 2 438) | Females (n = 2 800) | |
| Educationc | –0.0800 [–0.107, –0.0527] | –0.141 [–0.164, –0.117] |
| Incomed | ||
| 150% FPL and above | –0.102 [–0.135, –0.0687] | –0.117 [–0.148, –0.0872] |
| 125 to 149% FPL | 0.0138 [0.00881, 0.0188] | 0.00923 [0.00633, 0.0121] |
| 100 to 124% FPL | 0.0136 [0.00850, 0.0186] | 0.0167 [0.0118, 0.0217] |
| Below 100% FPL | 0.0745 [0.0498, 0.0991] | 0.0915 [0.0675, 0.116] |
| Decades since the Duvalier regime | ||
| Males (n = 2 246) | Females (n = 2 602) | |
| Education | 0.0839 [0.0596, 0.108] | 0.112 [0.0933, 0.130] |
| Income | ||
| 150% FPL and above | 0.0773 [0.0457, 0.109] | 0.115 [0.0869, 0.142] |
| 125 to 149% FPL | –0.0112 [–0.0162, –0.00626] | –0.00889 [–0.0116, –0.00615] |
| 100 to 124% FPL | –0.0106 [–0.0154, –0.00579] | –0.0171 [–0.0220, –0.0123] |
| Below 100% FPL | –0.0555 [–0.0783, –0.0326] | –0.0886 [–0.111, –0.0667] |
[i] FPL = federal poverty level.
a Table entries are average marginal effects and 95% confidence intervals from ordered probit regressions of the distribution of the outcomes on the number of decades of the Duvalier regime, and the number of decades since pre-migration residence during the Duvalier regime, adjusted for the observed distributions of cubic age trends.
b Estimates and 95% confidence intervals are weighted by the sampling probabilities.
c Educational attainment identifies those individuals who completed any high school education.
d Household income categories compare total family income given the number of children in the family, to poverty thresholds defined annually by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Households with income below 100% of the FPL live in poverty.
Table 5
Robustness of Associations of the Duvalier Regime in Haiti with Immigrant Health, Education, and Income in the United States to Quadratic Age Trend Adjustmentsa.
| Average Marginal Effect (95% Confidence Interval)b | ||
|---|---|---|
| Decades of the Duvalier regime | ||
| Health status | Males (n = 2 438) | Females (n = 2 800) |
| Excellent | –0.0314 [–0.0555, –0.00722] | –0.0310 [–0.0514, –0.0105] |
| Very good | –0.00725 [–0.0129, –0.00159] | –0.00949 [–0.0158, –0.00317] |
| Good | 0.0207 [0.00474, 0.0367] | 0.0184 [0.00618, 0.0306] |
| Fair | 0.0124 [0.00278, 0.0219] | 0.0126 [0.00425, 0.0209] |
| Poor | 0.00555 [0.00118, 0.00992] | 0.00948 [0.00311, 0.0158] |
| Educationc | –0.0774 [–0.105, –0.0497] | –0.143 [–0.167, –0.120] |
| Incomed | ||
| 150% FPL and above | –0.0988 [–0.133, –0.0646] | –0.127 [–0.158, –0.0969] |
| 125 to 149% FPL | 0.0134 [0.00835, 0.0184] | 0.00997 [0.00700, 0.0129] |
| 100 to 124% FPL | 0.0132 [0.00805, 0.0183] | 0.0181 [0.0131, 0.0232] |
| Below 100% FPL | 0.0722 [0.0468, 0.0976] | 0.0992 [0.0750, 0.123] |
| Decades since the Duvalier regime | ||
| Health status | Males (n = 2 246) | Females (n = 2 602) |
| Excellent | 0.0326 [0.0110, 0.0542] | 0.0241 [0.00613, 0.0420] |
| Very good | 0.00863 [0.00284, 0.0144] | 0.00890 [0.00226, 0.0155] |
| Good | –0.0216 [–0.0358, –0.00731] | –0.0144 [–0.0253, –0.00361] |
| Fair | –0.0136 [–0.0228, –0.00453] | –0.0106 [–0.0186, –0.00266] |
| Poor | –0.00602 [–0.0102, –0.00187] | –0.00789 [–0.0138, –0.00199] |
| Education | 0.0835 [0.0592, 0.108] | 0.112 [0.0935, 0.130] |
| Income | ||
| 150% FPL and above | 0.0750 [0.0433, 0.107] | 0.116 [0.0887, 0.144] |
| 125 to 149% FPL | –0.0109 [–0.0159, –0.00597] | –0.00900 [–0.0117, –0.00626] |
| 100 to 124% FPL | –0.0103 [–0.0151, –0.00550] | –0.0174 [–0.0222, –0.0125] |
| Below 100% FPL | –0.0537 [–0.0767, –0.0308] | –0.0899 [–0.112, –0.0682] |
[i] FPL = federal poverty level
a Table entries are average marginal effects and 95% confidence intervals from ordered probit regressions of the distribution of the outcomes on the number of decades of the Duvalier regime, and the number of decades since pre-migration residence during the Duvalier regime, adjusted for the observed distributions of quadratic age trends.
b Estimates and 95% confidence intervals are weighted by the sampling probabilities.
c Educational attainment identifies those individuals who completed any high school education.
d Household income categories compare total family income given the number of children in the family, to poverty thresholds defined annually by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Households with income below 100% of the FPL live in poverty.