Lisette LeMerise 1

Disability Statistics

Lisette LeMerise
Candidate #: ___________
Math SL
May 2017
 Lisette LeMerise 2

Introduction:

I thought of this topic after reflecting on my home life. At home, I have two siblings with

disabilities, and neither of them, especially the eldest, have a true reason for why they have their

disabilities. This concerns and bothers me, especially because oftentimes a cure cannot be found

and thus the quality of life for people that have disabilities is difficult. This includes my siblings

whom I deal with and see on a daily basis. Thus, I know firsthand the effects of having

disabilities. From seizures to trouble speaking, I feel that it is a shame for people to have these

factors on their life. It can affect their ability to get a job, how much pain they are in, and how

well they learn and fit in within society. Thus, I desire to fix this issue, and the best way to start

is to figure out what possible causes are and whether there is a correlation between them. If that

is found, a cure could be developed, or at least ways to prevent the increase of people with

disabilities.

While researching this subject, I came across the common idea that premature births are

associated with disabilities, mainly because the baby is more vulnerable when born preterm, for

it is not fully developed. Thus, the baby may not be fully “formed” at the point of birth, or the

environment may cause an issue with the baby. Therefore, my math IA will focus on

discovering if there is a correlation between the percentage of preterm births and the percentage

of people having disabilities. Also, because I live in Michigan, I decided to focus my topic in

that location because it most directly affects me. It is possible that there may be more preterm

births here due to the poverty associated with cities such as Detroit. Therefore, I will focus my

calculations in these main areas.

 Lisette LeMerise 3

Rationale:

In many countries today, there are issues associated with the rising rates of diseases, especially

when those diseases are not easily understood, have much research for, or have a cure for.

Specific to my topic, one of the categories of diseases that are often difficult to understand are

disabilities, including, but not limited to, visual, auditory, and cognitive disabilities.

Thus, people are often left to wonder whether the rate of those with disabilities is truly rising, a

pressing issue because most would not desire for others to gain adversaries within their life.

However, I think the largest concern comes from not knowing the cause of this rise. There are a

multitude of hypotheses, such as vaccinations that were thought to cause autism, various

medicines, and especially premature births. However, the multitude of hypotheses do not aid the

worry, for there is an issue of discovering causation. Causation, at this point in time, can only

truly be claimed if a controlled experiment is performed. However, doing an experiment on a

human patient may be unethical in and of itself, especially if it is potentially life threatening. In

my scenario, purposely causing someone to have a premature birth or to have disabilities is

definitely unethical due to the lifelong suffering it would cause. Therefore, at this point in time,

the best researchers can do is try to find a correlation between disabilities and the potential

causes. Even with the issue of confounding variables, finding a correlation may still be helpful,

especially if it is strong and plausible, which could give scientists enough evidence to convince

them to take action. Globally, people are born with disabilities every day. Therefore, it is no

wonder a cure, or at the minimum, a prevention tactic, is desired.

 Lisette LeMerise 4

Aim:

In order to delve into my topic, I will first analyze the data I have acquired. To do so, I will

initially look at the data and visually describe a relationship. Then, I will plot the data as a

scatter plot and again visually observe a relationship, to see whether there is a relationship at all

and not a random plot of points. In order to prove there is a correlation, I will then calculate the

correlation coefficient and analyze its meaning. This will be done for a linear regression if

applicable, and then a line of best fit will be created for the data. Therefore, we will be able to

analyze future data through extrapolation and see if further implications may arise. To check my

math in case of errors due to rounding or handwritten math, I will redo the plotted points,

correlation coefficient, and the line of best fit and reanalyze them again to perform a coherence

check. Finally, I will perform a possible example using the line of best fit to extrapolate from the

data and then assess my results and conclusions.

Math:

In sum my question is, is there a correlation between percentages of preterm births in Michigan

and the percentages of people with disabilities in Michigan from the years 2008 to 2013?
 Lisette LeMerise 5

My data is listed in the Table 1 below, with 𝓅 being the variable used to represent the percentage

of preterm births in Michigan, and 𝒹 being the variable used to represent the percentage of

people with disabilities in Michigan.

Year Percentage of People with Percentage of People with

Preterm Births (𝓅) Disabilities (𝒹)

(March of Dimes (Disability, 2013)

Foundation, 2016)

2008 12.7% 13.2%

2009 12.4% 13.1%

2010 12.2% 13.5%

2011 12.0% 14.0%

2012 11.8% 13.5%

2013 11.6% 14.4%

Table 1

Without plotting any points, we can visually see that, as the percentage preterm births decreases

from 2008 to 2013, the percentage of people with disabilities increases. At this point, it appears

that the data follows an inverse relationship, where one variable follows an opposite trend to the

other.
 Lisette LeMerise 6

However, there still may not be a correlation. To check this, it is first best to plot the data and

qualitatively describe the scatter plot.

 Lisette LeMerise 7

If we visually look at the graph after plotting the points, there does seem to be some kind of trend

occurring. Although this is not proven through any kind of quantitative evidence yet, the plotted

points are close enough to a trend to at least conclude that the data is not random. They also

visually appear close enough to a linear trend. However, to prove a correlation quantitatively, it

is best to calculate 𝑟, or the parameter used to represent the correlation coefficient which

indicates how well a linear regression would fit the data. In order to do so, the equation

∑(𝓅−𝓅̅)(𝒹−𝒹̅ )
𝑟= 2 is used, where 𝓅 and 𝒹 keep their representations as specified above, and 𝓅̅
√∑(𝓅−𝓅 ̅)2 (𝑑−𝑑 ̅)2

is the parameter defined as the mean percentage of the percentages of preterm births, and 𝒹̅ is the

parameter defined as the mean percentage of the percentages of people with disabilities.

To find each variable’s respective means, the following equations can be used, where one is to

find the sum of the respective percentages and divide by the number of percentages, or the

number of years in this case, represented by 𝑛.

∑ 𝒹 81.7
𝒹̅ = = = 13.6
𝑛 6

∑ 𝓅 72.7
𝓅̅ = = = 12.1
𝑛 6
 Lisette LeMerise 8

Then, in order to satisfy the correlation coefficient equation, I created Table 2.

𝓅 𝒹 𝓅 − 𝓅̅ 𝒹 − 𝒹̅ (𝓅 − 𝓅̅)(𝒹 − 𝒹̅ ) (𝓅 − 𝓅 ̅)2 (𝑑 − 𝑑 ̅)2

12.7 13.2 0.60 -0.40 -0.24 0.36 0.16

12.4 13.1 0.30 -0.50 -0.15 0.09 0.25

12.2 13.5 0.10 -0.10 -0.01 0.01 0.01

12.0 14.0 -0.10 0.40 -0.04 0.01 0.16

11.8 13.5 -0.30 -0.10 0.03 0.09 0.01

11.6 14.4 -0.50 0.80 -0.40 0.25 0.64

Total 72.7 81.7 0 0 -0.81 0.81 1.23

Table 2
Therefore, we can calculate the correlation coefficient by plugging in the respective values.

∑(𝓅 − 𝓅̅)(𝒹 − 𝒹̅ ) −0.81

𝑟= 2
= 2
= −0.812
√∑(𝓅 − 𝓅 ̅)2 (𝑑 − 𝑑 ̅)2 √0.81(1.23)

The value of 𝑟 indicates the direction and strength of the correlation. The closer the correlation

is to 1, the stronger the correlation, while the sign of 𝑟 indicates the direction of the correlation.

Therefore, in this case, our correlation coefficient indicates a fairly strong, negative correlation.

This means that, as the value of 𝓅 increases, or the percent of preterm births increases, 𝒹

decreases, or the percent of people with disabilities decreases, and that it is likely there is a trend

and correlation between the two. This is actually quite shocking as a result, for most people

assume that preterm births create more disabilities, but these results seem to indicate the
 Lisette LeMerise 9

opposite. Remember, however, that we cannot determine causation from these results anyway.

Causation is only determined by controlled scientific experiments. Nonetheless, because an

experiment in which it would be required to cause preterm births would be unethical, this tactic

is one of the best means of seeing if causation is possible. It just comes down to the fact that

causation cannot officially be determined, but we can say there is a correlation, as indicated by

the correlation coefficient in this case.

To further my research, I’d like to discover a line of best fit to represent the trend we noticed

here. That way, the equation can be used further to predict new data or find data within,

extrapolation and interpolation respectively.

To find the line of best fit, it is more reliable to use the point (𝓅̅, 𝒹̅) = (12.1, 13.2).

Then, in order to create a line, you need at least two points. I’m choosing the point (11.6, 14.4)

in this case because it appears to be closest to being on a line with my first point (𝓅̅, 𝒹̅ ) .

To create a line, use the linear equation 𝒹 = 𝓂𝓅 + 𝑏, where 𝒹 is the percentage of people with

disabilities, 𝓂 is the rate of change of the equation, or the rate by which the percentage of people

with disabilities changes as the number of preterm births change, 𝓅 is the percentage of preterm

births, and 𝑏 is the y-intercept of the line, or the percentage of people with disabilities when there

are no preterm births.

 Lisette LeMerise 10

Δy 𝒹1 −𝒹2
In order to solve for rate of change, we use the equation: Δx = . Therefore:
𝑝1 −𝑝2

13.6 − 14.4
𝑚= = −0.625
12.1 − 11.6

This rate of change indicates that, as the percent of preterm births increases by 1 percent, the

percent of people with disabilities decreases by 0.625 percent.

Then, to finalize the equation and solve for 𝑏, or the y-intercept, we can plug a coordinate into

the equation for rate of change and solve. I chose to use the point (12.1, 13.2) because I know it

will be located on the line, especially if we already used it to find the slope originally. The

(𝓅̅, 𝒹̅) coordinate must be located on the line of best fit.

𝑑 − 13.6
= −0.625
𝑝 − 12.1

𝑑 − 13.6 = −0.625𝑝 + 7.56

𝑑 = −0.625𝑝 + 21.1

The y-intercept, according to this line, indicates that, when 0% of preterm births occur in

Michigan, 21.1% of people have disabilities. Logically, we know that this cannot be the case.

Most likely, the technology will never be developed enough to cause premature births to never

occur, or at least in the near future. However, a y-intercept is necessary for the creation of a line,

so we assume it occurs anyway. Likewise, this is why our scatter plot should not contain any

negative values on the y or x-axes, for a negative percentage can never occur.
 Lisette LeMerise 11

However, in order to check the accuracy of my work, I would like to use the calculator. The

issue by doing math by hand is that rounding is required which decreases accuracy.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Based on the graph in Figure 2, it appears that the points follow a linear correlation as mentioned

in my earlier sketch. Therefore, it’s plausible to use the calculator to calculate a linear

regression. Using LinReg (ax+b), we can calculate the linear line of best fit of L1 and L2, where

L1 includes the values of 𝑝 and L2 includes the values of 𝑑.

Figure 3
According to Figure 3, our correlation coefficient is 𝑟 = −0.815 which is very close to the

correlation coefficient we calculated. Also according to Figure 3, our equation is

𝑑 = −1.00𝑝 + 25.8, which is again fairly close to the equation we calculated.

 Lisette LeMerise 12

To test how well the line of best fit fits the data, we can graph the line on our plotted points as

shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4

Again, it appears that the line fits the data fairly well. We usually check this by looking at the

distribution of the coordinates. If the distribution has a fairly even split in which about half are

above the line and half are below, the line is a fairly accurate representation of the relationship

between the coordinates.

 Lisette LeMerise 13

To take it a step further, I was wondering what would happen if the percentage of preterm births

ever reached 15% in the state of Michigan. In order to calculate this value, a value outside of our

range of data for 𝑝, we must assume the equation 𝑑 = −1.00𝑝 + 25.8 is accurate and that we are

extrapolating our data. Extrapolation means that we are to assume the trend will continue.

𝑑 = −1.00𝑝 + 25.8

𝑑 = −1.00(15.0) + 25.8

𝑑 = 10.8

This means that, when preterm births are at 15.0%, the percentage of people with disabilities will

be at 10.8%. Because we are assuming the trend will continue in years to come, this predicted

value may not be correct. Other factors could occur, such as a drastic decrease in the percentage

of people with disabilities due to the discovery of a cure. Therefore, the value may actually be

lower. In addition, the possibility still exists that the two variables are not even causational. In

fact, another confounding variable or factor could also cause a difference in the predicted

𝑑-value.

Results:

As a result, a linear correlation does exist between the percentage of preterm births in Michigan

and the percentage of people with disabilities in Michigan. However, it is not the type of linear

correlation we’d expect: it is negative. Most would argue an increase in preterm births would be

associated with an increase in people with disabilities, yet we find that as preterm births

increases, people having disabilities decreases. Therefore, if we are looking for a particular

cause, it may be best to look elsewhere to another variable.

 Lisette LeMerise 14

Conclusions

Thus, in conclusion, it would be valuable to continue research, but with another variable. I think

next I would like to look at vaccinations and whether their decrease is correlated with an increase

in people with disabilities. I would find this especially intriguing because current pop science

and the media have people believing that they should stop vaccinating their children because it

could cause autism, a more common, yet still worrisome disease.

I think it would also be beneficial to look into specific disabilities and look for some of their

potential causes. For example, I could look specifically into epilepsy and preterm births to see

how it may apply to my sister. I say this because, in my mathematical research, I left my data

broad. One could hone in on specific ages, disabilities, or even genders. That way, it may be

easier to hone in on a specific cause for a specific aspect, yet it would probably be harder to find

data for. As it was, a limitation of my research was that data was fairly difficult to find,

especially data across a multitude of years. Data is not always collected and it especially is not

always reported because research is difficult and requires funding that may not exist. Therefore,

I would like to look into finding data for more years as well, since I only have six. Six years

indicates a smaller sample size and thus less accurate data.

Another limitation of my research includes low ecological validity, in part due to the low sample

size. By creating a correlation, I am creating a generalization that may not actually occur within

everyone and every place. For example, the fact that I focused on the state of Michigan lowers

ecological validity because, in another state, or even another country, preterm births and

disabilities may have a different correlation. It may just so happen that the entire world may
 Lisette LeMerise 15

show a different correlation, and thus I think it would be beneficial to also look into more

locations to give a greater ability for application, especially on a global scale.

In addition, just because the state of Michigan indicates a negative correlation does not mean that

a child may still be born preterm and have a disability because of it. It may also mean that a

baby born preterm may not have a disability because of it. This is not a guaranteed occurrence in

either setting, for exceptions still occur.

Finally, my research is still valuable in that it provides yet another example that could be applied

to further research. It may contradict or support another point, and thus it is still important. The

desire to help those with disabilities is one we should have, for a life with disabilities is one

encompassing great pain and difficulty. Therefore, we should continue to look into research on

this topic to help anyone across the globe that needs it. After all, people have a natural tendency

to help others, and this may be a large way to do it.

 Lisette LeMerise 16

References

Disability, K. L. (2013). Disability Statistics. Retrieved May 12, 2016, from Cornell University

Disability Statistcs Online Resource for U.S. Disability Statistics:

https://www.disabilitystatistics.org/

March of Dimes Foundation. (2016, May). March of Dimes Peristats. Retrieved May 23, 2016,

from March of Dimes Web site: www.marchofdimes.org/peristats