Chilean vs Bhutanese Ambulatory Disability
COMPARE
Chilean
Bhutanese
Ambulatory Disability
Ambulatory Disability Comparison
Chileans
Bhutanese
5.7%
AMBULATORY DISABILITY
99.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
79th/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.8%
AMBULATORY DISABILITY
98.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
89th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chilean vs Bhutanese Ambulatory Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 256,632,151 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chileans and percentage of population with ambulatory disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.042 and weighted average of 5.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 455,305,094 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and percentage of population with ambulatory disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.248 and weighted average of 5.8%, a difference of 0.66%.
Ambulatory Disability Correlation Summary
Measurement | Chilean | Bhutanese |
Minimum | 2.1% | 0.28% |
Maximum | 13.0% | 14.0% |
Range | 10.9% | 13.8% |
Mean | 6.3% | 6.2% |
Median | 5.7% | 5.7% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.9% | 5.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 7.2% | 7.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.2% | 2.0% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 2.4% | 2.1% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 2.3% | 2.1% |
Demographics Similar to Chileans and Bhutanese by Ambulatory Disability
In terms of ambulatory disability, the demographic groups most similar to Chileans are Somali (5.7%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Vietnam (5.7%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Ireland (5.7%, a difference of 0.13%), Immigrants from Jordan (5.7%, a difference of 0.14%), and Palestinian (5.7%, a difference of 0.14%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Australian (5.8%, a difference of 0.0%), Immigrants from Sudan (5.8%, a difference of 0.0%), Soviet Union (5.8%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Chile (5.8%, a difference of 0.16%), and Immigrants from Sierra Leone (5.8%, a difference of 0.17%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Ambulatory Disability |
Immigrants | Cameroon | 99.4 /100 | #74 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Immigrants | South Africa | 99.3 /100 | #75 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Sudanese | 99.3 /100 | #76 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Immigrants | Vietnam | 99.3 /100 | #77 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Somalis | 99.2 /100 | #78 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Chileans | 99.2 /100 | #79 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.2 /100 | #80 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Immigrants | Jordan | 99.2 /100 | #81 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Palestinians | 99.2 /100 | #82 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.2 /100 | #83 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Ugandans | 99.2 /100 | #84 | Exceptional 5.7% |
South Americans | 99.0 /100 | #85 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Latvians | 99.0 /100 | #86 | Exceptional 5.7% |
Immigrants | Chile | 98.9 /100 | #87 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Soviet Union | 98.9 /100 | #88 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Bhutanese | 98.8 /100 | #89 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Australians | 98.8 /100 | #90 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Immigrants | Sudan | 98.8 /100 | #91 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Immigrants | Sierra Leone | 98.6 /100 | #92 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Immigrants | Denmark | 98.6 /100 | #93 | Exceptional 5.8% |
Kenyans | 98.4 /100 | #94 | Exceptional 5.8% |