Pima vs Creek Female Disability
COMPARE
Pima
Creek
Female Disability
Female Disability Comparison
Pima
Creek
14.8%
FEMALE DISABILITY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
332nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.7%
FEMALE DISABILITY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
342nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Pima vs Creek Female Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 61,537,754 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Pima and percentage of females with a disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.578 and weighted average of 14.8%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 178,448,690 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Creek and percentage of females with a disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.565 and weighted average of 15.7%, a difference of 5.9%.
Female Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Pima | Creek |
| Minimum | 8.1% | 8.3% |
| Maximum | 31.0% | 42.6% |
| Range | 22.9% | 34.2% |
| Mean | 16.7% | 20.5% |
| Median | 15.6% | 18.9% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 12.3% | 15.4% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 21.6% | 23.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 9.3% | 8.2% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.4% | 7.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.3% | 7.3% |
Demographics Similar to Pima and Creek by Female Disability
In terms of female disability, the demographic groups most similar to Pima are Immigrants from the Azores (14.9%, a difference of 0.39%), Cherokee (14.9%, a difference of 0.48%), Cajun (14.9%, a difference of 0.50%), Seminole (15.0%, a difference of 1.2%), and Tohono O'odham (15.0%, a difference of 1.3%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Creek are Lumbee (15.8%, a difference of 0.68%), Kiowa (15.8%, a difference of 0.84%), Choctaw (15.4%, a difference of 1.6%), Chickasaw (15.2%, a difference of 3.0%), and Colville (15.1%, a difference of 4.0%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Disability |
| Ottawa | 0.0 /100 | #327 | Tragic 14.2% |
| Cape Verdeans | 0.0 /100 | #328 | Tragic 14.2% |
| Osage | 0.0 /100 | #329 | Tragic 14.3% |
| Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #330 | Tragic 14.5% |
| Immigrants | Cabo Verde | 0.0 /100 | #331 | Tragic 14.6% |
| Pima | 0.0 /100 | #332 | Tragic 14.8% |
| Immigrants | Azores | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 14.9% |
| Cherokee | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 14.9% |
| Cajuns | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 14.9% |
| Seminole | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 15.0% |
| Tohono O'odham | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 15.0% |
| Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 15.0% |
| Colville | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 15.1% |
| Chickasaw | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 15.2% |
| Choctaw | 0.0 /100 | #341 | Tragic 15.4% |
| Creek | 0.0 /100 | #342 | Tragic 15.7% |
| Lumbee | 0.0 /100 | #343 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Kiowa | 0.0 /100 | #344 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Puerto Ricans | 0.0 /100 | #345 | Tragic 16.6% |
| Tsimshian | 0.0 /100 | #346 | Tragic 16.8% |
| Houma | 0.0 /100 | #347 | Tragic 16.9% |