Eastern European vs Burmese Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Eastern European
Burmese
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Eastern Europeans
Burmese
13.5%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
26th/ 347
METRIC RANK
13.0%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
14th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Eastern European vs Burmese Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 448,083,832 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Eastern Europeans and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.711 and weighted average of 13.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 454,212,415 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Burmese and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.126 and weighted average of 13.0%, a difference of 3.9%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Eastern European | Burmese |
Minimum | 1.0% | 1.2% |
Maximum | 100.0% | 43.4% |
Range | 99.0% | 42.2% |
Mean | 15.5% | 10.3% |
Median | 9.0% | 9.2% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.7% | 6.6% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.3% | 12.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 9.6% | 6.1% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 21.1% | 6.8% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 20.8% | 6.8% |
Demographics Similar to Eastern Europeans and Burmese by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Eastern Europeans are Latvian (13.5%, a difference of 0.020%), Tongan (13.6%, a difference of 0.28%), Bolivian (13.6%, a difference of 0.40%), Immigrants from China (13.4%, a difference of 0.78%), and Asian (13.7%, a difference of 1.1%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Burmese are Okinawan (13.0%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Lithuania (13.1%, a difference of 0.93%), Bulgarian (13.1%, a difference of 1.0%), Immigrants from Korea (13.1%, a difference of 1.0%), and Immigrants from Ireland (12.9%, a difference of 1.1%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Immigrants | Iran | 100.0 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 12.6% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 100.0 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 12.7% |
Bhutanese | 100.0 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 12.7% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 12.9% |
Burmese | 99.9 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 13.0% |
Okinawans | 99.9 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 13.0% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 13.1% |
Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 13.1% |
Immigrants | Korea | 99.9 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 13.1% |
Cypriots | 99.9 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 13.2% |
Immigrants | Japan | 99.9 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 13.3% |
Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs | 99.9 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 13.3% |
Indians (Asian) | 99.9 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 13.3% |
Norwegians | 99.9 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 13.3% |
Immigrants | Eastern Asia | 99.9 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 13.4% |
Immigrants | China | 99.8 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 13.4% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.8 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 13.5% |
Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 13.5% |
Tongans | 99.8 /100 | #28 | Exceptional 13.6% |
Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #29 | Exceptional 13.6% |
Asians | 99.7 /100 | #30 | Exceptional 13.7% |