Brazilian vs Immigrants from Zimbabwe Hearing Disability
COMPARE
Brazilian
Immigrants from Zimbabwe
Hearing Disability
Hearing Disability Comparison
Brazilians
Immigrants from Zimbabwe
2.9%
HEARING DISABILITY
78.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
146th/ 347
METRIC RANK
3.0%
HEARING DISABILITY
64.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
165th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Brazilian vs Immigrants from Zimbabwe Hearing Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 323,867,149 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Brazilians and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.115 and weighted average of 2.9%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 117,807,709 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Zimbabwe and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.409 and weighted average of 3.0%, a difference of 1.8%.
Hearing Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Brazilian | Immigrants from Zimbabwe |
| Minimum | 0.82% | 1.1% |
| Maximum | 7.3% | 18.9% |
| Range | 6.5% | 17.8% |
| Mean | 3.1% | 4.3% |
| Median | 2.9% | 3.2% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.6% | 2.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 3.3% | 5.0% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 0.65% | 2.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.2% | 3.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.2% | 3.6% |
Demographics Similar to Brazilians and Immigrants from Zimbabwe by Hearing Disability
In terms of hearing disability, the demographic groups most similar to Brazilians are Tongan (2.9%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Congo (2.9%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Russia (2.9%, a difference of 0.15%), Immigrants from Panama (2.9%, a difference of 0.26%), and Palestinian (2.9%, a difference of 0.69%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Zimbabwe are Immigrants from Cambodia (3.0%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Central America (3.0%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Japan (2.9%, a difference of 0.22%), Albanian (2.9%, a difference of 0.25%), and Immigrants from Fiji (2.9%, a difference of 0.31%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Hearing Disability |
| Immigrants | Congo | 78.9 /100 | #145 | Good 2.9% |
| Brazilians | 78.7 /100 | #146 | Good 2.9% |
| Tongans | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Russia | 77.7 /100 | #148 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Panama | 76.9 /100 | #149 | Good 2.9% |
| Palestinians | 73.6 /100 | #150 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | France | 73.1 /100 | #151 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 73.0 /100 | #152 | Good 2.9% |
| Sudanese | 72.1 /100 | #153 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Lebanon | 71.5 /100 | #154 | Good 2.9% |
| Costa Ricans | 71.4 /100 | #155 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Poland | 70.2 /100 | #156 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 69.6 /100 | #157 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 69.5 /100 | #158 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Australia | 67.4 /100 | #159 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Fiji | 67.1 /100 | #160 | Good 2.9% |
| Albanians | 66.6 /100 | #161 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Japan | 66.3 /100 | #162 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Central America | 64.9 /100 | #163 | Good 3.0% |
| Immigrants | Cambodia | 64.8 /100 | #164 | Good 3.0% |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 64.2 /100 | #165 | Good 3.0% |