Subsaharan African vs Ute Vision Disability
COMPARE
Subsaharan African
 Ute
 Vision Disability
Vision Disability Comparison
Sub-Saharan Africans
Ute
2.3%
VISION DISABILITY
0.5/ 100
METRIC RATING
248th/ 347
METRIC RANK
2.4%
VISION DISABILITY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
267th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Subsaharan African vs Ute Vision Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 507,474,731 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Sub-Saharan Africans and percentage of population with vision disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.288 and weighted average of 2.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 55,653,653 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Ute and percentage of population with vision disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.323 and weighted average of 2.4%, a difference of 2.2%.
 
Vision Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Subsaharan African | Ute | 
| Minimum | 0.34% | 1.2% | 
| Maximum | 9.3% | 7.6% | 
| Range | 9.0% | 6.4% | 
| Mean | 2.6% | 2.9% | 
| Median | 2.3% | 2.5% | 
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.0% | 2.1% | 
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 2.7% | 3.5% | 
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 0.74% | 1.5% | 
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.6% | 1.5% | 
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.6% | 1.4% | 
Demographics Similar to Sub-Saharan Africans and Ute by Vision Disability
In terms of vision disability, the demographic groups most similar to Sub-Saharan Africans are Liberian (2.3%, a difference of 0.010%), Guatemalan (2.3%, a difference of 0.020%), Bangladeshi (2.3%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Laos (2.4%, a difference of 0.21%), and Immigrants from Micronesia (2.4%, a difference of 0.53%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Ute are Mexican American Indian (2.4%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Jamaica (2.4%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Liberia (2.4%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Belize (2.4%, a difference of 0.20%), and Jamaican (2.4%, a difference of 0.46%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Vision Disability | 
| Guatemalans | 0.5 /100 | #247  | Tragic 2.3%  | 
| Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.5 /100 | #248  | Tragic 2.3%  | 
| Liberians | 0.5 /100 | #249  | Tragic 2.3%  | 
| Bangladeshis | 0.5 /100 | #250  | Tragic 2.3%  | 
| Immigrants | Laos | 0.4 /100 | #251  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Micronesia | 0.3 /100 | #252  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Japanese | 0.3 /100 | #253  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Haitians | 0.3 /100 | #254  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Guatemala | 0.3 /100 | #255  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Haiti | 0.2 /100 | #256  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| West Indians | 0.2 /100 | #257  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| British West Indians | 0.2 /100 | #258  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Whites/Caucasians | 0.2 /100 | #259  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Belizeans | 0.2 /100 | #260  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Fijians | 0.1 /100 | #261  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Jamaicans | 0.1 /100 | #262  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Belize | 0.1 /100 | #263  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #264  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #265  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Mexican American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #266  | Tragic 2.4%  | 
| Ute | 0.1 /100 | #267  | Tragic 2.4%  |