Sudanese vs Bhutanese Ambulatory Disability
COMPARE
Sudanese
Bhutanese
Ambulatory Disability
Ambulatory Disability Comparison
Sudanese
Bhutanese
5.7%
AMBULATORY DISABILITY
99.3/ 100
METRIC RATING
76th/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.8%
AMBULATORY DISABILITY
98.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
89th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Sudanese vs Bhutanese Ambulatory Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 110,129,493 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Sudanese and percentage of population with ambulatory disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.186 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 0.86%.
Ambulatory Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Sudanese | Bhutanese |
| Minimum | 2.1% | 0.28% |
| Maximum | 12.3% | 14.0% |
| Range | 10.2% | 13.8% |
| Mean | 5.8% | 6.2% |
| Median | 5.6% | 5.7% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.8% | 5.0% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 6.3% | 7.0% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 1.5% | 2.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.8% | 2.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.7% | 2.1% |
Demographics Similar to Sudanese and Bhutanese by Ambulatory Disability
In terms of ambulatory disability, the demographic groups most similar to Sudanese are Immigrants from South Africa (5.7%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Cameroon (5.7%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Northern Africa (5.7%, a difference of 0.080%), Brazilian (5.7%, a difference of 0.090%), and Immigrants from Vietnam (5.7%, a difference of 0.17%). 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 |
| Brazilians | 99.4 /100 | #72 | Exceptional 5.7% |
| Immigrants | Northern Africa | 99.4 /100 | #73 | Exceptional 5.7% |
| 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% |