, 1990). While an extensive body of empirical evidence supports gender as a strong determinant of health

(Krieger, 2003 and Sen and Östlin, 2008), other determinants of obesity risk contribute to a more complex picture; the effects of these determinants are difficult to disentangle (Verbrugge, 1985). In health disparities research, obesity risk is often attributed to racial and ethnic differences (Cossrow and Falkner, 2004 and Wang and Beydoun, 2007). However, socioeconomic factors and population density (rural, urban) also play important roles (Wang and Beydoun, 2007 and Zhang and Wang, 2004). In the literature, unique differences in community resiliency, culture, and geography have been found to be associated with attenuated obesity risk, especially among particular subpopulations GSI-IX in vitro (Wang and Beydoun, 2007). Although studying complex causal pathways to disease development is of significant value to obesity SB431542 datasheet research, public health practice often necessitates more applied science, requiring data that can enumerate specific subpopulation needs. At this more granular level, subpopulation health data can aid

program planning and fieldwork by tailoring interventions to specifically address key geo-social factors that influence obesity risk (Frieden, 2010). Information on key attributes of targeted populations (e.g., subgroup obesity prevalence, health profiles and/or health behaviors) can be used to plan programs that address group- or culturally-specific covariates including food preparation style, social norms surrounding eating, etc. Such data provides validation of agency decisions to invest federal funds in obesity prevention. Unfortunately, for most communities, access to subpopulation health data is sparse. In this article, we contribute to public health practice by presenting two case studies of CPPW communities that collected subpopulation health data to document community needs. We specifically described the prevalence of overweight and obesity, and the health risk profiles of low-income women in a clinic setting in rural West Virginia

(WV, Case-Community Rutecarpine No. 1)2 and urban Los Angeles County (LA County, Case-Community No. 2).3 We chose these two specific communities because surveillance of obesity by population density (rural and urban) were key focus areas in the national CPPW program during 2010–2012. We analyzed cross-sectional data from health assessments conducted during the first 15 months of the national CPPW program in rural WV and urban LA County. Both communities participated in several local CPPW interventions and enhanced evaluation activities, including interval assessments of body mass index (BMI) and self-reported dietary behaviors of low-income community-dwelling adults. In WV, CPPW funded interventions in a six-county area. This region is largely rural (U.S.