Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40643978›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

The impact of US assimilation and allotment policy on American Indian mortality.

Grant Miller, Jack Shane, C Matthew Snipp

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Grant MillerSchool of Medicine, Department of Health Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0000-0003-3191-2558
Jack ShaneDepartment of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0009-0005-1842-9045
C Matthew SnippDepartment of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0009-0007-6663-4662

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In contrast to earlier US policies of open war, forcible removal, and relocation to address the "Indian Problem," the Dawes Act of 1887 focused on assimilation and land severalty-making American Indians citizens of the United States with individually titled plots of land rather than members of collective tribes with communal land. Considerable scholarship shows that the consequences of the policy differed substantially from its stated goals, and by the time of its repeal in 1934, American Indians had lost two-thirds of all native land held in 1887 (86 million acres)-and nearly two-thirds of American Indians had become landless or unable to meet subsistence needs. Complementing rich qualitative history, this paper provides quantitative evidence on the demographic impact of the Dawes Act on mortality among American Indian children and adults. Using 1900 and 1910 US population census data to study both household and tribe-level variation in allotment timing, we find that assimilation and allotment policy increased the American Indian child mortality ratio by a little more than 15%. In secondary analyses (requiring additional assumptions) focused on total mortality, we find increases among young American Indians of nearly one-third (implying a decline in life expectancy at birth of about 20%). These results confirm contemporary critics' adamant concerns about the Dawes Act.

Indexed as

Indians, North AmericanMortalityAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHumansMaleUnited StatesAllotmentAmerican Indian mortalitydemography

Identifiers

PMID40643978
PMCPMC12280973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.