ArticleAmerican journal of public health2013
Improving the environmental quality component of the County Health Rankings model.
Article in American journal of public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Proximity to Oil Refineries and Risk of Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
- Spatial patterns in prostate Cancer-specific mortality in Pennsylvania using Pennsylvania Cancer registry data, 2004-2014.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- County Health Rankings and the Cult of the Imperfect.Health services research · 2015Article
- The County Health Rankings: rationale and methods.Population health metrics · 2015Article
- Measuring Subcounty Differences in Population Health Using Hospital and Census-Derived Data Sets: The Missouri ZIP Health Rankings Project.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
- County Health Factors Associated with Avoidable Deaths from Cardiovascular Disease in the United States, 2006-2010.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
- Racial disparities in COVID-19 deaths in Georgia.Journal of healthcare, science and the humanitiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe examined the association between environmental quality measures and health outcomes by using the County Health Rankings data, and tested whether a revised environmental quality measure for 1 state could improve the models.
methodsWe conducted state-by-state, county-level linear regression analyses to determine how often the model's 4 health determinants (social and economic factors, health behaviors, clinical care, and physical environment) were associated with mortality and morbidity outcomes. We then developed a revised measure of environmental quality for West Virginia, and tested whether the revised measure was superior to the original measure.
resultsMeasures of social and economic conditions, and health behaviors, were related to health outcomes in 58% to 88% of state models; measures of environmental quality were related to outcomes in 0% to 8% of models. In West Virginia, the original measure of environmental quality was unrelated to any of the 8 health outcome measures, but the revised measure was significantly related to all 8.
conclusionsThe County Health Rankings model underestimates the impact of the physical environment on public health outcomes. Suggestions for other data sources that may contribute to improved measurement of the physical environment are provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.