ArticleTransactions in GIS : TG2014
Geocoding large population-level administrative datasets at highly resolved spatial scales.
Article in Transactions in GIS : TG, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- A cross-sectional ecological analysis of international and sub-national health inequalities in commercial geospatial resource availability.International journal of health geographics · 2018Article
- Geographic Information Systems to Assess External Validity in Randomized Trials.American journal of preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Potential selection bias associated with using geocoded birth records for epidemiologic research.Annals of epidemiology · 2016Article
- Methods and initial findings from the Durham Diabetes Coalition: Integrating geospatial health technology and community interventions to reduce death and disability.Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology · 2015Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Using geographic information systems to link administrative databases with demographic, social, and environmental data allows researchers to use spatial approaches to explore relationships between exposures and health. Traditionally, spatial analysis in public health has focused on the county, zip code, or tract level because of limitations to geocoding at highly resolved scales. Using 2005 birth and death data from North Carolina, we examine our ability to geocode population-level datasets at three spatial resolutions - zip code, street, and parcel. We achieve high geocoding rates at all three resolutions, with statewide street geocoding rates of 88.0% for births and 93.2% for deaths. We observe differences in geocoding rates across demographics and health outcomes, with lower geocoding rates in disadvantaged populations and the most dramatic differences occurring across the urban-rural spectrum. Our results suggest highly resolved spatial data architectures for population-level datasets are viable through geocoding individual street addresses. We recommend routinely geocoding administrative datasets to the highest spatial resolution feasible, allowing public health researchers to choose the spatial resolution used in analysis based on an understanding of the spatial dimensions of the health outcomes and exposures being investigated. Such research, however, must acknowledge how disparate geocoding success across subpopulations may affect findings.
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.