Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28026709›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2016

Misclassification errors from postal code-based geocoding to assign census geography in Nova Scotia, Canada.

Mikiko Terashima, George Kephart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Mikiko TerashimaSchool of Planning, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Healthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS. mikiko.terashima@dal.ca.
George Kephart

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPostal codes are often the only available geographic identifiers in many sources of health data in Canada. In order to conduct geographic analyses, postal codes are routinely geocoded to census geography to link to ecological data. Despite common use of this method, the extent of geographic misclassification errors is poorly understood. We estimated misclassification errors in the geocoding of postal codes to assign census geography in Nova Scotia, Canada.

methodsWe examined differences between counts and match rates for postal-code geocoded and actual locations of buildings in Nova Scotia at two census administrative area levels: dissemination areas (DAs) and census subdivisions (CSDs). Actual locations were based on the data collected by the provincial government containing actual latitude/longitude of buildings. Variation in misclassification by rurality, using Statistics Canada's classification, was also assessed.

resultsOutside two urban areas (Halifax Metro and Sydney) which had <10% differences in counts, many DAs had >30% differences. Match rates showed similar patterns, with the vast majority of non-urban DAs having <40% match rates. Even in major urban areas, 10% of DAs had large misclassification errors. Misclassification errors at the CSD level were still too great to estimate counts or rates without further area aggregation.

conclusionRoutine use of postal code geocoding should be replaced with geocoding of location information using additional identifiers such as civic addresses or latitude and longitude. If data holders did this in-house before providing data to researchers, the accuracy and capacity of geographic analysis would be enhanced while protecting confidentiality.

Indexed as

CensusesGeographic MappingGeographic Information SystemsHumansNova ScotiaReproducibility of ResultsRural PopulationUrban Population

Identifiers

PMID28026709
PMCPMC6972365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.