Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28784135›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health geographics2017

Transforming geographic scale: a comparison of combined population and areal weighting to other interpolation methods.

Elaine Hallisey, Eric Tai, Andrew Berens, Grete Wilt, Lucy Peipins, Brian Lewis, Shannon Graham, Barry Flanagan, Natasha Buchanan Lunsford

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health geographics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. COVID-19 Community Incidence and Associated Neighborhood-Level Characteristics in Houston, Texas, USA.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Differences in Travel Time to Cancer Surgery for Colon versus Rectal Cancer in a Rural State: A New Method for Analyzing Time-to-Place Data Using Survival Analysis.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Elaine HalliseyAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA. ehallisey@cdc.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-9733-9611
Eric TaiDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Andrew BerensAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Grete WiltAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Lucy PeipinsDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Brian LewisAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Shannon GrahamAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Barry FlanaganAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F09, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Natasha Buchanan LunsfordDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransforming spatial data from one scale to another is a challenge in geographic analysis. As part of a larger, primary study to determine a possible association between travel barriers to pediatric cancer facilities and adolescent cancer mortality across the United States, we examined methods to estimate mortality within zones at varying distances from these facilities: (1) geographic centroid assignment, (2) population-weighted centroid assignment, (3) simple areal weighting, (4) combined population and areal weighting, and (5) geostatistical areal interpolation. For the primary study, we used county mortality counts from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and population data by census tract for the United States to estimate zone mortality. In this paper, to evaluate the five mortality estimation methods, we employed address-level mortality data from the state of Georgia in conjunction with census data. Our objective here is to identify the simplest method that returns accurate mortality estimates.

resultsThe distribution of Georgia county adolescent cancer mortality counts mirrors the Poisson distribution of the NCHS counts for the U.S. Likewise, zone value patterns, along with the error measures of hierarchy and fit, are similar for the state and the nation. Therefore, Georgia data are suitable for methods testing. The mean absolute value arithmetic differences between the observed counts for Georgia and the five methods were 5.50, 5.00, 4.17, 2.74, and 3.43, respectively. Comparing the methods through paired t-tests of absolute value arithmetic differences showed no statistical difference among the methods. However, we found a strong positive correlation (r = 0.63) between estimated Georgia mortality rates and combined weighting rates at zone level. Most importantly, Bland-Altman plots indicated acceptable agreement between paired arithmetic differences of Georgia rates and combined population and areal weighting rates.

conclusionsThis research contributes to the literature on areal interpolation, demonstrating that combined population and areal weighting, compared to other tested methods, returns the most accurate estimates of mortality in transforming small counts by county to aggregated counts for large, non-standard study zones. This conceptually simple cartographic method should be of interest to public health practitioners and researchers limited to analysis of data for relatively large enumeration units.

Indexed as

CensusesSpatial AnalysisAdolescentFemaleGeorgiaHumansMaleNeoplasmsPopulation SurveillanceUnited StatesYoung AdultAdolescent cancerAreal interpolationAreal weightingCompressed Mortality FileDisaggregationGeographic scalePopulation weighting

Identifiers

PMID28784135
PMCPMC5547484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.