Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33292290›Full record

ArticleEmerging themes in epidemiology2020

Comparing methods of performing geographically targeted rural health surveillance.

David C Lee, Nancy A McGraw, Kelly M Doran, Amanda K Mengotto, Sara L Wiener, Andrew J Vinson, Lorna E Thorpe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emerging themes in epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

David C LeeRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, Room A345, New York, NY, 10016, USA. david.lee@nyumc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7202-1893
Nancy A McGrawSullivan County Public Health Services, Liberty, NY, USA.
Kelly M DoranRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, Room A345, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Amanda K MengottoRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, Room A345, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Sara L WienerRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, Room A345, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Andrew J VinsonRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, Room A345, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Lorna E ThorpeDepartment of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

The Impact of the Food Environment and Other Environmental Exposures on the Risk of Diabetes in Rural SettingsR01DK124400 · NIDDK · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI LEE, DAVID C · 2020 to 2024
$3.5M
New York State Health Foundation 16-04083NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK124400
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorsening socioeconomic conditions in rural America have been fueling increases in chronic disease and poor health. The goal of this study was to identify cost-effective methods of deploying geographically targeted health surveys in rural areas, which often have limited resources. These health surveys were administered in New York's rural Sullivan County, which has some of the poorest health outcomes in the entire state.

methodsComparisons were made for response rates, estimated costs, respondent demographics, and prevalence estimates of a brief health survey delivered by mail and phone using address-based sampling, and in-person using convenience sampling at a sub-county level in New York's rural Sullivan County during 2017.

resultsOverall response rates were 27.0% by mail, 8.2% by phone, and 71.4% for convenience in-person surveys. Costs to perform phone surveys were substantially higher than mailed or convenience in-person surveys. All modalities had lower proportions of Hispanic respondents compared to Census estimates. Unadjusted and age-adjusted prevalence estimates were similar between mailed and in-person surveys, but not for phone surveys.

conclusionsThese findings are consistent with declining response rates of phone surveys, which obtained an inadequate sample of rural residents. Though in-person surveys had higher response rates, convenience sampling failed to obtain a geographically distributed sample of rural residents. Of modalities tested, mailed surveys provided the best opportunity to perform geographically targeted rural health surveillance.

Indexed as

Chronic diseaseGeographic information systemsHealth surveillanceRural healthSurvey methodology

Identifiers

PMID33292290
PMCPMC7686693

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.