ArticleBMC public health2021
A method to define the relevant ego-centred spatial scale for the assessment of neighbourhood effects: the example of cardiovascular risk factors.
Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe neighbourhood in which one lives affects health through complex pathways not yet fully understood. A way to move forward in assessing these pathways direction is to explore the spatial structure of health phenomena to generate hypotheses and examine whether the neighbourhood characteristics are able to explain this spatial structure. We compare the spatial structure of two cardiovascular disease risk factors in three European urban areas, thus assessing if a non-measured neighbourhood effect or spatial processes is present by either modelling the correlation structure at individual level or by estimating the intra-class correlation within administrative units.
methodsData from three independent studies (RECORD, DHS and BaBi), covering each a European urban area, are used. The characteristics of the spatial correlation structure of cardiovascular risk factors (BMI and systolic blood pressure) adjusted for age, sex, educational attainment and income are estimated by fitting an exponential model to the semi-variogram based on the geo-coordinates of places of residence. For comparison purposes, a random effect model is also fitted to estimate the intra-class correlation within administrative units. We then discuss the benefits of modelling the correlation structure to evaluate the presence of unmeasured spatial effects on health.
resultsBMI and blood pressure are consistently found to be spatially structured across the studies, the spatial correlation structures being stronger for BMI. Eight to 22% of the variability in BMI were spatially structured with radii ranging from 100 to 240 m (range). Only a small part of the correlation of residuals was explained by adjusting for the correlation within administrative units (from 0 to 4 percentage points). DISCUSSION: The individual spatial correlation approach provides much stronger evidence of spatial effects than the multilevel approach even for small administrative units. Spatial correlation structure offers new possibilities to assess the relevant spatial scale for health. Stronger correlation structure seen for BMI may be due to neighbourhood socioeconomic conditions and processes like social norms at work in the immediate neighbourhood.
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.