ArticleSSM - population health2021
Matching participant address with public records database in a US national longitudinal cohort study.
Article in SSM - population health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of LexisNexis-derived retrospective address histories in the Sister Study cohort.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026Article
- Evaluating Linkage Approaches for Address-Level Socioenvironmental Exposure Assessment.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026Article
- Gentrification and Fear of Displacement: a Quantitative Study of Older Black and White US Adults.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Predictors of LexisNexis residential history availability and registry data concordance for childhood cancer research.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Construction of residential histories to estimate long-term environmental exposures in the California Teachers Study cohort.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2024Article
- Intake of Snacks and Sweets in a National Study of Built and Social Environments: the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke Study.The Journal of nutrition · 2024Article
- Lifetime residential data collection protocol for the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study.MethodsX · 2024Article
- Lifetime residential history collection and processing for environmental data linkages in the ABCD study.Health & place · 2024Article
- Constructing Residential Histories in a General Population-Based Representative Sample.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Associations of neighbourhood food retail with disability and death in older adults: Cardiovascular Health Study.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2024Article
- Utilizing residential histories to assess environmental exposure and socioeconomic status over the life course among mesothelioma patients.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- The association of baseline depressive symptoms and stress on withdrawal in a national longitudinal cohort: the REGARDS study.Annals of epidemiology · 2023Article
- A longitudinal examination of objective neighborhood walkability, body mass index, and waist circumference: the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Article
- Health care experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic by race and social determinants of health among adults age ≥ 58 years in the REGARDS study.BMC public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEpidemiological studies utilize residential histories to assess environmental exposure risk. The validity from using commercially-sourced residential histories within national longitudinal studies remains unclear. Our study assessed predictors of non-agreement between baseline addresses from the commercially-sourced LexisNexis database and participants in the national longitudinal study, REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS). Additionally, we assessed differences in stroke risk by neighborhood socioeconomic score (nSES) based on participant reported address compared to nSES from LexisNexis/REGARDS matched baseline address.
methodsFrom January 2003-October 2007, REGARDS enrolled 30,239 black and white adults aged 45 and older within the continental United States and collected their baseline address. ArcGIS Desktop 10.5.1 with ESRI 2016 Business Analyst Data was used to geocode baseline addresses from LexisNexis and REGARDS. Logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood that LexisNexis address matched REGARDS baseline address for each participant. Survival analysis was used to estimate association between nSES and incident stroke.
resultsApproximately 91% of REGARDS participants had a LexisNexis address. Of these geocoded addresses, 93% of REGARDS baseline addresses matched LexisNexis addresses. Odds of agreement between LexisNexis and REGARDS was higher for older-aged participants (OR = 1.02 per year, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.02), blacks compared to whites (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.29), females compared to males (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.26), participants with an income of $34k-74k compared to an income less than $20k (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.39, 1.89). Odds of agreement were lower for residents in Midwest compared to residents in the south (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.94). No significant differences in nSES-stroke associations were observed between REGARDS only and LexisNexis/REGARDS matched addresses; however, differences in interactions were observed.
conclusionAgreement between LexisNexis and REGARDS addresses varied by sociodemographic groups, potentially introducing bias in studies reliant on LexisNexis alone for residential address data.
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.