Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34469444›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Measuring the accuracy of gridded human population density surfaces: A case study in Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea.

Brendan Fries, Carlos A Guerra, Guillermo A García, Sean L Wu, Jordan M Smith, Jeremías Nzamio Mba Oyono, Olivier T Donfack, José Osá Osá Nfumu, Simon I Hay, David L Smith and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Forest citizens and people-centered conservation in the Brazilian Amazon.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

11 authors.

Brendan FriesSouth and Central Africa ICEMR, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
Carlos A GuerraMedical Care Development International, Silver Spring, MD, United States of America.
Guillermo A GarcíaMedical Care Development International, Silver Spring, MD, United States of America.
Sean L WuDivisions of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States of America.
Jordan M SmithMedical Care Development International, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
Jeremías Nzamio Mba OyonoMedical Care Development International, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
Olivier T DonfackMedical Care Development International, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
José Osá Osá NfumuMedical Care Development International, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
Simon I HayDepartment of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0611-7272
David L SmithDepartment of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Andrew J DolgertInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6477-7981

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeospatial datasets of population are becoming more common in models used for health policy. Publicly-available maps of human population make a consistent picture from inconsistent census data, and the techniques they use to impute data makes each population map unique. Each mapping model explains its methods, but it can be difficult to know which map is appropriate for which policy work. High quality census datasets, where available, are a unique opportunity to characterize maps by comparing them with truth.

methodsWe use census data from a bed-net mass-distribution campaign on Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea, conducted by the Bioko Island Malaria Elimination Program as a gold standard to evaluate LandScan (LS), WorldPop Constrained (WP-C) and WorldPop Unconstrained (WP-U), Gridded Population of the World (GPW), and the High-Resolution Settlement Layer (HRSL). Each layer is compared to the gold-standard using statistical measures to evaluate distribution, error, and bias. We investigated how map choice affects burden estimates from a malaria prevalence model.

resultsSpecific population layers were able to match the gold-standard distribution at different population densities. LandScan was able to most accurately capture highly urban distribution, HRSL and WP-C matched best at all other lower population densities. GPW and WP-U performed poorly everywhere. Correctly capturing empty pixels is key, and smaller pixel sizes (100 m vs 1 km) improve this. Normalizing areas based on known district populations increased performance. The use of differing population layers in a malaria model showed a disparity in results around transition points between endemicity levels. DISCUSSION: The metrics in this paper, some of them novel in this context, characterize how these population maps differ from the gold standard census and from each other. We show that the metrics help understand the performance of a population map within a malaria model. The closest match to the census data would combine LandScan within urban areas and the HRSL for rural areas. Researchers should prefer particular maps if health calculations have a strong dependency on knowing where people are not, or if it is important to categorize variation in density within a city.

Indexed as

Population DensityEquatorial GuineaHumansMalariaMaps as TopicPlasmodium falciparumUrban Population

Identifiers

PMID34469444
PMCPMC8409626

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.