ArticleBMC public health2022
Effect of socioeconomic factors during the early COVID-19 pandemic: a spatial analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limited education and training, and practical application but high potential demand of spatial epidemiology among public health postgraduates in China: a serial national cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Spatial variation of asthma rates in Los Angeles County by environmental and socioeconomic indicators.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026Article
- Variability of COVID-19 mortality in Honduras: influence of sociodemographic factors.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Geographical distribution and the impact of socio-environmental indicators on incidence of Mpox in Ontario, Canada.PloS one · 2025Article
- Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of middle-aged and older Europeans.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Estrogen-modulating treatment among mid-life women and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality: a multiregister nationwide matched cohort study in Sweden.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Post COVID-19 Symptoms Among Infected Vaccinated Individuals: A Cross-Sectional Study in Saudi Arabia.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2023Article
- Addressing Equity Asymmetries in General Chemistry Outcomes Through an Asset-Based Supplemental Course.JACS Au · 2023Article
- Communication inequalities in the COVID-19 pandemic: socioeconomic differences and preventive behaviors in the United States and South Korea.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic differences in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and mortality in urban areas in a region in the South of Europe.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Epidemiological Profile and Social Welfare Index as Factors Associated with COVID-19 Hospitalization and Severity in Mexico City: A Retrospective Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpatial variability of COVID-19 cases may suggest geographic disparities of social determinants of health. Spatial analyses of population-level data may provide insight on factors that may contribute to COVID-19 transmission, hospitalization, and death.
methodsGeneralized additive models were used to map COVID-19 risk from March 2020 to February 2021 in Orange County (OC), California. We geocoded and analyzed 221,843 cases to OC census tracts within a Poisson framework while smoothing over census tract centroids. Location was randomly permuted 1000 times to test for randomness. We also separated the analyses temporally to observe if risk changed over time. COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were mapped across OC while adjusting for population-level demographic data in crude and adjusted models.
resultsRisk for COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were statistically significant in northern OC. Adjustment for demographic data substantially decreased spatial risk, but areas remained statistically significant. Inclusion of location within our models considerably decreased the magnitude of risk compared to univariate models. However, percent minority (adjusted RR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.06, 1.07), average household size (aRR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.05, 1.07), and percent service industry (aRR: 1.05, 95%CI: 1.04, 1.06) remained significantly associated with COVID-19 risk in adjusted spatial models. In addition, areas of risk did not change between surges and risk ratios were similar for hospitalizations and deaths.
conclusionSignificant risk factors and areas of increased risk were identified in OC in our adjusted models and suggests that social and environmental factors contribute to the spread of COVID-19 within communities. Areas in north OC remained significant despite adjustment, but risk substantially decreased. Additional investigation of risk factors may provide insight on how to protect vulnerable populations in future infectious disease outbreaks.
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.