ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Decision Tree Analyses to Explore the Relevance of Multiple Sex/Gender Dimensions for the Exposure to Green Spaces: Results from the KORA INGER Study.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Multiple Sex/Gender Dimensions Play a Role in the Association of Green Space and Self-Rated Health? Model-Based Recursive Partitioning Results from the KORA INGER Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Consideration of sex/gender in publications of quantitative health-related research: Development and application of an assessment matrix.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Operationalization of a multidimensional sex/gender concept for quantitative environmental health research and implementation in the KORA study: Results of the collaborative research project INGER.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, attention has been drawn to the need to integrate sex/gender more comprehensively into environmental health research. Considering theoretical approaches, we define sex/gender as a multidimensional concept based on intersectionality. However, operationalizing sex/gender through multiple covariates requires the usage of statistical methods that are suitable for handling such complex data. We therefore applied two different decision tree approaches: classification and regression trees (CART) and conditional inference trees (CIT). We explored the relevance of multiple sex/gender covariates for the exposure to green spaces, measured both subjectively and objectively. Data from 3742 participants from the Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg (KORA) study were analyzed within the INGER (Integrating gender into environmental health research) project. We observed that the participants' financial situation and discrimination experience was relevant for their access to high quality public green spaces, while the urban/rural context was most relevant for the general greenness in the residential environment. None of the covariates operationalizing the individual sex/gender self-concept were relevant for differences in exposure to green spaces. Results were largely consistent for both CART and CIT. Most importantly we showed that decision tree analyses are useful for exploring the relevance of multiple sex/gender dimensions and their interactions for environmental exposures. Further investigations in larger urban areas with less access to public green spaces and with a study population more heterogeneous with respect to age and social disparities may add more information about the relevance of multiple sex/gender dimensions for the exposure to green spaces.
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.