ArticleTransactions in GIS : TG2020
Quality of hybrid location data drawn from GPS-enabled mobile phones: Does it matter?
Article in Transactions in GIS : TG, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring environmental exposures in people's activity space: The need to account for travel modes and exposure decay.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2023Article
- How regularly do people visit service places?Computers, environment and urban systems · 2023Article
- Imputation of missing time-activity data with long-term gaps: A multi-scale residual CNN-LSTM network model.Computers, environment and urban systems · 2022Article
- Using GPS-enabled mobile phones to evaluate the associations between human mobility changes and the onset of influenza illness.Spatial and spatio-temporal epidemiology · 2022Article
- Geostatistical linkage of national demographic and health survey data: a case study of Tanzania.Population health metrics · 2021Article
- The Impact of Individual Mobility on Long-Term Exposure to Ambient PMInternational journal of environmental research and 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite their increasing popularity in human mobility studies, few studies have investigated the geo-spatial quality of GPS-enabled mobile phone data in which phone location is determined by special queries designed to collect location data with predetermined sampling intervals (hereafter "active mobile phone data"). We focus on two key issues in active mobile phone data-systematic gaps in tracking records and positioning uncertainty-and investigate their effects on human mobility pattern analyses. To address gaps in records, we develop an imputation strategy that utilizes local environment information, such as parcel boundaries, and recording time intervals. We evaluate the performance of the proposed imputation strategy by comparing raw versus imputed data with participants' online survey responses. The results indicate that imputed data are superior to raw data in identifying individuals' frequently visited places on a weekly basis. To assess the location accuracy of active mobile phone data, we investigate the spatial and temporal patterns of the positional uncertainty of each record and examine via Monte Carlo simulation how inaccurate location information might affect human mobility pattern indicators. Results suggest that the level of uncertainty varies as a function of time of day and the type of land use at which the position was determined, both of which are closely related to the location technology used to determine the location. Our study highlights the importance of understanding and addressing limitations of mobile phone derived positioning data prior to their use in human mobility studies.
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.