Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36822278›Full record

ArticleAnnals of epidemiology2023

Influence of geospatial resolution on sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 in Massachusetts.

Prasad Patil, Xiaojing Peng, Beth M Haley, Keith R Spangler, Koen F Tieskens, Kevin J Lane, Fei Carnes, M Patricia Fabian, R Monina Klevens, T Scott Troppy and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Prasad PatilDepartment of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA. Electronic address: patil@bu.edu.
Xiaojing PengDepartment of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Beth M HaleyDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Keith R SpanglerDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Koen F TieskensDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Kevin J LaneDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Fei CarnesDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
M Patricia FabianDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
R Monina KlevensBureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston.
T Scott TroppyBureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston.
Jessica H LeiblerDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Jonathan I LevyDepartment of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.

Funding

Environmental Epidemiology in Community SettingsT32ES014562 · NIEHS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI Birgit Gunhild Claus Henn · 2006 to 2026
$7.7M
Project 3: Cumulative Risk and Geospatial Health Disparities Related to Chemical and Non-Chemical Stressor ExposuresP50MD010428 · NIMHD · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI LADEN, FRANCINE, LEVY, JONATHAN I · 2015 to 2020
$4.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES014562NIMHD NIH HHS P50 MD010428
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWhen studying health risks across a large geographic region such as a state or province, researchers often assume that finer-resolution data on health outcomes and risk factors will improve inferences by avoiding ecological bias and other issues associated with geographic aggregation. However, coarser-resolution data (e.g., at the town or county-level) are more commonly publicly available and packaged for easier access, allowing for rapid analyses. The advantages and limitations of using finer-resolution data, which may improve precision at the cost of time spent gaining access and processing data, have not been considered in detail to date.

methodsWe systematically examine the implications of conducting town-level mixed-effect regression analyses versus census-tract-level analyses to study sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 in Massachusetts. In a series of negative binomial regressions, we vary the spatial resolution of the outcome, the resolution of variable selection, and the resolution of the random effect to allow for more direct comparison across models.

resultsWe find stability in some estimates across scenarios, changes in magnitude, direction, and significance in others, and tighter confidence intervals on the census-tract level. Conclusions regarding sociodemographic predictors are robust when regions of high concentration remain consistent across town and census-tract resolutions.

conclusionsInferences about high-risk populations may be misleading if derived from town- or county-resolution data, especially for covariates that capture small subgroups (e.g., small racial minority populations) or are geographically concentrated or skewed (e.g., % college students). Our analysis can help inform more rapid and efficient use of public health data by identifying when finer-resolution data are truly most informative, or when coarser-resolution data may be misleading.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansMassachusettsRegression AnalysisRisk FactorsStudentsCOVID-19Mixed-effect modelingRegression analysisSpatial resolution

Identifiers

PMID36822278
PMCPMC9942453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.