Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37256874›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

The utility of Zip4 codes in spatial epidemiological analysis.

Jayakrishnan Ajayakumar, Andrew Curtis, Jacqueline Curtis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Jayakrishnan AjayakumarGIS Health & Hazards Lab, Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9564-7728
Andrew CurtisGIS Health & Hazards Lab, Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0956-2686
Jacqueline CurtisGIS Health & Hazards Lab, Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are many public health situations within the United States that require fine geographical scale data to effectively inform response and intervention strategies. However, a condition for accessing and analyzing such data, especially when multiple institutions are involved, is being able to preserve a degree of spatial privacy and confidentiality. Hospitals and state health departments, who are generally the custodians of these fine-scale health data, are sometimes understandably hesitant to collaborate with each other due to these concerns. This paper looks at the utility and pitfalls of using Zip4 codes, a data layer often included as it is believed to be "safe", as a source for sharing fine-scale spatial health data that enables privacy preservation while maintaining a suitable precision for spatial analysis. While the Zip4 is widely supplied, researchers seldom utilize it. Nor is its spatial characteristics known by data guardians. To address this gap, we use the context of a near-real time spatial response to an emerging health threat to show how the Zip4 aggregation preserves an underlying spatial structure making it potentially suitable dataset for analysis. Our results suggest that based on the density of urbanization, Zip4 centroids are within 150 meters of the real location almost 99% of the time. Spatial analysis experiments performed on these Zip4 data suggest a far more insightful geographic output than if using more commonly used aggregation units such as street lines and census block groups. However, this improvement in analytical output comes at a spatial privy cost as Zip4 centroids have a higher potential of compromising spatial anonymity with 73% of addresses having a spatial k anonymity value less than 5 when compared to other aggregations. We conclude that while offers an exciting opportunity to share data between organizations, researchers and analysts need to be made aware of the potential for serious confidentiality violations.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityPrivacyGeographyOrganizationsSpatial Analysis

Identifiers

PMID37256874
PMCPMC10231782

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.