Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40003511›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025

Emerging Trends and Issues in Geo-Spatial Environmental Health: A Critical Perspective.

Daniel A Griffith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Daniel A GriffithDepartment of Geospatial Information Sciences, the University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX 75080-3021, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5125-6450

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This opinion piece postulates that quantitative environmental research and public health spatial analysts unknowingly tolerate certain spatial statistical model specification errors, whose remedies constitute some of the urgent emerging trends and issues in this subfield (e.g., forecasting disease spreading). Within this context, this paper addresses misspecifications affiliated with omitted variable bias complications arising from ignoring, and hence abandoning, negative spatial autocorrelation latent in georeferenced disease data, and/or being ill-informed about reigning teledependencies (i.e., long-distance spatial correlations). As imperative academic challenges, it advances elegant and convincing arguments to do otherwise. Its two particular themes are positive-negative spatial autocorrelation mixtures, and hierarchical autocorrelation generated by hegemonic urban systems. Comprehensive interpretations and implementations of these two conjectures constitute future research directions. Important conceptualizations for treatments reported in this paper include confounding variables and Moran eigenvector spatial filtering. This paper's fundamental implication is an advocacy for a prodigious paradigm shift, a marked change in the collective mindsets and applications of spatial epidemiologists when specifying spatial regression equations to describe either environmental health data, or a publicly transparent geographic diffusion of diseases.

Indexed as

Environmental HealthSpatial AnalysisHumansModels, Statisticalhierarchy autocorrelationmixtureomitted variable biasspatial autocorrelationurban hierarchy

Identifiers

PMID40003511
PMCPMC11855352

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.