ArticlePreventive medicine reports2026
Conceptual replication and validation of the PACER survey in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA).
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Perceptions About Changes in Environments and Residents (PACER) survey was developed to measure individual experiences of health-related neighborhood gentrification. Initial validation in Philadelphia and Montreal supported its reliability and validity, but generalizability remained limited by geographic and demographic constraints. We conducted a multi-site replication study within the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), a diverse cohort of older adults across six U.S. cities. Methods: Participants completed the 21-item PACER instrument during MESA Exam 7 (2022-2024). We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess internal consistency, factor stability across subgroups, and criterion-related validity. We assessed differences by sociodemographic characteristics. Results: CFA largely supported the hypothesized four subscales: Feelings, Built Environment, Social Environment, and Affordability. The factor structure was stable by age and hours in neighborhood, but varied modestly by site. Subscale correlations and expected associations with perceived amount and pace of change supported criterion validity. Lower socioeconomic status and Black or Hispanic respondents reported more affordability concerns and perceived more neighborhood change. Conclusions: This study affirms PACER's validity in a large, geographically and demographically diverse U.S. cohort. PACER provides a resident-centered tool for measuring the lived experience of neighborhood change and its health implications across different residential contexts.
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.