Cargando…

Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies

BACKGROUND: This article describes geographic bias in GIS analyses with unrepresentative data owing to missing geocodes, using as an example a spatial analysis of prostate cancer incidence among whites and African Americans in Virginia, 1990–1999. Statistical tests for clustering were performed and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oliver, M Norman, Matthews, Kevin A, Siadaty, Mir, Hauck, Fern R, Pickle, Linda W
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1298322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16281976
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-4-29
_version_ 1782126254201241600
author Oliver, M Norman
Matthews, Kevin A
Siadaty, Mir
Hauck, Fern R
Pickle, Linda W
author_facet Oliver, M Norman
Matthews, Kevin A
Siadaty, Mir
Hauck, Fern R
Pickle, Linda W
author_sort Oliver, M Norman
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This article describes geographic bias in GIS analyses with unrepresentative data owing to missing geocodes, using as an example a spatial analysis of prostate cancer incidence among whites and African Americans in Virginia, 1990–1999. Statistical tests for clustering were performed and such clusters mapped. The patterns of missing census tract identifiers for the cases were examined by generalized linear regression models. RESULTS: The county of residency for all cases was known, and 26,338 (74%) of these cases were geocoded successfully to census tracts. Cluster maps showed patterns that appeared markedly different, depending upon whether one used all cases or those geocoded to the census tract. Multivariate regression analysis showed that, in the most rural counties (where the missing data were concentrated), the percent of a county's population over age 64 and with less than a high school education were both independently associated with a higher percent of missing geocodes. CONCLUSION: We found statistically significant pattern differences resulting from spatially non-random differences in geocoding completeness across Virginia. Appropriate interpretation of maps, therefore, requires an understanding of this phenomenon, which we call "cartographic confounding."
format Text
id pubmed-1298322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-12983222005-12-02 Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies Oliver, M Norman Matthews, Kevin A Siadaty, Mir Hauck, Fern R Pickle, Linda W Int J Health Geogr Research BACKGROUND: This article describes geographic bias in GIS analyses with unrepresentative data owing to missing geocodes, using as an example a spatial analysis of prostate cancer incidence among whites and African Americans in Virginia, 1990–1999. Statistical tests for clustering were performed and such clusters mapped. The patterns of missing census tract identifiers for the cases were examined by generalized linear regression models. RESULTS: The county of residency for all cases was known, and 26,338 (74%) of these cases were geocoded successfully to census tracts. Cluster maps showed patterns that appeared markedly different, depending upon whether one used all cases or those geocoded to the census tract. Multivariate regression analysis showed that, in the most rural counties (where the missing data were concentrated), the percent of a county's population over age 64 and with less than a high school education were both independently associated with a higher percent of missing geocodes. CONCLUSION: We found statistically significant pattern differences resulting from spatially non-random differences in geocoding completeness across Virginia. Appropriate interpretation of maps, therefore, requires an understanding of this phenomenon, which we call "cartographic confounding." BioMed Central 2005-11-10 /pmc/articles/PMC1298322/ /pubmed/16281976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-4-29 Text en Copyright © 2005 Oliver et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Oliver, M Norman
Matthews, Kevin A
Siadaty, Mir
Hauck, Fern R
Pickle, Linda W
Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title_full Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title_fullStr Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title_full_unstemmed Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title_short Geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
title_sort geographic bias related to geocoding in epidemiologic studies
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1298322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16281976
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-4-29
work_keys_str_mv AT olivermnorman geographicbiasrelatedtogeocodinginepidemiologicstudies
AT matthewskevina geographicbiasrelatedtogeocodinginepidemiologicstudies
AT siadatymir geographicbiasrelatedtogeocodinginepidemiologicstudies
AT hauckfernr geographicbiasrelatedtogeocodinginepidemiologicstudies
AT picklelindaw geographicbiasrelatedtogeocodinginepidemiologicstudies