Cargando…

Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context

BACKGROUND: Validity and reliability of an urbanicity scale is of utmost importance in developing effective strategies to minimize adverse social and health consequences of increased urbanization. A number of urbanicity scales for the quantitative assessment of the “static” feature of an urban envir...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj, Aekplakorn, Wichai, Vimolkej, Thosporn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4712519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26762646
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2704-y
_version_ 1782410079927009280
author Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj
Aekplakorn, Wichai
Vimolkej, Thosporn
author_facet Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj
Aekplakorn, Wichai
Vimolkej, Thosporn
author_sort Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Validity and reliability of an urbanicity scale is of utmost importance in developing effective strategies to minimize adverse social and health consequences of increased urbanization. A number of urbanicity scales for the quantitative assessment of the “static” feature of an urban environment has been invented and validated by the original developers. However, their comparability and robustness when utilized in another study context were not verified. This study aimed to examine the comparability, validity, and reliability of three urbanicity scales proposed by Dahly and Adair, Jones-Smith and Popkin, and Novak et al. in a Thailand context. METHODS: Urban characteristics data for 537 communities throughout Thailand were obtained from authoritative sources, and urbinicity scores were calculated according to the original developers’ algorithms with some modifications to accommodate local available data. Comparability, dimensionality, internal consistency, and criterion-related and construct validities of the scores were then determined. RESULTS: All three scales were highly correlated, but Dahly and Adair’s and Jones-Smith and Popkin’s were more comparable. Only Dahly and Adair’s scale achieved the unidimensionality assumption. Internal consistency ranged from very poor to high, based on their Chonbach’s alpha and the corrected item-scale correlation coefficients. All three scales had good criterion-related validity (when compared against the official urban–rural dichotomy and four-category urbanicity classification) and construct validity (in terms of their relation to the mean per capita monthly income and body mass index). CONCLUSIONS: This study’s results ensure the utility of these three urbanicity scales as valid instruments for examining the social and health impacts of urbanicity/urbanization, but caution must be applied with comparisons of urbanicity levels across different studies when different urbanicity scales are applied. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-2704-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4712519
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47125192016-01-15 Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj Aekplakorn, Wichai Vimolkej, Thosporn BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Validity and reliability of an urbanicity scale is of utmost importance in developing effective strategies to minimize adverse social and health consequences of increased urbanization. A number of urbanicity scales for the quantitative assessment of the “static” feature of an urban environment has been invented and validated by the original developers. However, their comparability and robustness when utilized in another study context were not verified. This study aimed to examine the comparability, validity, and reliability of three urbanicity scales proposed by Dahly and Adair, Jones-Smith and Popkin, and Novak et al. in a Thailand context. METHODS: Urban characteristics data for 537 communities throughout Thailand were obtained from authoritative sources, and urbinicity scores were calculated according to the original developers’ algorithms with some modifications to accommodate local available data. Comparability, dimensionality, internal consistency, and criterion-related and construct validities of the scores were then determined. RESULTS: All three scales were highly correlated, but Dahly and Adair’s and Jones-Smith and Popkin’s were more comparable. Only Dahly and Adair’s scale achieved the unidimensionality assumption. Internal consistency ranged from very poor to high, based on their Chonbach’s alpha and the corrected item-scale correlation coefficients. All three scales had good criterion-related validity (when compared against the official urban–rural dichotomy and four-category urbanicity classification) and construct validity (in terms of their relation to the mean per capita monthly income and body mass index). CONCLUSIONS: This study’s results ensure the utility of these three urbanicity scales as valid instruments for examining the social and health impacts of urbanicity/urbanization, but caution must be applied with comparisons of urbanicity levels across different studies when different urbanicity scales are applied. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-2704-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4712519/ /pubmed/26762646 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2704-y Text en © Jiamjarasrangsi et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Jiamjarasrangsi, Wiroj
Aekplakorn, Wichai
Vimolkej, Thosporn
Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title_full Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title_fullStr Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title_full_unstemmed Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title_short Validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a Thailand context
title_sort validation and comparison study of three urbanicity scales in a thailand context
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4712519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26762646
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2704-y
work_keys_str_mv AT jiamjarasrangsiwiroj validationandcomparisonstudyofthreeurbanicityscalesinathailandcontext
AT aekplakornwichai validationandcomparisonstudyofthreeurbanicityscalesinathailandcontext
AT vimolkejthosporn validationandcomparisonstudyofthreeurbanicityscalesinathailandcontext