OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the use of neighborhood mapping as a key element in an ecological study of a community-based urban infant mortality prevention program. We propose the use of neighborhood mapping in evaluation research to more fully examine the local context of community health programs. Mapping can be used to study community change and to describe community assets and structural, epidemiological, and social features of neighborhoods that may influence program implementation and outcomes. METHODS: Data on physical features were collected by community residents during street-by-street neighborhood walkthroughs. Other data sources included program records, Census, birth certificate, and state and city data. Analytic methods included geo-coding, exploratory factor analysis to create spatial density indicators of neighborhood features at the Census block group level, and analysis of associations between neighborhood features and outcomes. RESULTS: Point and chloropleth maps provide a powerful illustration of neighborhood features (e.g., vacant buildings), client distribution and participation, health outcomes, and change over time. Factor analysis indicated two salient clusters of non-residential land use: (1) legitimate daily usage (liquor stores and other businesses) and (2) non-legitimate daily use (houses of worship and vacant buildings). A composite scale was created to indicate overall risk related to physical neighborhood features. CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood mapping is a powerful tool that brings participants and residents into the research process. Moreover, it can improve understanding of the role of neighborhood ecology in program implementation and outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the use of neighborhood mapping as a key element in an ecological study of a community-based urban infant mortality prevention program. We propose the use of neighborhood mapping in evaluation research to more fully examine the local context of community health programs. Mapping can be used to study community change and to describe community assets and structural, epidemiological, and social features of neighborhoods that may influence program implementation and outcomes. METHODS: Data on physical features were collected by community residents during street-by-street neighborhood walkthroughs. Other data sources included program records, Census, birth certificate, and state and city data. Analytic methods included geo-coding, exploratory factor analysis to create spatial density indicators of neighborhood features at the Census block group level, and analysis of associations between neighborhood features and outcomes. RESULTS: Point and chloropleth maps provide a powerful illustration of neighborhood features (e.g., vacant buildings), client distribution and participation, health outcomes, and change over time. Factor analysis indicated two salient clusters of non-residential land use: (1) legitimate daily usage (liquor stores and other businesses) and (2) non-legitimate daily use (houses of worship and vacant buildings). A composite scale was created to indicate overall risk related to physical neighborhood features. CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood mapping is a powerful tool that brings participants and residents into the research process. Moreover, it can improve understanding of the role of neighborhood ecology in program implementation and outcomes.
Authors: B A Israel; R Lichtenstein; P Lantz; R McGranaghan; A Allen; J R Guzman; D Softley; B Maciak Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2001-09
Authors: S T Orr; S A James; C A Miller; B Barakat; N Daikoku; M Pupkin; K Engstrom; G Huggins Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 1996 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Stacy Tessler Lindau; Jennifer A Makelarski; Marshall H Chin; Shane Desautels; Daniel Johnson; Waldo E Johnson; Doriane Miller; Susan Peters; Connie Robinson; John Schneider; Florence Thicklin; Natalie P Watson; Marcus Wolfe; Eric Whitaker Journal: Prev Med Date: 2011-01-12 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Claudia María Vargas; Consuelo Arauza; Kim Folsom; María del Rosario Luna; Lucy Gutiérrez; Patricia Ohliger Frerking; Kathleen Shelton; Carl Foreman; David Waffle; Richard Reynolds; Phillip J Cooper Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2012-01
Authors: Latrice Rollins; Tara Carey; Adrianne Proeller; Mary Anne Adams; Margaret Hooker; Rodney Lyn; Olayiwola Taylor; Kisha Holden; Tabia Henry Akintobi Journal: J Community Health Date: 2021-02
Authors: Rafael Guerrero-Preston; Fahcina Lawson; Sebastian Rodriguez-Torres; Maartje G Noordhuis; Francesca Pirini; Laura Manuel; Blanca L Valle; Tal Hadar; Bianca Rivera; Oluwasina Folawiyo; Adriana Baez; Luigi Marchionni; Wayne M Koch; William H Westra; Young J Kim; James R Eshleman; David Sidransky Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2019-02-18
Authors: Heather Angier; Sonja Likumahuwa; Sean Finnegan; Trisha Vakarcs; Christine Nelson; Andrew Bazemore; Mark Carrozza; Jennifer E DeVoe Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2014 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657