Literature DB >> 22469492

Error propagation models to examine the effects of geocoding quality on spatial analysis of individual-level datasets.

P A Zandbergen1, T C Hart, K E Lenzer, M E Camponovo.   

Abstract

The quality of geocoding has received substantial attention in recent years. A synthesis of published studies shows that the positional errors of street geocoding are somewhat unique relative to those of other types of spatial data: (1) the magnitude of error varies strongly across urban-rural gradients; (2) the direction of error is not uniform, but strongly associated with the properties of local street segments; (3) the distribution of errors does not follow a normal distribution, but is highly skewed and characterized by a substantial number of very large error values; and (4) the magnitude of error is spatially autocorrelated and is related to properties of the reference data. This makes it difficult to employ analytic approaches or Monte Carlo simulations for error propagation modeling because these rely on generalized statistical characteristics. The current paper describes an alternative empirical approach to error propagation modeling for geocoded data and illustrates its implementation using three different case-studies of geocoded individual-level datasets. The first case-study consists of determining the land cover categories associated with geocoded addresses using a point-in-raster overlay. The second case-study consists of a local hotspot characterization using kernel density analysis of geocoded addresses. The third case-study consists of a spatial data aggregation using enumeration areas of varying spatial resolution. For each case-study a high quality reference scenario based on address points forms the basis for the analysis, which is then compared to the result of various street geocoding techniques. Results show that the unique nature of the positional error of street geocoding introduces substantial noise in the result of spatial analysis, including a substantial amount of bias for some analysis scenarios. This confirms findings from earlier studies, but expands these to a wider range of analytical techniques.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22469492      PMCID: PMC3319659          DOI: 10.1016/j.sste.2012.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol        ISSN: 1877-5845


  17 in total

1.  The accuracy of address coding and the effects of coding errors.

Authors:  Nataliya Kravets; Wilbur C Hadden
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2005-09-12       Impact factor: 4.078

2.  Positional accuracy of two methods of geocoding.

Authors:  Mary H Ward; John R Nuckols; James Giglierano; Matthew R Bonner; Calvin Wolter; Matthew Airola; Wende Mix; Joanne S Colt; Patricia Hartge
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.822

Review 3.  Geocoding in cancer research: a review.

Authors:  Gerard Rushton; Marc P Armstrong; Josephine Gittler; Barry R Greene; Claire E Pavlik; Michele M West; Dale L Zimmerman
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Match rate and positional accuracy of two geocoding methods for epidemiologic research.

Authors:  F Benjamin Zhan; Jean D Brender; Ionara De Lima; Lucina Suarez; Peter H Langlois
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 3.797

5.  The effects of local street network characteristics on the positional accuracy of automated geocoding for geographic health studies.

Authors:  Dale L Zimmerman; Jie Li
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 3.918

6.  Quantifying geocode location error using GIS methods.

Authors:  Matthew J Strickland; Csaba Siffel; Bennett R Gardner; Alissa K Berzen; Adolfo Correa
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2007-04-04       Impact factor: 5.984

7.  Error and bias in determining exposure potential of children at school locations using proximity-based GIS techniques.

Authors:  Paul A Zandbergen; Joseph W Green
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Influence of geocoding quality on environmental exposure assessment of children living near high traffic roads.

Authors:  Paul A Zandbergen
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2007-03-16       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Positional error in automated geocoding of residential addresses.

Authors:  Michael R Cayo; Thomas O Talbot
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 3.918

10.  Geocoding accuracy and the recovery of relationships between environmental exposures and health.

Authors:  Soumya Mazumdar; Gerard Rushton; Brian J Smith; Dale L Zimmerman; Kelley J Donham
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 3.918

View more
  14 in total

1.  Influence of Demographic and Health Survey Point Displacements on Raster-Based Analyses.

Authors:  Carolina Perez-Heydrich; Joshua L Warren; Clara R Burgert; Michael E Emch
Journal:  Spat Demogr       Date:  2015-06-23

2.  Error propagation in spatial modeling of public health data: a simulation approach using pediatric blood lead level data for Syracuse, New York.

Authors:  Monghyeon Lee; Yongwan Chun; Daniel A Griffith
Journal:  Environ Geochem Health       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 4.609

3.  Physician Multisite Practicing: Impact on Access to Care.

Authors:  Imam M Xierali
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.657

4.  A research agenda: does geocoding positional error matter in health GIS studies?

Authors:  Geoffrey M Jacquez
Journal:  Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol       Date:  2012-02-14

5.  Split and combine simulation extrapolation algorithm to correct geocoding coarsening of built environment exposures.

Authors:  Jung Y Won; Emma V Sanchez-Vaznaugh; Yuqi Zhai; Brisa N Sánchez
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 2.497

6.  Residential proximity to major roadways and incident hypertension in post-menopausal women.

Authors:  Samantha L Kingsley; Melissa N Eliot; Eric A Whitsel; Yi Wang; Brent A Coull; Lifang Hou; Helene G Margolis; Karen L Margolis; Lina Mu; Wen-Chih C Wu; Karen C Johnson; Matthew A Allison; JoAnn E Manson; Charles B Eaton; Gregory A Wellenius
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 6.498

7.  Use of attribute association error probability estimates to evaluate quality of medical record geocodes.

Authors:  Christian A Klaus; Luis E Carrasco; Daniel W Goldberg; Kevin A Henry; Recinda L Sherman
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.918

8.  Impact of geocoding methods on associations between long-term exposure to urban air pollution and lung function.

Authors:  Bénédicte Jacquemin; Johanna Lepeule; Anne Boudier; Caroline Arnould; Meriem Benmerad; Claire Chappaz; Joane Ferran; Francine Kauffmann; Xavier Morelli; Isabelle Pin; Christophe Pison; Isabelle Rios; Sofia Temam; Nino Künzli; Rémy Slama; Valérie Siroux
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Effects of georeferencing effort on mapping monkeypox case distributions and transmission risk.

Authors:  R Ryan Lash; Darin S Carroll; Christine M Hughes; Yoshinori Nakazawa; Kevin Karem; Inger K Damon; A Townsend Peterson
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 3.918

Review 10.  Ensuring Confidentiality of Geocoded Health Data: Assessing Geographic Masking Strategies for Individual-Level Data.

Authors:  Paul A Zandbergen
Journal:  Adv Med       Date:  2014-04-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.