Raquel B Jimenez1, Kevin J Lane2, Lucy R Hutyra3, M Patricia Fabian2. 1. Department of Environmental Health. School of Public Health, Boston University, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. raque@bu.edu. 2. Department of Environmental Health. School of Public Health, Boston University, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 3. Department of Earth and Environment, Boston University, 685 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is a measure of greenness widely used in environmental health research. High spatial resolution NDVI has become increasingly available; however, the implications of its use in exposure assessment are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of NDVI spatial resolution on greenness exposure misclassification. METHODS: Greenness exposure was assessed for 31,328 children in the Greater Boston Area in 2016 using NDVI from MODIS (250 m2), Landsat 8 (30 m2), Sentinel-2 (10 m2), and the National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP, 1 m2). We compared continuous and categorical greenness estimates for multiple buffer sizes under a reliability assessment framework. Exposure misclassification was evaluated using NAIP data as reference. RESULTS: Greenness estimates were greater for coarser resolution NDVI, but exposure distributions were similar. Continuous estimates showed poor agreement and high consistency, while agreement in categorical estimates ranged from poor to strong. Exposure misclassification was higher with greater differences in resolution, smaller buffers, and greater number of exposure quantiles. The proportion of participants changing greenness quantiles was higher for MODIS (11-60%), followed by Landsat 8 (6-44%), and Sentinel-2 (5-33%). SIGNIFICANCE: Greenness exposure assessment is sensitive to spatial resolution of NDVI, aggregation area, and number of exposure quantiles. Greenness exposure decisions should ponder relevant pathways for specific health outcomes and operational considerations.
BACKGROUND: The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is a measure of greenness widely used in environmental health research. High spatial resolution NDVI has become increasingly available; however, the implications of its use in exposure assessment are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of NDVI spatial resolution on greenness exposure misclassification. METHODS: Greenness exposure was assessed for 31,328 children in the Greater Boston Area in 2016 using NDVI from MODIS (250 m2), Landsat 8 (30 m2), Sentinel-2 (10 m2), and the National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP, 1 m2). We compared continuous and categorical greenness estimates for multiple buffer sizes under a reliability assessment framework. Exposure misclassification was evaluated using NAIP data as reference. RESULTS: Greenness estimates were greater for coarser resolution NDVI, but exposure distributions were similar. Continuous estimates showed poor agreement and high consistency, while agreement in categorical estimates ranged from poor to strong. Exposure misclassification was higher with greater differences in resolution, smaller buffers, and greater number of exposure quantiles. The proportion of participants changing greenness quantiles was higher for MODIS (11-60%), followed by Landsat 8 (6-44%), and Sentinel-2 (5-33%). SIGNIFICANCE: Greenness exposure assessment is sensitive to spatial resolution of NDVI, aggregation area, and number of exposure quantiles. Greenness exposure decisions should ponder relevant pathways for specific health outcomes and operational considerations.
Authors: Rebecca Gernes; Cole Brokamp; Glenn E Rice; J Michael Wright; Michelle C Kondo; Yvonne L Michael; Geoffrey H Donovan; Demetrios Gatziolis; David Bernstein; Grace K LeMasters; James E Lockey; Gurjit K Khurana Hershey; Patrick H Ryan Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2019-03-02 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: Danielle Vienneau; Kees de Hoogh; David Faeh; Marco Kaufmann; Jean Marc Wunderli; Martin Röösli Journal: Environ Int Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Elisabeth Thiering; Iana Markevych; Irene Brüske; Elaine Fuertes; Jürgen Kratzsch; Dorothea Sugiri; Barbara Hoffmann; Andrea von Berg; Carl-Peter Bauer; Sibylle Koletzko; Dietrich Berdel; Joachim Heinrich Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Mireia Gascon; Margarita Triguero-Mas; David Martínez; Payam Dadvand; Joan Forns; Antoni Plasència; Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 3.390