Capturing emergency dispatch address points as geocoding candidates to quantify delimited confidence in residential geolocation.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal of Health Geographics Pub Date : 2023-09-26 DOI:10.1186/s12942-023-00347-2
Christian A Klaus, Kevin A Henry, Dora Il'yasova
{"title":"Capturing emergency dispatch address points as geocoding candidates to quantify delimited confidence in residential geolocation.","authors":"Christian A Klaus, Kevin A Henry, Dora Il'yasova","doi":"10.1186/s12942-023-00347-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In response to citizens' concerns about elevated cancer incidence in their locales, US CDC proposed publishing cancer incidence at sub-county scales. At these scales, confidence in patients' residential geolocation becomes a key constraint of geospatial analysis. To support monitoring cancer incidence in sub-county areas, we presented summary metrics to numerically delimit confidence in residential geolocation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We defined a concept of Residential Address Discriminant Power (RADP) as theoretically perfect within all residential addresses and its practical application, i.e., using Emergency Dispatch (ED) Address Point Candidates of Equivalent Likelihood (CEL) to quantify Residential Geolocation Discriminant Power (RGDP) to approximate RADP. Leveraging different productivity of probabilistic, deterministic, and interactive geocoding record linkage, we simultaneously detected CEL for 5,807 cancer cases reported to North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (NC CCR)- in January 2022. Batch-match probabilistic and deterministic algorithms matched 86.0% cases to their unique ED address point candidates or a CEL, 4.4% to parcel site address, and 1.4% to street centerline. Interactively geocoded cases were 8.2%. To demonstrate differences in residential geolocation confidence between enumeration areas, we calculated sRGDP for cancer cases by county and assessed the existing uncertainty within the ED data, i.e., identified duplicate addresses (as CEL) for each ED address point in the 2014 version of the NC ED data and calculated ED_sRGDP by county. Both summary RGDP (sRGDP) (0.62-1.00) and ED_sRGDP (0.36-1.00) varied across counties and were lower in rural counties (p < 0.05); sRGDP correlated with ED_sRGDP (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). The discussion covered multiple conceptual and economic issues attendant to quantifying confidence in residential geolocation and presented a set of organizing principles for future work.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our methodology produces simple metrics - sRGDP - to capture confidence in residential geolocation via leveraging ED address points as CEL. Two facts demonstrate the usefulness of sRGDP as area-based summary metrics: sRGDP variability between counties and the overall lower quality of residential geolocation in rural vs. urban counties. Low sRGDP for the cancer cases within the area of interest helps manage expectations for the uncertainty in cancer incidence data. By supplementing cancer incidence data with sRGDP and ED_sRGDP, CCRs can demonstrate transparency in geocoding success, which may help win citizen trust.</p>","PeriodicalId":48739,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Geographics","volume":"22 1","pages":"25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10523746/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Geographics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-023-00347-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In response to citizens' concerns about elevated cancer incidence in their locales, US CDC proposed publishing cancer incidence at sub-county scales. At these scales, confidence in patients' residential geolocation becomes a key constraint of geospatial analysis. To support monitoring cancer incidence in sub-county areas, we presented summary metrics to numerically delimit confidence in residential geolocation.

Results: We defined a concept of Residential Address Discriminant Power (RADP) as theoretically perfect within all residential addresses and its practical application, i.e., using Emergency Dispatch (ED) Address Point Candidates of Equivalent Likelihood (CEL) to quantify Residential Geolocation Discriminant Power (RGDP) to approximate RADP. Leveraging different productivity of probabilistic, deterministic, and interactive geocoding record linkage, we simultaneously detected CEL for 5,807 cancer cases reported to North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (NC CCR)- in January 2022. Batch-match probabilistic and deterministic algorithms matched 86.0% cases to their unique ED address point candidates or a CEL, 4.4% to parcel site address, and 1.4% to street centerline. Interactively geocoded cases were 8.2%. To demonstrate differences in residential geolocation confidence between enumeration areas, we calculated sRGDP for cancer cases by county and assessed the existing uncertainty within the ED data, i.e., identified duplicate addresses (as CEL) for each ED address point in the 2014 version of the NC ED data and calculated ED_sRGDP by county. Both summary RGDP (sRGDP) (0.62-1.00) and ED_sRGDP (0.36-1.00) varied across counties and were lower in rural counties (p < 0.05); sRGDP correlated with ED_sRGDP (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). The discussion covered multiple conceptual and economic issues attendant to quantifying confidence in residential geolocation and presented a set of organizing principles for future work.

Conclusions: Our methodology produces simple metrics - sRGDP - to capture confidence in residential geolocation via leveraging ED address points as CEL. Two facts demonstrate the usefulness of sRGDP as area-based summary metrics: sRGDP variability between counties and the overall lower quality of residential geolocation in rural vs. urban counties. Low sRGDP for the cancer cases within the area of interest helps manage expectations for the uncertainty in cancer incidence data. By supplementing cancer incidence data with sRGDP and ED_sRGDP, CCRs can demonstrate transparency in geocoding success, which may help win citizen trust.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
捕获紧急调度地址点作为地理编码候选者,以量化住宅地理位置中的定界置信度。
背景:为了回应市民对所在地癌症发病率上升的担忧,美国疾病控制与预防中心提议公布癌症的亚县发病率。在这些尺度上,对患者居住地理位置的信心成为地理空间分析的关键约束。为了支持监测子县地区的癌症发病率,我们提出了汇总指标,以数字界定居民地理位置的置信度。结果:我们在所有住宅地址中定义了一个理论上完美的住宅地址判别力(RADP)概念及其实际应用,即使用等效似然的紧急调度(ED)候选地址点(CEL)来量化住宅地理位置判别力(RGDP)来近似RADP。利用概率、确定性和交互式地理编码记录链接的不同生产力,我们在2022年1月对北卡罗来纳州癌症注册中心(NC CCR)报告的5807例癌症病例同时检测了CEL。批量匹配概率和确定性算法将86.0%的案例与其唯一的ED地址点候选者或CEL匹配,4.4%与地块地址匹配,1.4%与街道中心线匹配。交互式地理编码病例为8.2%。为了证明枚举区域之间居住地理位置置信度的差异,我们按县计算了癌症病例的sRGDP,并评估了ED数据中的现有不确定性,即2014版NC ED数据中每个ED地址点的重复地址(如CEL),并按县计算ED_sRGDP。汇总RGDP(sRGDP)(0.62-1.00)和ED_sRGDP(0.36-1.00)在各县不同,在农村县较低(p 结论:我们的方法产生了简单的指标sRGDP,通过利用ED地址点作为CEL来获取对住宅地理位置的信心。两个事实证明了sRGDP作为基于区域的汇总指标的有用性:县之间的sRGDP可变性以及农村县与城市县的总体居住地理位置质量较低。感兴趣区域内癌症病例的低sRGDP有助于管理对癌症发病率数据不确定性的预期。通过用sRGDP和ED_sRGDP补充癌症发病率数据,CCRs可以证明地理编码成功的透明度,这可能有助于赢得公民的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Health Geographics
International Journal of Health Geographics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
2.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leader among the field, International Journal of Health Geographics is an interdisciplinary, open access journal publishing internationally significant studies of geospatial information systems and science applications in health and healthcare. With an exceptional author satisfaction rate and a quick time to first decision, the journal caters to readers across an array of healthcare disciplines globally. International Journal of Health Geographics welcomes novel studies in the health and healthcare context spanning from spatial data infrastructure and Web geospatial interoperability research, to research into real-time Geographic Information Systems (GIS)-enabled surveillance services, remote sensing applications, spatial epidemiology, spatio-temporal statistics, internet GIS and cyberspace mapping, participatory GIS and citizen sensing, geospatial big data, healthy smart cities and regions, and geospatial Internet of Things and blockchain.
期刊最新文献
Development of an approach to forecast future takeaway outlet growth around schools and population exposure to takeaways in England. Using spatial video and deep learning for automated mapping of ground-level context in relief camps. The influence of malaria control interventions and climate variability on changes in the geographical distribution of parasite prevalence in Kenya between 2015 and 2020. Understanding Ixodes ricinus occurrence in private yards: influence of yard and landscape features. Accessibility, neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and expenditures on electronic gambling machines: a spatial analysis based on player account data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1