You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A generic method for improving the spatial interoperability of medical and ecological databases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Health Geographics, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12942-017-0109-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Ghenassia, J. B. Beuscart, G. Ficheur, F. Occelli, E. Babykina, E. Chazard, M. Genin |
| Abstract |
The availability of big data in healthcare and the intensive development of data reuse and georeferencing have opened up perspectives for health spatial analysis. However, fine-scale spatial studies of ecological and medical databases are limited by the change of support problem and thus a lack of spatial unit interoperability. The use of spatial disaggregation methods to solve this problem introduces errors into the spatial estimations. Here, we present a generic, two-step method for merging medical and ecological databases that avoids the use of spatial disaggregation methods, while maximizing the spatial resolution. Firstly, a mapping table is created after one or more transition matrices have been defined. The latter link the spatial units of the original databases to the spatial units of the final database. Secondly, the mapping table is validated by (1) comparing the covariates contained in the two original databases, and (2) checking the spatial validity with a spatial continuity criterion and a spatial resolution index. We used our novel method to merge a medical database (the French national diagnosis-related group database, containing 5644 spatial units) with an ecological database (produced by the French National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies, and containing with 36,594 spatial units). The mapping table yielded 5632 final spatial units. The mapping table's validity was evaluated by comparing the number of births in the medical database and the ecological databases in each final spatial unit. The median [interquartile range] relative difference was 2.3% [0; 5.7]. The spatial continuity criterion was low (2.4%), and the spatial resolution index was greater than for most French administrative areas. Our innovative approach improves interoperability between medical and ecological databases and facilitates fine-scale spatial analyses. We have shown that disaggregation models and large aggregation techniques are not necessarily the best ways to tackle the change of support problem. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 28% |
| Unknown | 12 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2018.
All research outputs
#16,074,502
of 24,457,696 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#431
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,754
of 327,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,457,696 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.