Accuracy and repeatability of commercial geocoding.
Accuracy and repeatability of commercial geocoding.
复制标题
商业地理编码的准确性和可重复性。
DOI：
10.1093/aje/kwh310
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Heiss,Gerardo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Whitsel,EricA;Rose,KathrynM;Wood,JoyL;Henley,AmandaC;Liao,Duanping;Heiss,Gerardo
作者估计了商业地理编码的准确性和可重复性，以指导生命历程社会经济状况、社会背景和心血管疾病研究（2001-2002）中的供应商选择。他们在 9 个月内两次向供应商 A 提交了 1,032 个参与者地址（97% 在马里兰州、明尼苏达州、密西西比州或北卡罗来纳州），并测量了重复性，即地址匹配水平之间的一致性、统计列表区域之间的不一致 (%) 以及每次分配的坐标之间的中位距离（d，以米为单位）和方位角（θ，以度为单位）（Ho:Σi= 1 →n[θi/n] = 180°）。他们还向供应商 A 和 B 提交了附近空气污染监测器的 75 个地址（77% 城市/郊区；69% 住宅/商业），然后通过使用上述措施比较供应商和美国环境保护局 (EPA) 分配的地理编码来测量准确性。供应商 A 分配的地理编码的重复性很高（kappa = 0.90；人口普查区块组不一致 = 5%；d< 1 m；θ = 177°）。供应商 B 与 A 的 EPA 监测地址匹配率较高（88% 与 76%），但供应商 B 的人口普查区块组、区域和县级别的不一致也分别高出 1.4、1.9 和 5.0 倍。此外，供应商 B 分配的坐标与 EPA 分配的坐标相距更远（d= 212 m 与 149 m；θ = 131° 与 131°）。 171°）。这些发现表明，应使用匹配率、重复性和准确性来指导供应商选择。
The authors estimated accuracy and repeatability of commercial geocoding to guide vendor selection in the Life Course Socioeconomic Status, Social Context and Cardiovascular Disease study (2001–2002). They submitted 1,032 participant addresses (97% in Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, or North Carolina) to vendor A twice over 9 months and measured repeatability as agreement between levels of address matching, discordance (%) between statistical tabulation areas, and median distance (d, in meters) and bearing (θ, in degrees) between coordinates assigned on each occasion (Ho:Σi= 1 →n[θi/n] = 180°). They also submitted 75 addresses of nearby air pollution monitors (77% urban/suburban; 69% residential/commercial) to vendors A and B and then measured accuracy by comparing vendor- and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)–assigned geocodes using the above measures. Repeatability of geocodes assigned by vendor A was high (kappa = 0.90; census block group discordance = 5%;d< 1 m; θ = 177°). The match rate for EPA monitor addresses was higher for vendor B versus A (88% vs. 76%), but discordance at census block group, tract, and county levels also was, respectively, 1.4-, 1.9-, and 5.0-fold higher for vendor B. Moreover, coordinates assigned by vendor B were further from those assigned by the EPA (d= 212 m vs. 149 m; θ = 131° vs. 171°). These findings suggest that match rates, repeatability,andaccuracy should be used to guide vendor selection.