Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Ann Epidemiol ; 80: 62-68.e3, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2275874

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: When studying health risks across a large geographic region such as a state or province, researchers often assume that finer-resolution data on health outcomes and risk factors will improve inferences by avoiding ecological bias and other issues associated with geographic aggregation. However, coarser-resolution data (e.g., at the town or county-level) are more commonly publicly available and packaged for easier access, allowing for rapid analyses. The advantages and limitations of using finer-resolution data, which may improve precision at the cost of time spent gaining access and processing data, have not been considered in detail to date. METHODS: We systematically examine the implications of conducting town-level mixed-effect regression analyses versus census-tract-level analyses to study sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 in Massachusetts. In a series of negative binomial regressions, we vary the spatial resolution of the outcome, the resolution of variable selection, and the resolution of the random effect to allow for more direct comparison across models. RESULTS: We find stability in some estimates across scenarios, changes in magnitude, direction, and significance in others, and tighter confidence intervals on the census-tract level. Conclusions regarding sociodemographic predictors are robust when regions of high concentration remain consistent across town and census-tract resolutions. CONCLUSIONS: Inferences about high-risk populations may be misleading if derived from town- or county-resolution data, especially for covariates that capture small subgroups (e.g., small racial minority populations) or are geographically concentrated or skewed (e.g., % college students). Our analysis can help inform more rapid and efficient use of public health data by identifying when finer-resolution data are truly most informative, or when coarser-resolution data may be misleading.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Students , Regression Analysis
2.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities ; 2022 Sep 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007324

ABSTRACT

Infectious disease surveillance frequently lacks complete information on race and ethnicity, making it difficult to identify health inequities. Greater awareness of this issue has occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic, during which inequities in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were reported but with evidence of substantial missing demographic details. Although the problem of missing race and ethnicity data in COVID-19 cases has been well documented, neither its spatiotemporal variation nor its particular drivers have been characterized. Using individual-level data on confirmed COVID-19 cases in Massachusetts from March 2020 to February 2021, we show how missing race and ethnicity data: (1) varied over time, appearing to increase sharply during two different periods of rapid case growth; (2) differed substantially between towns, indicating a nonrandom distribution; and (3) was associated significantly with several individual- and town-level characteristics in a mixed-effects regression model, suggesting a combination of personal and infrastructural drivers of missing data that persisted despite state and federal data-collection mandates. We discuss how a variety of factors may contribute to persistent missing data but could potentially be mitigated in future contexts.

3.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 686, 2021 Jul 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1571742

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Associations between community-level risk factors and COVID-19 incidence have been used to identify vulnerable subpopulations and target interventions, but the variability of these associations over time remains largely unknown. We evaluated variability in the associations between community-level predictors and COVID-19 case incidence in 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts from March to October 2020. METHODS: Using publicly available sociodemographic, occupational, environmental, and mobility datasets, we developed mixed-effect, adjusted Poisson regression models to depict associations between these variables and town-level COVID-19 case incidence data across five distinct time periods from March to October 2020. We examined town-level demographic variables, including population proportions by race, ethnicity, and age, as well as factors related to occupation, housing density, economic vulnerability, air pollution (PM2.5), and institutional facilities. We calculated incidence rate ratios (IRR) associated with these predictors and compared these values across the multiple time periods to assess variability in the observed associations over time. RESULTS: Associations between key predictor variables and town-level incidence varied across the five time periods. We observed reductions over time in the association with percentage of Black residents (IRR = 1.12 [95%CI: 1.12-1.13]) in early spring, IRR = 1.01 [95%CI: 1.00-1.01] in early fall) and COVID-19 incidence. The association with number of long-term care facility beds per capita also decreased over time (IRR = 1.28 [95%CI: 1.26-1.31] in spring, IRR = 1.07 [95%CI: 1.05-1.09] in fall). Controlling for other factors, towns with higher percentages of essential workers experienced elevated incidences of COVID-19 throughout the pandemic (e.g., IRR = 1.30 [95%CI: 1.27-1.33] in spring, IRR = 1.20 [95%CI: 1.17-1.22] in fall). Towns with higher proportions of Latinx residents also had sustained elevated incidence over time (IRR = 1.19 [95%CI: 1.18-1.21] in spring, IRR = 1.14 [95%CI: 1.13-1.15] in fall). CONCLUSIONS: Town-level COVID-19 risk factors varied with time in this study. In Massachusetts, racial (but not ethnic) disparities in COVID-19 incidence may have decreased across the first 8 months of the pandemic, perhaps indicating greater success in risk mitigation in selected communities. Our approach can be used to evaluate effectiveness of public health interventions and target specific mitigation efforts on the community level.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Occupations/statistics & numerical data , Social Environment , Transportation/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/ethnology , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Incidence , Income/statistics & numerical data , Male , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Movement/physiology , Pandemics , Residence Characteristics/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Socioeconomic Factors , Time Factors , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
4.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 16(2): 213-221, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511324

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for targeted local interventions given substantial heterogeneity within cities and counties. Publicly available case data are typically aggregated to the city or county level to protect patient privacy, but more granular data are necessary to identify and act upon community-level risk factors that can change over time. METHODS: Individual COVID-19 case and mortality data from Massachusetts were geocoded to residential addresses and aggregated into two time periods: "Phase 1" (March-June 2020) and "Phase 2" (September 2020 to February 2021). Institutional cases associated with long-term care facilities, prisons, or homeless shelters were identified using address data and modeled separately. Census tract sociodemographic and occupational predictors were drawn from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey. We used mixed-effects negative binomial regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs), accounting for town-level spatial autocorrelation. RESULTS: Case incidence was elevated in census tracts with higher proportions of Black and Latinx residents, with larger associations in Phase 1 than Phase 2. Case incidence associated with proportion of essential workers was similarly elevated in both Phases. Mortality IRRs had differing patterns from case IRRs, decreasing less substantially between Phases for Black and Latinx populations and increasing between Phases for proportion of essential workers. Mortality models excluding institutional cases yielded stronger associations for age, race/ethnicity, and essential worker status. CONCLUSIONS: Geocoded home address data can allow for nuanced analyses of community disease patterns, identification of high-risk subgroups, and exclusion of institutional cases to comprehensively reflect community risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL