TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of 3 food outlet databases
T2 - Completeness and geospatial accuracy in rural and urban food environments
AU - Liese, Angela D.
AU - Colabianchi, Natalie
AU - Lamichhane, Archana P.
AU - Barnes, Timothy L.
AU - Hibbert, James D.
AU - Porter, Dwayne E.
AU - Nichols, Michele D.
AU - Lawson, Andrew B.
PY - 2010/12/1
Y1 - 2010/12/1
N2 - Despite interest in the built food environment, little is known about the validity of commonly used secondary data. The authors conducted a comprehensive field census identifying the locations of all food outlets using a handheld global positioning system in 8 counties in South Carolina (2008-2009). Secondary data were obtained from 2 commercial companies, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (D&B) (Short Hills, New Jersey) and InfoUSA, Inc. (Omaha, Nebraska), and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and geospatial accuracy were compared. The field census identified 2,208 food outlets, significantly more than the DHEC (n = 1,694), InfoUSA (n = 1,657), or D&B (n = 1,573). Sensitivities were moderate for DHEC (68%) and InfoUSA (65%) and fair for D&B (55%). Combining InfoUSA and D&B data would have increased sensitivity to 78%. Positive predictive values were very good for DHEC (89%) and InfoUSA (86%) and good for D&B (78%). Geospatial accuracy varied, depending on the scale: More than 80% of outlets were geocoded to the correct US Census tract, but only 29%-39% were correctly allocated within 100 m. This study suggests that the validity of common data sources used to characterize the food environment is limited. The marked undercount of food outlets and the geospatial inaccuracies observed have the potential to introduce bias into studies evaluating the impact of the built food environment. American Journal of Epidemiology
AB - Despite interest in the built food environment, little is known about the validity of commonly used secondary data. The authors conducted a comprehensive field census identifying the locations of all food outlets using a handheld global positioning system in 8 counties in South Carolina (2008-2009). Secondary data were obtained from 2 commercial companies, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (D&B) (Short Hills, New Jersey) and InfoUSA, Inc. (Omaha, Nebraska), and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and geospatial accuracy were compared. The field census identified 2,208 food outlets, significantly more than the DHEC (n = 1,694), InfoUSA (n = 1,657), or D&B (n = 1,573). Sensitivities were moderate for DHEC (68%) and InfoUSA (65%) and fair for D&B (55%). Combining InfoUSA and D&B data would have increased sensitivity to 78%. Positive predictive values were very good for DHEC (89%) and InfoUSA (86%) and good for D&B (78%). Geospatial accuracy varied, depending on the scale: More than 80% of outlets were geocoded to the correct US Census tract, but only 29%-39% were correctly allocated within 100 m. This study suggests that the validity of common data sources used to characterize the food environment is limited. The marked undercount of food outlets and the geospatial inaccuracies observed have the potential to introduce bias into studies evaluating the impact of the built food environment. American Journal of Epidemiology
KW - environment
KW - food
KW - geography
KW - reproducibility of results
KW - residence characteristics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78649656596&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78649656596&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/aje/kwq292
DO - 10.1093/aje/kwq292
M3 - Article
C2 - 20961970
AN - SCOPUS:78649656596
SN - 0002-9262
VL - 172
SP - 1324
EP - 1333
JO - American journal of epidemiology
JF - American journal of epidemiology
IS - 11
ER -