CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 711Health disparities and outcomesPublic Health and Social InequalitiesUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies

Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Monitoring Socioeconomic Gradients in Health: A Comparison of Area-Based Socioeconomic Measures—The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project

Open access
Krieger, Nancy, Chen, Jarvis T., Waterman, Pamela D., Rehkopf, David H., Subramanian, S. V.·2003·American Journal of Public Health
DOI 10.2105/ajph.93.10.1655PMC PMC1448030
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Use of multilevel frameworks and area-based socioeconomic measures (ABSMs) for public health monitoring can potentially overcome the absence of socioeconomic data in most US public health surveillance systems. To assess whether ABSMs can meaningfully be used for diverse race/ethnicity–gender groups, we geocoded and linked public health surveillance data from Massachusetts and Rhode Island to 1990 block group, tract, and zip code ABSMs. Outcomes comprised death, birth, cancer incidence, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections, childhood lead poisoning, and nonfatal weapons-related injuries. Among White, Black, and Hispanic women and men, measures of economic deprivation (e.g., percentage below poverty) were most sensitive to expected socioeconomic gradients in health, with the most consistent results and maximal geocoding linkage evident for tract-level analyses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.93.10.1655

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Researchers and clinicians are using artificial intelligence to integrate electronic health records and social risk factors, such as neighborhood characteristics, to predict outcomes important to individuals with diabetes, including poor control.

    “researchers and clinicians are using artificial intelligence (AI) to integrate electronic health records (EHRs) and social risk factors, such as neighborhood characteristics, to predict outcomes important to individuals with diabetes, including poor control [17-22].”

    From An Assessment of How Clinicians and Staff Members Use a Diabetes Artificial Intelligence Prediction Tool: Mixed Methods Study (2023) · cites this paper as [22]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 63 · Cited by 711

Research works printed but not linked: 53

  1. [2]Leon D, Walt G, eds. Poverty, Inequality, and Health: An International Perspective. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2001.
  2. [3]Marmot M, Wilkinson RG, eds. Social Determinants of Health. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 1999.
  3. [4]Berkman L, Kawachi I, eds. Social Epidemiology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2000.
  4. [5]Krieger N, Chen JT, Ebel G. Can we monitor socioeconomic inequalities in health? A survey of US Health Departments’ data collection and reporting practices. Public Health Rep. 1997;112:481–491. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. [6]Krieger N, Williams D, Moss N. Measuring social class in US public health research: concepts, methodologies and guidelines. Annu Rev Public Health. 1997;18:341–378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. [7]Tolson GC, Barnes JM, Gay GA, Kowaleski JL. The 1989 revision of the US standard certificates and reports. Vital Health Stat 4. 1991;No. 28. [PubMed]
  7. [9]Pollack AM, Rice DP. Monitoring health care in the United States—a challenging task. Public Health Rep. 1997;112:108–113. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. [11]Healthy People 2010. Conference ed, 2 vol. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2000:objective 23–3. Available at: http://www.health.gov/healthypeople. Accessed January 1, 2003.
  9. [12]Krieger N, Zierler S, Hogan JW, et al. Geocoding and measurement of neighborhood socioeconomic position: a US perspective. In: Kawachi I, Berkman L, eds. Neighborhoods and Health. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2003:147–178.
  10. [14]Williams DR. Race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status: measurement and methodological issues. Int J Health Serv. 1996;26:483–505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. [15]Krieger N. Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology. Am J Public Health. 1992;82:703–710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. [16]Lynch J, Kaplan G. Socioeconomic position. In: Berkman L, Kawachi I, eds. Social Epidemiology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2000:13–35.
  13. [18]Green HW. The use of census tracts in analyzing the population of a metropolitan community. J Am Stat Assoc. 1933;28:147–153. [Google Scholar]
  14. [19]Terris M. Relation of economic status to tuberculosis mortality by age and sex. Am J Public Health. 1948;38:1061–1070. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. [20]Coulter EJ, Guralnick L. Analysis of vital statistics by census tract. J Am Stat Assoc. 1959;54:730–740. [Google Scholar]
  16. [21]Carstairs V. Socio-economic factors at areal level and their relationship with health. In: Elliott P, Wakefield J, Best N, Briggs D, eds. Spatial Epidemiology: Methods and Applications. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2000:51–67.
  17. [22]Krieger N. Epidemiology and the web of causation: has anyone seen the spider? Soc Sci Med. 1994;39:887–903. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. [24]Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Soobader M-J, Subramanian SV, Carson R. Geocoding and monitoring US socioeconomic inequalities in mortality and cancer incidence: does choice of area-based measure and geographic level matter? The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:471–482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. [25]Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Soobader M-J, Subramanian SV, Carson R. Choosing area-based socioeconomic measures to monitor social inequalities in low birthweight and childhood lead poisoning—The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project (US). J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57:186–199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. [26]Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Soobader M-J, Subramanian SV. Monitoring socioeconomic inequalities in sexually transmitted infections, tuberculosis, and violence: geocoding and choice of area-based socioeconomic measures—The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project (US). Public Health Rep. 2003;118:240–260. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. [27]Rossi RJ, Gilmartin KJ. The Handbook of Social Indicators: Sources, Characteristics, and Analysis. New York, NY: Garland STPM Press; 1980.
  22. [28]Krieger N, Waterman P, Lemieux K, Zierler S, Hogan JW. On the wrong side of the tracts? Evaluating accuracy of geocoding for public health research. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1114–1116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. [48]Krieger N, Waterman P, Chen JT, Soobader M-J, Subramanian SV, Carson R. Zip code caveat: bias due to spatiotemporal mismatches between zip codes and US census–defined areas—The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1100–1102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. [50]Cowell FA. Measuring Inequality. 2nd ed. London: Prentice Hall; 1995. LSE Handbooks in Economics Series.
  25. [51]Soobader M, LeClere FB. Aggregation and the measurement of income inequality: effects on morbidity. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:733–744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. [53]Carstairs V, Morris R. Deprivation and mortality: an alternative to social class? Community Med. 1989;11:210–219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. [59]Breslow NE, Day NE, eds. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research, Vol. II: The Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 1987:54.
  28. [60]Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott-Raven; 1998:263.
  29. [61]Anderson RN, Rosenberg HM. Age standardization of death rates: implementation of the year 2000 standard. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 1998;37(3). [PubMed]
  30. [62]Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research: Vol. I. The Analysis of Case–Control Studies. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1980:47. IARC Scientific Publication 32. [PubMed]
  31. [63]Boyle P, Parkin DM. Statistical methods for registries. In: Jensen OM, Parkin DM, MacLennan R, et al., eds. Cancer Registration: Principles and Methods. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1991:126–158. IARC Scientific Publication 95. [PubMed]
  32. [64]Pamuk ER. Social class inequality in mortality from 1921 to 1972 in England and Wales. Popul Stud. 1985;39:17–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. [65]Wagstaff A, Paci P, van Doorslaer E. On the measurement of inequalities in health. Soc Sci Med. 1991;33:545–557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. [66]Davey Smith G, Hart C, Hole D, et al. Education and occupational social class: which is the more important indicator of mortality risk? J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:153–160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. [68]Macintyre S, Ellaway A, Cummins S. Place effects on health: how can we conceptualise, operationalise and measure them? Soc Sci Med. 2002;55:125–139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. [69]Diez-Roux AV. Multilevel analysis in public health research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:171–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. [70]Jones K, Duncan C. Individuals and their ecologies: analysing the geography of chronic illness within a multilevel modelling framework. Health Place. 1995;1:27–40. [Google Scholar]
  38. [71]O’Campo P. Invited commentary: advancing theory and methods for multilevel models of residential neighborhoods and health. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157:9–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. [72]Subramanian SV, Jones K, Duncan C. Multilevel methods for public health research. In: Kawachi I, Berkman L, eds. Neighborhoods and Health. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2003:65–111.
  40. [73]Krieger N. Women and social class: a methodological study comparing individual, household, and census measures as predictors of black/white differences in reproductive history. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1991;45:35–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. [74]Geronimus AT, Bound J, Neidert LJ. On the validity of using census geocode data to proxy individual socioeconomic characteristics. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91:529–537. [Google Scholar]
  42. [75]Soobader M, LeClere FB, Hadden W, Maury B. Using aggregate geographic data to proxy individual socioeconomic status: does size matter? Am J Public Health. 2001;91:632–636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. [76]Alker HR Jr. A typology of ecologic fallacies. In: Doggan M, Rokkan S, eds. Social Ecology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press; 1969:69–86.
  44. [77]Oppenshaw S, Taylor PJ. The modifiable areal unit problem. In: Wrigley N, Bennett RJ, eds. Quantitative Geography. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1981:60–69.
  45. [78]Sorensen A. Women, family, and class. Annu Rev Sociol. 1994;20:27–47. [Google Scholar]
  46. [79]Lahelma E, Manderbacka K, Rahkonen O, Karisto A. Comparisons of inequalities in health: evidence from national surveys in Finland, Norway and Sweden. Soc Sci Med. 1994;38:517–524. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. [80]Borrell C, Rue M, Pasarin MI, Benach J, Kunst AE. The measurement of inequalities in health. Gac Sanit. 2000;14(suplemento 3):20–33.11459557 [Google Scholar]
  48. [81]Krieger N. Does racism harm health? Did child abuse exist before 1962? On explicit questions, critical science, and current controversies: an ecosocial perspective. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:194–199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. [85]Laws MB, Heckscher RA. Racial and ethnic identification practices in public health data systems in New England. Public Health Rep. 2002;117:50–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. [86]Anderson NB. Levels of analysis in health science. A framework for integrating sociobehavioral and biomedical research. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1998;840:563–576. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. [88]Susser M, Susser E. Choosing a future for epidemiology, II: from black boxes to Chinese boxes and eco-epidemiology. Am J Public Health. 1996;86:674–677. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. [89]McKinlay JB, Marceau LD. To boldly go. . . . Am J Public Health. 2000;90:25–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. [90]Krieger N, Fee E. Measuring social inequalities in health in the United States: an historical review, 1900–1950. Int J Health Serv. 1996;26:391–418. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Authors
Krieger, N., Chen, J. T., Waterman, P. D., Rehkopf, D. H., & Subramanian, S. V.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Publisher
American Public Health Association
Published
2003-10
Volume
93
Issue
10
Pages
1655-1671
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
DOI
10.2105/ajph.93.10.1655
PMC
PMC1448030
OpenAlex
W2083117436
Cited by
711
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 44
FWCI
17.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University Libraries (University of Maryland) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (University of Maryland College Park)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01hd036865-04)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA036865)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1 R01 HD36865-01)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Keywords
race and ethnicity, gender, disease surveillance, geocoding, multilevel analysis, economic hardship, poverty, health disparities, cancer incidence, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections, childhood lead poisoning, census block groups, tracts, zip codes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child, Preschool, Ethnicity, Female, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Infant, Lead Poisoning, Male, Massachusetts, Middle Aged, Mortality, Neoplasms, Population Surveillance, Residence Characteristics, Rhode Island, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Socioeconomic Factors, Tuberculosis, Wounds, Gunshot, Small-Area Analysis, Sex Distribution, Public Health Informatics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review