Comparing the accuracy of food outlet datasets in an urban environment

  • Michelle S. Wong | mwong23@jhu.edu Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, United States. http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7917-9696
  • Jennifer M. Peyton Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States.
  • Timothy M. Shields Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, United States.
  • Frank C. Curriero Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, United States.
  • Kimberly A. Gudzune Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.

Abstract

Studies that investigate the relationship between the retail food environment and health outcomes often use geospatial datasets. Prior studies have identified challenges of using the most common data sources. Retail food environment datasets created through academic-government partnership present an alternative, but their validity (retail existence, type, location) has not been assessed yet. In our study, we used ground-truth data to compare the validity of two datasets, a 2015 commercial dataset (InfoUSA) and data collected from 2012 to 2014 through the Maryland Food Systems Mapping Project (MFSMP), an academic-government partnership, on the retail food environment in two low-income, inner city neighbourhoods in Baltimore City. We compared sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the commercial and academic-government partnership data to ground-truth data for two broad categories of unhealthy food retailers: small food retailers and quick-service restaurants. Ground-truth data was collected in 2015 and analysed in 2016. Compared to the ground-truth data, MFSMP and InfoUSA generally had similar sensitivity that was greater than 85%. MFSMP had higher PPV compared to InfoUSA for both small food retailers (MFSMP: 56.3% vs InfoUSA: 40.7%) and quick-service restaurants (MFSMP: 58.6% vs InfoUSA: 36.4%). We conclude that data from academic-government partnerships like MFSMP might be an attractive alternative option and improvement to relying only on commercial data. Other research institutes or cities might consider efforts to create and maintain such an environmental dataset. Even if these datasets cannot be updated on an annual basis, they are likely more accurate than commercial data.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Michelle S. Wong, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health
PhD Candidate
Published
2017-05-11
Section
Original Articles
Keywords:
Retail food environment, Urban food environment, Validity, Geographic Information Systems
Statistics
Abstract views: 1198

PDF: 438
HTML: 917
Share it

PlumX Metrics

PlumX Metrics provide insights into the ways people interact with individual pieces of research output (articles, conference proceedings, book chapters, and many more) in the online environment. Examples include, when research is mentioned in the news or is tweeted about. Collectively known as PlumX Metrics, these metrics are divided into five categories to help make sense of the huge amounts of data involved and to enable analysis by comparing like with like.

How to Cite
Wong, M., Peyton, J., Shields, T., Curriero, F., & Gudzune, K. (2017). Comparing the accuracy of food outlet datasets in an urban environment. Geospatial Health, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.4081/gh.2017.546