SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 13
The problem of mapping mortality rate:
geocoding complexity
• Developing smoothed maps of Prostate mortality
rate, in Iowa, based on the combinations of
different geographic reference level and methods.
Geographic references Methods
Downscalin
g
Upscaling
County Level (99 locations)
* *
City and “rest of county” level (1053
Locations)
N/A
*
•Computing the observed and expected numbers of deaths
 for county level geographic reference (99 locations)
 for city and “the rest of county” level geographic reference (1053 locations)
Downscaling and Upscaling methods
Downscaling
Upscaling
Inverse Distance Weight
Kernel Filter Method
Spatial Model
Measurement
Model
Mortality Data
Individual prostate cancer mortality data (year 1999-2003)
associated with city codes and county codes in Iowa
was provided by Iowa Department of Public Health. An
made up example shows as following:
Date_Death sex Age Date_Birth County_Resid City_Resid
1/13/2010 M 83 12/20/1900 029 BUR
1/14/2010 M 67 12/21/1900 029 SPI
1/15/2010 M 82 12/22/1900 030 SPI
1/16/2010 M 71 12/24/1900 041 KEO
1/16/2010 M 74 12/23/1900 041 XXX
• Some death records are outside of city limits but within the
corresponding county
•Some cities across different counties
Figure 1: Example of cities crossing different counties
Male Population
Area Number
WEST
BRANCH 1039
Cedar (Part) 997
Johnson
(Part) 42
Compute the observed and expected numbers of deaths
for county level, 99 locations
• Creating the geographic location
files
– County centroid file
• Aggregating mortality records
based on corresponding county
code combination
• Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of
rest counties to the county centroid file
• The expected number of deaths was calculated by
indirectly standardization for age for these counties
centroids
•Calculating statewide standard mortality rate for different age categories
•Obtaining population of each age category for county1
1: available from State Date Center of Iowa http://data.iowadatacenter.org/browse/places.html#PopulationbyCounty
• Multiplying the population of each age category with
corresponding statewide standard mortality rate to get
expected number of deaths for each age category in
each county
• Summing all the expected numbers of deaths in each
age category together to obtain the total expected
number of deaths for each county
• Assigning those values to corresponding county
centroids
Compute the observed and expected numbers of deaths
for county level, 99 locations (continued)
Assigning observed mortality records to
city and “rest of county” locations
• Creating another geographic
location file
– City point location file (only one
point location for boundary
crossed city) based on populated
places point file2
• Aggregating mortality records
based on corresponding
unique city/county code
combination
2: available from NRGIS library http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu/nrgislibx/gishome.htm
• Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of
cities to the city point location file
• Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of
rest counties to the county centroid file
Process to compute expected numbers of
deaths for city and “rest of county” locations
• The expected number of deaths was
calculated after the adjustment of age for
these cities and counties centriods
– Statewide standard mortality rate for different
age categories
– Population of each age category for cities3
– Population of each age category for the rest
of county
3: available from State Date Center of Iowa http://data.iowadatacenter.org/browse/places.html#PopulationbyCounty
• Compute the population of each age category for the rest of county
County City M0_39 M40_44 … M85A
Cedar 111546 14741 … 1370
City A (fully located within County) Pop_A_1 Pop_A_2 … Pop_A_11
City B (fully located within County) Pop_B_1 Pop_B_2 … Pop_B_11
…
…
…
…
…
West Branch
(Partly located in County) Partial_Pop_1 Partial_Pop_2 … Partial_Pop_11
Pop of each age category for
the rest of Pork county Result_1 Result_2 … Result_11
County City M0_39 M40_44 … M85A
Johnson 11470 1618 … 203
City A (fully located within County) Pop_A_1 Pop_A_2 … Pop_A_11
City B (fully located within County) Pop_B_1 Pop_B_2 … Pop_B_11
…
…
…
…
…
West Branch
(Partly located in County) Partial_Pop_1 Partial_Pop_2 … Partial_Pop_11
Pop of each age category for
the rest of Pork county Result_1 Result_2 … Result_11
Process to compute expected numbers of deaths
for city and “rest of county” locations (continued)
• Multiplying the population of each age category with
corresponding statewide standard mortality rate to get
expected number of deaths for each age category
• Summing all the expected numbers of deaths in each
age category together to obtain the total expected
number of deaths for each city and rest of county
• Assigning those values to corresponding city and county
centroids
• Combining city point file and county centroid file together.
We obtained a point file which contains 1053 point
locations and corresponding observed and expected
numbers of deaths.
Process to compute expected numbers of deaths
for city and “rest of county” locations (continued)
Create smoothed Prostate mortality
map
Figure 2: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003)
using Inverse Distance Weight (IDW) and county centroids for geocodes (99 areas):
Create smoothed Prostate mortality
map (continued)
Figure 3: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003)
using a fixed distance filters and county centroids for geocodes (99 areas):
a – 30 mile fixed distance filter b – 40 mile fixed distance filter
Correlation coefficient=0.65
Create smoothed Prostate mortality
map (continued)
Figure 4: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003)
using a fixed distance filters and city and “rest of county” geocodes (1053 areas)
a – 30 mile fixed distance filter b – 40 mile fixed distance filter
Correlation coefficient=0.73

More Related Content

More from Chen Zunqiu

Presentation noanimation
Presentation noanimationPresentation noanimation
Presentation noanimationChen Zunqiu
 
the elements of data analytic style checklisti
the elements of data analytic style checklistithe elements of data analytic style checklisti
the elements of data analytic style checklistiChen Zunqiu
 
New Opportunity for Urban Analysis
New Opportunity for Urban AnalysisNew Opportunity for Urban Analysis
New Opportunity for Urban AnalysisChen Zunqiu
 
MortalityRateComp
MortalityRateCompMortalityRateComp
MortalityRateCompChen Zunqiu
 
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]Chen Zunqiu
 
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTI
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTIMaps for Peds MRSA SSTI
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTIChen Zunqiu
 
ZunqiuPresentationOct05
ZunqiuPresentationOct05ZunqiuPresentationOct05
ZunqiuPresentationOct05Chen Zunqiu
 

More from Chen Zunqiu (13)

Presentation noanimation
Presentation noanimationPresentation noanimation
Presentation noanimation
 
the elements of data analytic style checklisti
the elements of data analytic style checklistithe elements of data analytic style checklisti
the elements of data analytic style checklisti
 
proposal2
proposal2proposal2
proposal2
 
proposal[1]
proposal[1]proposal[1]
proposal[1]
 
Presentation1
Presentation1Presentation1
Presentation1
 
Presentation2
Presentation2Presentation2
Presentation2
 
figures
figuresfigures
figures
 
New Opportunity for Urban Analysis
New Opportunity for Urban AnalysisNew Opportunity for Urban Analysis
New Opportunity for Urban Analysis
 
PCSA
PCSAPCSA
PCSA
 
MortalityRateComp
MortalityRateCompMortalityRateComp
MortalityRateComp
 
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]
Members’ distribution of Infectious diseases network[edited1]
 
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTI
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTIMaps for Peds MRSA SSTI
Maps for Peds MRSA SSTI
 
ZunqiuPresentationOct05
ZunqiuPresentationOct05ZunqiuPresentationOct05
ZunqiuPresentationOct05
 

Producing Smoothed Prostate Mortality Map, Iowa

  • 1. The problem of mapping mortality rate: geocoding complexity • Developing smoothed maps of Prostate mortality rate, in Iowa, based on the combinations of different geographic reference level and methods. Geographic references Methods Downscalin g Upscaling County Level (99 locations) * * City and “rest of county” level (1053 Locations) N/A * •Computing the observed and expected numbers of deaths  for county level geographic reference (99 locations)  for city and “the rest of county” level geographic reference (1053 locations)
  • 2. Downscaling and Upscaling methods Downscaling Upscaling Inverse Distance Weight Kernel Filter Method Spatial Model Measurement Model
  • 3. Mortality Data Individual prostate cancer mortality data (year 1999-2003) associated with city codes and county codes in Iowa was provided by Iowa Department of Public Health. An made up example shows as following: Date_Death sex Age Date_Birth County_Resid City_Resid 1/13/2010 M 83 12/20/1900 029 BUR 1/14/2010 M 67 12/21/1900 029 SPI 1/15/2010 M 82 12/22/1900 030 SPI 1/16/2010 M 71 12/24/1900 041 KEO 1/16/2010 M 74 12/23/1900 041 XXX • Some death records are outside of city limits but within the corresponding county •Some cities across different counties
  • 4. Figure 1: Example of cities crossing different counties Male Population Area Number WEST BRANCH 1039 Cedar (Part) 997 Johnson (Part) 42
  • 5. Compute the observed and expected numbers of deaths for county level, 99 locations • Creating the geographic location files – County centroid file • Aggregating mortality records based on corresponding county code combination • Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of rest counties to the county centroid file • The expected number of deaths was calculated by indirectly standardization for age for these counties centroids •Calculating statewide standard mortality rate for different age categories •Obtaining population of each age category for county1 1: available from State Date Center of Iowa http://data.iowadatacenter.org/browse/places.html#PopulationbyCounty
  • 6. • Multiplying the population of each age category with corresponding statewide standard mortality rate to get expected number of deaths for each age category in each county • Summing all the expected numbers of deaths in each age category together to obtain the total expected number of deaths for each county • Assigning those values to corresponding county centroids Compute the observed and expected numbers of deaths for county level, 99 locations (continued)
  • 7. Assigning observed mortality records to city and “rest of county” locations • Creating another geographic location file – City point location file (only one point location for boundary crossed city) based on populated places point file2 • Aggregating mortality records based on corresponding unique city/county code combination 2: available from NRGIS library http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu/nrgislibx/gishome.htm • Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of cities to the city point location file • Assigning the observed aggregated mortality records of rest counties to the county centroid file
  • 8. Process to compute expected numbers of deaths for city and “rest of county” locations • The expected number of deaths was calculated after the adjustment of age for these cities and counties centriods – Statewide standard mortality rate for different age categories – Population of each age category for cities3 – Population of each age category for the rest of county 3: available from State Date Center of Iowa http://data.iowadatacenter.org/browse/places.html#PopulationbyCounty
  • 9. • Compute the population of each age category for the rest of county County City M0_39 M40_44 … M85A Cedar 111546 14741 … 1370 City A (fully located within County) Pop_A_1 Pop_A_2 … Pop_A_11 City B (fully located within County) Pop_B_1 Pop_B_2 … Pop_B_11 … … … … … West Branch (Partly located in County) Partial_Pop_1 Partial_Pop_2 … Partial_Pop_11 Pop of each age category for the rest of Pork county Result_1 Result_2 … Result_11 County City M0_39 M40_44 … M85A Johnson 11470 1618 … 203 City A (fully located within County) Pop_A_1 Pop_A_2 … Pop_A_11 City B (fully located within County) Pop_B_1 Pop_B_2 … Pop_B_11 … … … … … West Branch (Partly located in County) Partial_Pop_1 Partial_Pop_2 … Partial_Pop_11 Pop of each age category for the rest of Pork county Result_1 Result_2 … Result_11 Process to compute expected numbers of deaths for city and “rest of county” locations (continued)
  • 10. • Multiplying the population of each age category with corresponding statewide standard mortality rate to get expected number of deaths for each age category • Summing all the expected numbers of deaths in each age category together to obtain the total expected number of deaths for each city and rest of county • Assigning those values to corresponding city and county centroids • Combining city point file and county centroid file together. We obtained a point file which contains 1053 point locations and corresponding observed and expected numbers of deaths. Process to compute expected numbers of deaths for city and “rest of county” locations (continued)
  • 11. Create smoothed Prostate mortality map Figure 2: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003) using Inverse Distance Weight (IDW) and county centroids for geocodes (99 areas):
  • 12. Create smoothed Prostate mortality map (continued) Figure 3: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003) using a fixed distance filters and county centroids for geocodes (99 areas): a – 30 mile fixed distance filter b – 40 mile fixed distance filter Correlation coefficient=0.65
  • 13. Create smoothed Prostate mortality map (continued) Figure 4: Indirect age standardized prostate cancer mortality in Iowa (1999-2003) using a fixed distance filters and city and “rest of county” geocodes (1053 areas) a – 30 mile fixed distance filter b – 40 mile fixed distance filter Correlation coefficient=0.73

Editor's Notes

  1. One is based on county level by downscaling method. Another one is also based on county level but by upscaling method. The last map is based on city and “rest of county” level by upscaling method.
  2. From the combination of county and city code, we can tell where the death record is located. Notice city code XXX such as this record which means this death record is located out of any city limits but still within this county. From this kind of feature of the data, we decided to use city level with the compensation of county level as our geocoding support area level.
  3. In this case, we decide to use city point file and county centroid file as our finest geographic support level for the mortality data.
  4. NRGIS library
  5. Population of each age category for the whole county –population of each age category for each city-partial population of each age category for cross county board city
  6. The mortality rate for Prostate cancer was mapped by using kernel filter method over a grid consisting of 6300 gird nodes with a 3 miles spacing. Iowa counties are approximately 30 miles across. So, a 30 mile fixed distance filter will pull in centroids of all adjacent counties to any grid points within the circle whereas 40 mile fixed distance in some circumstance will pull in more than immediately adjacent counties. In this case, we can tell easily form figure b that is quite smoother than a. The correlation coefficient between these two maps is 0.6463, indicating a substantial difference between the two map patterns.
  7. The mortality rate for Prostate cancer was mapped by using kernel filter method over a grid consisting of 6300 gird nodes with a 3 miles spacing. Iowa counties are approximately 30 miles across. So, a 30 mile fixed distance filter will pull in centroids of all adjacent counties to any grid points within the circle whereas 40 mile fixed distance in some circumstance will pull in more than immediately adjacent counties. In this case, we can tell easily form figure b that is quite smoother than a. The correlation coefficient between these two maps is 0.6463, indicating a substantial difference between the two map patterns.
  8. The correlation between these 2 maps is 0.7308 which is increased compared to the correlation of last two maps. It indicates that a substantial part of the differences in patterns between the maps was caused by the grossness of the county-level geocodes.