Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2001 Jul;91(7):1114-6.
doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.7.1114.

On the wrong side of the tracts? Evaluating the accuracy of geocoding in public health research

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Comparative Study

On the wrong side of the tracts? Evaluating the accuracy of geocoding in public health research

N Krieger et al. Am J Public Health. 2001 Jul.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Objectives: This study sought to determine the accuracy of geocoding for public health databases.

Methods: A test file of 70 addresses, 50 of which involved errors, was generated, and the file was geocoded to the census tract and block group levels by 4 commercial geocoding firms. Also, the "real world" accuracy of the best-performing firm was evaluated.

Results: Accuracy rates in regard to geocoding of the test file ranged from 44% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 32%, 56%) to 84% (95% CI = 73%, 92%). The geocoding firm identified as having the best accuracy rate correctly geocoded 96% of the addresses obtained from the public health databases.

Conclusions: Public health studies involving geocoded databases should evaluate and report on methods used to verify accuracy.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cancer Causes Control. 1999 Dec;10(6):525-37 - PubMed
    1. Public Health Rep. 1999 Jul-Aug;114(4):359-73 - PubMed
    1. Public Health Rep. 1997 Nov-Dec;112(6):481-91 - PubMed
    1. Am J Public Health. 1992 May;82(5):703-10 - PubMed
    1. Comput Biol Med. 1992 Sep;22(5):351-61 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources