Disparity of Imputed Data from Small Area Estimate Approaches – A Case Study on Diabetes Prevalence at the County Level in the U.S.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2018-008Keywords:
Small area estimate, diabetes prevalence, multi-level logistic regression, spatial logistic regression, spatial Poisson regressionAbstract
This paper assesses concordance and inconsistency among three small area estimation methods that are currently providing county-level health indicators in the United States. The three methods are multi-level logistic regression, spatial logistic regression, and spatial Poison regression, all proposed since 2010. Diabetes prevalence is estimated for each county in the continental United States from the 2012 sample of Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. The mapping results show that all three methods displayed elevated diabetes prevalence in the South. While the Pearson correlation coefficients among three model-based estimates were all above 0.60, the highest one was 0.80 between the multilevel and spatial logistic methods. While point estimates are apparently different among the three small area estimate methods, their top and bottom of quintile distributions are fairly consistent based on Bangdiwala’s B-statistic, suggesting that outputs from each method would support consistent policy making in terms of identifying top and bottom percent counties.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms. If a submission is rejected or withdrawn prior to publication, all rights return to the author(s):
-
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Submitting to the journal implicitly confirms that all named authors and rights holders have agreed to the above terms of publication. It is the submitting author's responsibility to ensure all authors and relevant institutional bodies have given their agreement at the point of submission.
Note: some institutions require authors to seek written approval in relation to the terms of publication. Should this be required, authors can request a separate licence agreement document from the editorial team (e.g. authors who are Crown employees).