Quality of automatic geocoding tools: a study using addresses from hospital record files in Temuco, Chile
Por:
Quinteros, M, Blazquez, C, Rosas, F, Ayala, S, Garcia, X, Delgado-Saborit, J, Harrison, R, Ruiz-Rudolph, P and Yohannessen, K
Publicada:
1 ene 2022
Resumen:
Automatic geocoding methods have become popular in recent years, facilitating the study of the association between health outcomes and the place of living. however, rather few studies have evaluated geocoding quality, with most of them being performed in the US and Europe. This article aims to compare the quality of three automatic online geocoding tools against a reference method. A subsample of 300 handwritten addresses from hospital records was geocoded using Bing, Google Earth, and Google Maps. Match rates were higher (> 80%) for Google Maps and Google Earth compared with Bing. However, the accuracy of the addresses was better for Bing with a larger proportion (> 70%) of addresses with positional errors below 20m. Generally, performance did not vary for each method for different socioeconomic status. Overall, the methods showed an acceptable, but heterogeneous performance, which may be a warning against the use of automatic methods without assessing quality in other municipalities, particularly in Chile and Latin America.
Filiaciones:
Quinteros, M:
Univ Talca, Talca, Chile
Blazquez, C:
Univ Andres Bello, Vina Del Mar, Chile
Rosas, F:
Univ La Frontera, Temuco, Chile
Ayala, S:
Univ Chile, Independencia 939, Santiago, Chile
Garcia, X:
Univ La Frontera, Temuco, Chile
:
Univ Jaume 1, Castellon de La Plana, Spain
Univ Birmingham, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
Harrison, R:
Univ Birmingham, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
Ruiz-Rudolph, P:
Univ Chile, Independencia 939, Santiago, Chile
Yohannessen, K:
Univ Chile, Independencia 939, Santiago, Chile
gold, Green Published
|