Spatial accessibility to health facilities in Sub-Saharan Africa: comparing existing models with survey-based perceived accessibility.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jérémie Bihin, Florence De Longueville, Catherine Linard
{"title":"Spatial accessibility to health facilities in Sub-Saharan Africa: comparing existing models with survey-based perceived accessibility.","authors":"Jérémie Bihin,&nbsp;Florence De Longueville,&nbsp;Catherine Linard","doi":"10.1186/s12942-022-00318-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mapping geographical accessibility to health services is essential to improve access to public health in sub-Saharan Africa. Different methods exist to estimate geographical accessibility, but little is known about the ability of these methods to represent the experienced accessibility of the population, and about the added-value of sophisticated and data-demanding methods over simpler ones. Here we compare the most commonly used methods to survey-based perceived accessibility in different geographical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Modelled accessibility maps are computed for 12 selected sub-Saharan African countries using four methods: Euclidean distance, cost-distance considering walking and motorized speed, and Kernel density. All methods are based on open and large-scale datasets to allow replication. Correlation coefficients are computed between the four modelled accessibility indexes and the perceived accessibility index extracted from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), and compared across different socio-geographical contexts (rural and urban, population with or without access to motorized transports, per country).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis suggests that, at medium spatial resolution and using globally-consistent input datasets, the use of sophisticated and data-demanding methods is difficult to justify as their added value over a simple Euclidian distance method is not clear. We also highlight that all modelled accessibilities are better correlated with perceived accessibility in rural than urban contexts and for population who do not have access to motorized transportation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper should guide researchers in the public health domain for knowing strengths and limits of different methods to evaluate disparities in health services accessibility. We suggest that using cost-distance accessibility maps over Euclidean distance is not always relevant, especially when based on low resolution and/or non-exhaustive geographical datasets, which is often the case in low- and middle-income countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":48739,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Geographics","volume":" ","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9652128/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Geographics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-022-00318-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mapping geographical accessibility to health services is essential to improve access to public health in sub-Saharan Africa. Different methods exist to estimate geographical accessibility, but little is known about the ability of these methods to represent the experienced accessibility of the population, and about the added-value of sophisticated and data-demanding methods over simpler ones. Here we compare the most commonly used methods to survey-based perceived accessibility in different geographical settings.

Methods: Modelled accessibility maps are computed for 12 selected sub-Saharan African countries using four methods: Euclidean distance, cost-distance considering walking and motorized speed, and Kernel density. All methods are based on open and large-scale datasets to allow replication. Correlation coefficients are computed between the four modelled accessibility indexes and the perceived accessibility index extracted from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), and compared across different socio-geographical contexts (rural and urban, population with or without access to motorized transports, per country).

Results: Our analysis suggests that, at medium spatial resolution and using globally-consistent input datasets, the use of sophisticated and data-demanding methods is difficult to justify as their added value over a simple Euclidian distance method is not clear. We also highlight that all modelled accessibilities are better correlated with perceived accessibility in rural than urban contexts and for population who do not have access to motorized transportation.

Conclusions: This paper should guide researchers in the public health domain for knowing strengths and limits of different methods to evaluate disparities in health services accessibility. We suggest that using cost-distance accessibility maps over Euclidean distance is not always relevant, especially when based on low resolution and/or non-exhaustive geographical datasets, which is often the case in low- and middle-income countries.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

撒哈拉以南非洲卫生设施的空间可达性:比较现有模式与基于调查的感知可达性。
背景:绘制卫生服务地理可及性地图对于改善撒哈拉以南非洲获得公共卫生服务的机会至关重要。估计地理可达性的方法多种多样,但这些方法是否能够反映人口的可达性,以及复杂和数据要求高的方法相对于简单方法的附加值,人们所知甚少。在这里,我们比较了在不同地理环境中最常用的基于调查的感知可达性方法。方法:采用欧几里得距离、考虑步行和机动速度的成本距离和核密度四种方法,对12个撒哈拉以南非洲国家的可达性地图进行建模计算。所有方法都基于开放和大规模的数据集,以允许复制。计算了四个模拟的可达性指数与从人口与健康调查(DHS)中提取的可达性指数之间的相关系数,并在不同的社会地理背景下(农村和城市,每个国家有或没有机动交通工具的人口)进行了比较。结果:我们的分析表明,在中等空间分辨率和使用全球一致的输入数据集时,很难证明使用复杂和数据要求高的方法是合理的,因为它们比简单的欧几里得距离方法的附加值并不明显。我们还强调,所有模拟的可达性在农村比在城市环境和没有机动交通工具的人口中更好地与可达性相关。结论:本文应指导公共卫生领域的研究人员了解评估卫生服务可及性差异的不同方法的优势和局限性。我们建议,在欧几里得距离上使用成本-距离可及性地图并不总是相关的,特别是当基于低分辨率和/或非详尽的地理数据集时,这种情况在低收入和中等收入国家经常出现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Health Geographics
International Journal of Health Geographics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
2.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leader among the field, International Journal of Health Geographics is an interdisciplinary, open access journal publishing internationally significant studies of geospatial information systems and science applications in health and healthcare. With an exceptional author satisfaction rate and a quick time to first decision, the journal caters to readers across an array of healthcare disciplines globally. International Journal of Health Geographics welcomes novel studies in the health and healthcare context spanning from spatial data infrastructure and Web geospatial interoperability research, to research into real-time Geographic Information Systems (GIS)-enabled surveillance services, remote sensing applications, spatial epidemiology, spatio-temporal statistics, internet GIS and cyberspace mapping, participatory GIS and citizen sensing, geospatial big data, healthy smart cities and regions, and geospatial Internet of Things and blockchain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信