Edwin M McCulley, Lisa Frueh, Deiriai Myers, Samuel Jaros, Hoda S Abdel Magid, Felicia Bayer, Gina S Lovasi
{"title":"测量公共卫生研究中的空间社会极化:方法和应用的范围综述。","authors":"Edwin M McCulley, Lisa Frueh, Deiriai Myers, Samuel Jaros, Hoda S Abdel Magid, Felicia Bayer, Gina S Lovasi","doi":"10.1007/s11524-024-00957-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spatial social polarization (SSP) refers to the uneven spatial distribution and subsequent concentration of polarized social and/or economic groups in a specified geographic area. However, there is heterogeneity in how SSP is measured and operationalized in research. To this end, we conducted a scoping review to characterize the use of SSP measures in public health research, providing a foundation for those seeking to navigate this complex literature, select measurement options, and identify opportunities for methodological development. Using a structured search strategy, we searched PubMed for any primary research, published since 2007, that examined the relationship between SSP and health outcomes. Across 117 included studies, we found a body of evidence that was primarily set in the United States (n = 104), published between 2020 and 2022 (n = 52), and focused on non-communicable diseases (n = 40). We found that defining SSP in the context of privilege, deprivation, and segregation returns a variety of measures. Among measures, we categorized 18 of them as SSP measures, with the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (n = 43) being the most common, and 5 of them as composite indices based on numerous underlying variables spanning several domains like education and race/ethnicity. While most employed a single SSP measure (n = 64), some included up to 5 measures to examine the robustness of findings or to identify how a multidimensional approach to SSP affected associations. Our findings fill a critical literature gap by summarizing options for operationalizing SSP measures and documenting their respective methodologies. Future research should consider using multiple SSP measures to capture the multidimensionality of SSP, widen the scope of health outcomes, and clearly explain the choice of measure(s) and methods used to derive them. Our findings can inform future research questions and help guide researchers in the selection and utilization of the various SSP measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":49964,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring Spatial Social Polarization in Public Health Research: A Scoping Review of Methods and Applications.\",\"authors\":\"Edwin M McCulley, Lisa Frueh, Deiriai Myers, Samuel Jaros, Hoda S Abdel Magid, Felicia Bayer, Gina S Lovasi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11524-024-00957-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Spatial social polarization (SSP) refers to the uneven spatial distribution and subsequent concentration of polarized social and/or economic groups in a specified geographic area. However, there is heterogeneity in how SSP is measured and operationalized in research. To this end, we conducted a scoping review to characterize the use of SSP measures in public health research, providing a foundation for those seeking to navigate this complex literature, select measurement options, and identify opportunities for methodological development. Using a structured search strategy, we searched PubMed for any primary research, published since 2007, that examined the relationship between SSP and health outcomes. Across 117 included studies, we found a body of evidence that was primarily set in the United States (n = 104), published between 2020 and 2022 (n = 52), and focused on non-communicable diseases (n = 40). We found that defining SSP in the context of privilege, deprivation, and segregation returns a variety of measures. Among measures, we categorized 18 of them as SSP measures, with the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (n = 43) being the most common, and 5 of them as composite indices based on numerous underlying variables spanning several domains like education and race/ethnicity. While most employed a single SSP measure (n = 64), some included up to 5 measures to examine the robustness of findings or to identify how a multidimensional approach to SSP affected associations. Our findings fill a critical literature gap by summarizing options for operationalizing SSP measures and documenting their respective methodologies. Future research should consider using multiple SSP measures to capture the multidimensionality of SSP, widen the scope of health outcomes, and clearly explain the choice of measure(s) and methods used to derive them. Our findings can inform future research questions and help guide researchers in the selection and utilization of the various SSP measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49964,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-024-00957-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-024-00957-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measuring Spatial Social Polarization in Public Health Research: A Scoping Review of Methods and Applications.
Spatial social polarization (SSP) refers to the uneven spatial distribution and subsequent concentration of polarized social and/or economic groups in a specified geographic area. However, there is heterogeneity in how SSP is measured and operationalized in research. To this end, we conducted a scoping review to characterize the use of SSP measures in public health research, providing a foundation for those seeking to navigate this complex literature, select measurement options, and identify opportunities for methodological development. Using a structured search strategy, we searched PubMed for any primary research, published since 2007, that examined the relationship between SSP and health outcomes. Across 117 included studies, we found a body of evidence that was primarily set in the United States (n = 104), published between 2020 and 2022 (n = 52), and focused on non-communicable diseases (n = 40). We found that defining SSP in the context of privilege, deprivation, and segregation returns a variety of measures. Among measures, we categorized 18 of them as SSP measures, with the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (n = 43) being the most common, and 5 of them as composite indices based on numerous underlying variables spanning several domains like education and race/ethnicity. While most employed a single SSP measure (n = 64), some included up to 5 measures to examine the robustness of findings or to identify how a multidimensional approach to SSP affected associations. Our findings fill a critical literature gap by summarizing options for operationalizing SSP measures and documenting their respective methodologies. Future research should consider using multiple SSP measures to capture the multidimensionality of SSP, widen the scope of health outcomes, and clearly explain the choice of measure(s) and methods used to derive them. Our findings can inform future research questions and help guide researchers in the selection and utilization of the various SSP measures.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Urban Health is the premier and authoritative source of rigorous analyses to advance the health and well-being of people in cities. The Journal provides a platform for interdisciplinary exploration of the evidence base for the broader determinants of health and health inequities needed to strengthen policies, programs, and governance for urban health.
The Journal publishes original data, case studies, commentaries, book reviews, executive summaries of selected reports, and proceedings from important global meetings. It welcomes submissions presenting new analytic methods, including systems science approaches to urban problem solving. Finally, the Journal provides a forum linking scholars, practitioners, civil society, and policy makers from the multiple sectors that can influence the health of urban populations.