Suppr超能文献

验证商业企业名单作为持牌酒类销售点代理的有效性。

Validation of commercial business lists as a proxy for licensed alcohol outlets.

作者信息

Carlos Heather A, Gabrielli Joy, Sargent James D

机构信息

Norris Cotton Cancer Center, C. Everett Koop Institute, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, NH, 03756, USA.

Norris Cotton Cancer Center, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH, 03756, USA.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2017 May 19;17(1):480. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4419-0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Studies of retail alcohol outlets are restricted to regions due to lack of U.S. national data. Commercial business lists (BL) offer a possible solution, but no data exists to determine if BLs could serve as an adequate proxy for license data. This paper compares geospatial measures of alcohol outlets derived from a commercial BL with license data for a large US state.

METHODS

We validated BL data as a measure of off-premise alcohol outlet density and proximity compared to license data for 5528 randomly selected California residential addresses. We calculated three proximity measures (Euclidean distance, road network travel time and distance) and two density measures (kernel density estimation and the count within a 2-mile radius) for each dataset. The data was acquired in 2015 and processed and analyzed in 2015 and 2016.

RESULTS

Correlations and reliabilities between density (correlation 0.98; Cronbach's α 0.97-0.99) and proximity (correlations 0.77-0.86; α 0.87-0.92) measures were high. For proximity, BL data matched license in 55-57% of addresses, overstated distance in 19%, and understated in 24-26%.

CONCLUSIONS

BL data can serve as a reliable proxy for licensed alcohol outlets, thus extending the work that can be performed in studies on associations between retail alcohol outlets and drinking outcomes.

摘要

背景

由于缺乏美国全国性数据,零售酒类销售点的研究仅限于某些地区。商业企业名录(BL)提供了一种可能的解决方案,但尚无数据可确定企业名录能否充分替代许可证数据。本文将源自商业企业名录的酒类销售点地理空间测量数据与美国一个大州的许可证数据进行了比较。

方法

我们验证了企业名录数据作为非店内酒类销售点密度和距离测量指标的有效性,并将其与随机选取的5528个加利福尼亚州居民地址的许可证数据进行了比较。我们为每个数据集计算了三种距离测量指标(欧几里得距离、道路网络出行时间和距离)和两种密度测量指标(核密度估计和2英里半径范围内的计数)。数据于2015年获取,并在2015年和2016年进行了处理和分析。

结果

密度测量指标(相关性0.98;克朗巴哈系数α为0.97 - 0.99)和距离测量指标(相关性0.77 - 0.86;α为0.87 - 0.92)之间的相关性和可靠性都很高。在距离方面,企业名录数据与许可证数据在55% - 57%的地址上匹配,在19%的地址上高估了距离,在24% - 26%的地址上低估了距离。

结论

企业名录数据可作为有许可证的酒类销售点的可靠替代数据,从而扩展了在零售酒类销售点与饮酒结果之间关联研究中可开展的工作。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1f65/5438553/42390734ea09/12889_2017_4419_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验