USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, 100 North 20th Street #405, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, USA.
USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station & Pacific Southwest Research Station, 4955 Canyon Crest Drive, Riverside, CA, 92507, USA.
Int J Health Geogr. 2024 Aug 31;23(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12942-024-00370-x.
An important consideration in studies of the relationship between greenspace exposure and health is the use of mapped data to assign geographic exposures to participants. Previous studies have used validated data from municipal park departments to describe the boundaries of public greenspaces. However, this approach assumes that these data accurately describe park boundaries, that formal parks fully capture the park and greenspace exposure of residents, and (for studies that use personal GPS traces to assign participant exposures) that time spent within these boundaries represents time spent in greenspace. These assumptions are tested using a comparison and ground-truthing of four sources of mapped park and greenspace data in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: PAD-US-AR, Philadelphia Parks and Recreation, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, and Open Street Maps. We find several important differences and tradeoffs in these data: the incorporation of highways and building lots within park boundaries, the inclusion or exclusion of formal park spaces (federal, state, and nonprofit), the exclusion of informal parks and greenspaces, and inconsistent boundaries for a linear park. Health researchers may wish to consider these issues when conducting studies using boundary data to assign park exposure.
在研究绿地暴露与健康之间的关系的研究中,一个重要的考虑因素是使用映射数据将地理暴露分配给参与者。以前的研究使用来自市公园部门的经过验证的数据来描述公共绿地的边界。然而,这种方法假设这些数据准确地描述了公园边界,即正式公园完全捕捉了居民的公园和绿地暴露,并且(对于使用个人 GPS 轨迹来分配参与者暴露的研究),在这些边界内花费的时间代表在绿地中度过的时间。我们使用宾夕法尼亚州费城的四种映射公园和绿地数据来源(PAD-US-AR、费城公园和娱乐、特拉华河谷区域规划委员会和开放街道地图)进行了比较和实地核实,以检验这些假设。我们发现这些数据存在几个重要差异和权衡:在公园边界内纳入高速公路和建筑用地,纳入或排除正式公园空间(联邦、州和非营利),排除非正式公园和绿地,以及线性公园的不一致边界。健康研究人员在使用边界数据来分配公园暴露的情况下进行研究时,可能希望考虑这些问题。