Healthc Inform Res Search

CLOSE


Healthc Inform Res > Volume 18(2); 2012 > Article
Shaw: Geographical Information Systems and Health: Current State and Future Directions

Abstract

This paper provides an introduction to Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and how they can be used. It reviews the current state of GIS use in health care before identifying the barriers to more pervasive use of GIS in health. Finally, it makes recommendations for the direction of health GIS research over the next decade and concludes with a call to action to health informatics researchers to stop ignoring a tool and methodology that has such immense potential for improving the health of our communities.

I. Introduction

Given that we know that patients tend to access health care services within their local geographic communities, the application of geographical information systems (GIS) to health service planning & provision would seem a logical progression. However, whilst the use of GIS in public health & epidemiology (for example, to map incidence and prevalence of disease) is reasonably well developed [1] the use of such technologies in understanding health service access, utilization and demand remains to be explored [2,3].
When used to the full extent of its capability, GIS can "inform and educate (professionals and the public); empower decision making at all levels; help in planning and tweaking clinically and cost-effective actions, in predicting outcomes before making any financial commitments and ascribing priorities in a climate of finite resources; change practices; and continually monitor and analyze changes, as well as sentinel events [4]." Yet, despite the incredible potential benefits of applying GIS technologies, their use in health service planning and provision remains greatly underutilized.
The aim of this paper is to provide an introduction to GIS and how it can be used, to review the current state of GIS use in health care, to identify the barriers to more pervasive use of GIS in health and to make recommendations for the direction of health GIS research over the next decade.

II. History

The concept of considering spatial data when seeking to understand the prevalence and incidence of disease is intrinsic to the fields of epidemiology and public health. The most well known use of GIS, in a rudimentary form, is that of Dr. John Snow in London, England, in 1854 when he mapped the incidences of a cholera outbreak demonstrating that a specific water pump was the cause of infection [5]. Removing the handle from that pump almost immediately reduced the number of cases of cholera; though Snow himself points out that the numbers were already diminishing when he removed the pump handle.
On a wider scale today the World Health Organization (WHO) issues disease alerts that are mapped at http://www.healthmap.org and provided in near-real time. Traditionally, such maps are used to plan service provision. In the case of the WHO, it may be where to send their expertise and resources; or at a more local level it may be where to build a new hospital.
Bizarrely, despite GIS technologies being freely available on the internet, the Canadian outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Canada in 2003 was managed by paper charts and color-coded post-it notes. It is one thing for a developing country, such as India, to state that "without computers and the Internet, we are fighting 21st century health problems with 19th century tools [6]," but it is quite another for Toronto's Chief Medical Officer to observe the same thing [7] in a country as developed and technology literate as Canada within the last decade!
Astonishingly, it was only nine years ago (2003) that the term 'Geographical Information Systems (GIS)' was added to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) reflecting the growing interest in the application of cartography (mapping) functions to healthcare.

III. Uses of GIS

A GIS is a "computerized system that relates and displays data collected from a geographic entity in the form of a map. The ability of GIS to overlay existing data with new information and display it in colour on a computer screen is used primarily to conduct analyses and make decisions related to geology, ecology, land use, demographics, transportation, and other domains, most of which relate to the human use of the physical environment [8]." So GIS is a modern tool that is now readily available and usable; but what can we use it for?

1. Map Where Things Are

Their most basic use is simply to map where things are. Whether that be merely to identify an individual feature is, such as the location of an emergency room, or to look at the distribution of features on a map to more clearly visualise the emergence of patterns.

2. Map Quantities

We can map quantities, such as where the most, and least, of something is to find places that meet specified criteria and take action. For example, we could look at which jurisdiction in a country has the highest percentage of children classified as obese or overweight. However, knowing which area has the greatest problem with obesity in children is helpful but not really enough to aid us in planning services.

3. Map Densities

Therefore, we need to look at further complexities such as density mapping. By mapping density we can map areas with different populations on an equivalent basis. That is, we can map areas which may vary greatly in size but have smaller numbers of people against smaller geographic areas that have larger numbers of people to see the true density of the feature we are looking at.
Although we must be careful again to truly understand what we are mapping. For example, health care maps will almost always show concentrations of disease around major urban settings. This doesn't necessarily mean that urban settings have a causal link with that disease, but more likely that families with chronically ill members will actually move into those urban settings in order to access specialized care. Consequentially, we must be cautious when drawing conclusions from density maps unless we truly understand both the source and the validity of the data being presented.

4. Find out What's Inside

With GIS we can also look at what's happening inside a specific area; such as mapping the movement of equipment, staff and patients as they move around within a hospital to help with the tracking of infection.

5. Find What's Nearby

Likewise, we can map what's occurring within a set distance of a feature. If we see increased mortality in a specific area we can look to see what might be causing that. It could be as simple as there being a palliative care facility in the area or more disturbingly, a successor to Dr. Shipman [9-11] is practicing there.

6. Map Change

We can map the change in an area (Figure 1) to anticipate future conditions, decide on a course of action, or to evaluate the results of an action or policy. For example, we can study how emergency patterns change from day to day to help decide where ambulances should be stationed.
We do have to be concerned with the validity of the data we're mapping. Sometimes what appears to be an increase in incidence of a disease over time is simply due to an increase in reporting of that disease [12].

IV. Current State of GIS Use in Health

In 1996 Clarke et al. [13] recognised that whilst GIS had been in development for over 30 years, it was only then that such systems had become readily usable for those not extensively trained in their use. Their review article 'On epidemiology and geographic information systems: a review and discussion of future directions [13]' specifically addressed the disciplinary crossover between GIS and public health and epidemiology.
They provided an overview of GIS functionality in terms of data storage, data capture, data retrieval and data display. They also identified a number of applications of GIS in health such as the surveillance and monitoring of water-borne diseases, environmental health, modeling exposure to electro-magnetic fields, predicting child pedestrian injuries and the analysis of disease policy and planning [13] as well as making the case for further use of GIS in public health. Fast forward 15 years to 2011, and the same points are still echoed in several more recent reviews [3,14,15].

1. So How is GIS Being Used in Health?

In 2003, McLafferty [14] summarized the current uses of GIS as being able to be categorized into four distinct areas: 1) analysing need for health care; 2) analysing access to health care, a) measuring access, b) evaluating inequalities in access; 3) geographic variation in utilization; and 4) GIS & health care delivery, a) locating health services, b) spatial decision support systems, and c) GIS & disasters.
She stated that at that time, GIS-based research on service performance and effectiveness was in its infancy and that whilst efforts were underway to integrate GIS with spatial decision support systems they were still in the stages of early evolution.
In 2008, Graves [15] looked specifically at the use of GIS in evaluating health care access or health outcomes. She conducted an integrative literature review in this area that presented the results from nine articles. She found that GIS had been used in a wide variety of health applications, and that GIS had been shown to be effective in relating health outcomes to the level of access to health care.
Like McLafferty before her, she identified several areas in which GIS in health was in its infancy, but felt that there was "sufficient research to support the use of GIS as an effective technology for the study of healthcare access and outcomes [Para] [15]."
In 2011, Nykiforuk and Flaman [3] continued the debate by reviewing once again GIS for health promotion and public health. They identified four predominant themes from a systematic review which was comprised of 621 journal articles and book chapters: 1) disease surveillance, a) disease mapping, b) disease modeling; 2) risk analysis; 3) health access and planning; and 4) community health profiling.

2. Disease Surveillance

Disease surveillance is an epidemiological practice that monitors the spread of disease in order to establish patterns of progression. A key component of modern disease surveillance is disease case reporting. Interestingly in these days of advanced technologies disease progression can sometimes be tracked by individuals' internet search engine usage more quickly than through traditional reporting mechanisms [16]. By tracking the location of individuals seeking information about the flu Google was able to estimate flu activity by region in the USA about two weeks later than traditional methods of Centre for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) flu outbreak reporting.
Examples of the diseases currently been surveilled in both developed [17,18] and undeveloped countries using GIS are tropical diseases [19], parasites [20,21], rabies epidemic [22], maleria [23-27], HIV/AIDS in India [28] & South Africa [29], cancer [30,31], communicable diseases [32,33], cholera [34], and sleeping sickness [35].

3. Risk Analysis

Traditionally the use of GIS for risk analyses has been linked with environmental exposures and mitigating risks consequential to exposures. Additionally, it is often integrated with disease modeling to effectively demonstrate how humans interact with their environment and how that interaction affects their health [36].
Current examples of health GIS use in risk analysis include flood management [37], air pollution [33,38-44], soil-borne infections [45], arsenic poisoning from ground water [46], climate change [47,48], ecosystem decline [49], pesticide exposure [50,51], and other environmental exposure assessments [52,53].
My Place History [54] developed by ESRI [55], the leading developer of GIS, provides a good example of how environmental exposures during your lifetime increases your risks of developing different diseases over time. The instigator of My Place History, Bill Davenhall [54] experienced a "personal health train wreck" and consequently ESRI developed a GIS tool allowing individuals in the USA to examine the environmental factors that may contribute to their disease.

4. Health Access and Planning

GIS use in health access and planning usually relates directly to analyzing market segmentation and network analysis. That is, developing an understanding of the physical location of health services and the distance and ability to travel between them. This is an area where GIS has been used extensively in both developed developing countries.
Health GIS is also being used in projects depicting key indicators of drug policy development over time [56], general access & quality of services studies [57,58], developing a model for determining the appropriate means of trauma transport [59], understanding the relationship that proximity to primary care clinics has on health outcomes in an urban setting [60], nursing workforce distribution planning [61], travel related health [62], the provision of vision services [63], sledding injuries [64], trauma management [65], injury research [66] and modeling ambulance response times [67].

5. Community Health Profiling

The mapping of community characteristics, such as ethnic identification, socio-economic status, gender, health behaviours, mortality and morbidity, together combine to provide profiles of population groups which allows for the explanation of general relationships between health and setting.
Current examples include supporting Hispanic community transitions [68], assessing community primary care needs [69], community development [70], community pharmacy populations [71], and developing an understanding of the spiritual dimension of health for communities [72].
However, community profiling must be undertaken with great care as whilst it can help us better understand the multi-level links between people and their environment the data linkages that such profiles are developed from are frequently not as valid as would be desired.
To extend our scope beyond that of GIS use in public health and epidemiology we can identify two additional areas in which GIS is being used in health. The first is a refinement of community profiling pertaining to the built environment, neighbourhoods and their impact on health.

6. Built Environment & Neighbourhoods

A neighbourhood [73] is a geographically localized community within a larger city, town or suburb. Consequently, measures such as walkability [74-76], needs for school transport [77], the food environment [78], opportunities for physical activity [79], environmental barriers [80] and alcohol use related to where alcohol is available for purchase [81] may be different in neighbourhoods that have the same built environment; where the built environment is the surroundings that have been made by humans. The second is an extension to disease surveillance: crisis management.

7. Crisis Management

While not used extensively in this area yet health GIS is being used in combination with a sensor web, citizen sensing and social web technologies to monitor public and environmental crises [82]. It is also being used to manage and plan for disasters & humanitarian emergencies [83,84].

V. Barriers to GIS Use in Health

The one consistent message throughout all the published work to date on health GIS is that the potential for benefit is vast but that several barriers still remain to pervasive use. Clarke et al. [13] suggestion in 1996 that GIS was being seen as a new "widget" yet to come into play was continued by McLafferty [14] in 2003 when she stated that researchers tended to view GIS as a mapping tool and didn't fully understand the potential applications.
Further, McLafferty [14] argued that adoption of GIS in health was uneven due to structural barriers such as the lack of available spatial data and privacy & confidentiality restrictions that limit access to data about health status and outcomes, especially at an individual level or for small areas. She further stated that public data, even when it was available, often couldn't be linked due to differences in the structure and level of granularity [14].
Additionally, due to the known limitations of indicators such as mortality and morbidity, over the years researchers have turned more to qualitative methods and blended methods to help develop our understanding of health care access, use and provision. Unfortunately, GIS wasn't able to fully integrate that data for analysis, beyond simply placing it at a discrete geographic location as of 2003. In fact, it still remains an issue today in 2012.
McLafferty [14] further recognized that there was a distinct lack of knowledge around how people acquire knowledge from a GIS and interpret it for their own use and decision making. In the same time period as McLafferty, Higgs and colleagues studied the use of GIS in the English National Health Service (NHS) [85,86] and reported that little use was found, especially in service planning, and that national guidance was needed for departments to be able to actively utilize the tools available.

VI. Conclusion

Having identified the barriers to the use of GIS in health a number of authors have made recommendations as to how we should best develop the use of GIS in health. These can be summarized as follows:
  • Integrate instruction on GIS into public health curricula [13]

  • Develop formal links between the interdisciplinary research communities working with GIS in health [3,13]

  • Seize the opportunity to set the public health agenda and influence the use of such technologies to improve public health [13,87,88]

  • Link information by place/location across sectors such as health, education, social services, and the justice system that together provide care [14,89]

  • Develop analytic techniques that take account of qualitative data in GIS [14]

  • Develop our understanding of the human dimension of using GIS in health [14]

  • Undertake studies that provide a greater understanding of patterns of geography, health care access and provision of services [15]

  • Develop further understanding of the relationship between specific populations and their unique geographical contexts [15]

  • Communicate with, and involve, stakeholders in the development and display of knowledge in mapped formats [3].

Despite the exponential growth in the evidence for the use of GIS in health it remains a discipline slow to grow and mature. In contrast the use of GIS in other domains, such as business, marketing, environmental assessments, and education, is now considered to be an inherent component.
The barriers to the discipline of health GIS developing further are not to be underestimated. Take for example, a study designed to examine childhood obesity. At the heart of the study is the need to explore the relationships between where children live, study and play. One would need to look at walkability factors, distances between appropriate and inappropriate food sources, play areas, parks and exercise facilities, schools, homes and their families' work places. Right there, unless we collect primary data from individuals with consent we're stymied. Location is personally identifiable information so under all privacy legislation, despite the fact that the child's address and registered school is held in a variety of databases (education, health or otherwise), it can't be accessed or used by those wishing to undertake this work; even though the information could be readily anonymised once the first step in the analysis was completed. This demonstrates the importance of the recommendations above.
Only when communities of researchers work in partnership with each other and with stakeholders will such issues be addressed, and only then can new methodologies be developed that protect the identity of the individual while allowing for such relationships to be explored.
Cost and ease of use are no longer barriers. There are free online tools such as GRASS, uDig GIS, TNTLite, SPRING, Flowmap, and Diva-GIS. ESRI [55] makes key components of their software available free and there are millions of maps available freely online that can be downloaded and worked with for personal use. Likewise these tools and systems are becoming easier to use daily. The issue is not in using the tools but in understanding what they represent when knowledge is presented in this way. Google maps have opened the eyes of the public to the potential of mapping and spatial-temporal analytics. It is time for the health community to work together to unleash the potential of GIS for the benefit of all.
In conclusion, health GIS remains underutilized 15 years after it was first identified as having immense potential benefits and having matured enough as a technology that researchers could use readily and easily. If, as healthcare informatics researchers, we are truly concerned with improving the health of our communities, this is a tool we should no longer be ignoring.

Notes

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

References

1. Cooper MM. The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care: what is it telling us? Health Syst Rev 1996;29:44-45. 47PMID: 10158559.
pmid
2. Joyce K. "To me it's just another tool to help understand the evidence": public health decision-makers' perceptions of the value of geographical information systems (GIS). Health Place 2009;15:801-810. PMID: 19268622.
pmid
3. Nykiforuk CI, Flaman LM. Geographic information systems (GIS) for health promotion and public health: a review. Health Promot Pract 2011;12:63-73. PMID: 19546198.
crossref
4. Boulos MN. Towards evidence-based, GIS-driven national spatial health information infrastructure and surveillance services in the United Kingdom. Int J Health Geogr 2004;3:1PMID: 14748927.
crossref
5. Snow J. On the mode of communication of cholera. 1849. London, UK: John Churchill.

6. World Health Organization. The world health report 2003: shaping the future. 2003. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

7. Menezes JP. Going public [Internet]. 2004. cited at 2012 Jun 11. Scarborough, Canada: IT World Canada; Available from: http://www.itworldcanada.com/news/going-public/116928-pg3.

8. DeMers MN. GIS [Internet]. c2012. cited at 2012 Jun 11. London, UK: Encyclopaedia Britannica; Available from: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1033394/GIS.

9. Kaplan R. Murder by medical malice: the love-hate relationship between Dr Harold Shipman and his patients. S Afr Med J 2000;90:598-601. PMID: 10918887.
pmid
10. Baker R. Implications of Harold Shipman for general practice. Postgrad Med J 2004;80:303-306. PMID: 15192157.
crossref
11. Baker R, Hurwitz B. Intentionally harmful violations and patient safety: the example of Harold Shipman. J R Soc Med 2009;102:223-227. PMID: 19531616.
crossref
12. Shaw NT. Electronic patient records in primary care: study has serious flaw. BMJ 2003;327:622PMID: 12969949.
crossref
13. Clarke KC, McLafferty SL, Tempalski BJ. On epidemiology and geographic information systems: a review and discussion of future directions. Emerg Infect Dis 1996;2:85-92. PMID: 8903207.
crossref
14. McLafferty SL. GIS and health care. Annu Rev Public Health 2003;24:25-42. PMID: 12668754.
crossref
15. Graves BA. Integrative literature review: a review of literature related to geographical information systems, healthcare access, and health outcomes. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2008;5:11PMID: 18698429.
pmid pmc
16. Dugas AF, Hsieh YH, Levin SR, Pines JM, Mareiniss DP, Mohareb A, Gaydos CA, Perl TM, Rothman RE. Google Flu Trends: correlation with emergency department influenza rates and crowding metrics. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:463-469. PMID: 22230244.
crossref
17. Duncombe J, Clements A, Hu W, Weinstein P, Ritchie S, Espino FE. Geographical information systems for dengue surveillance. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2012;86:753-755. PMID: 22556070.
crossref
18. Horst MA, Coco AS. Observing the spread of common illnesses through a community: using geographic information systems (GIS) for surveillance. J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:32-41. PMID: 20051540.
crossref
19. Khan OA, Davenhall W, Ali M, Castillo-Salgado C, Vazquez-Prokopec G, Kitron U, Soares Magalhaes RJ, Clements AC. Geographical information systems and tropical medicine. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 2010;104:303-318. PMID: 20659391.
crossref
20. Simoonga C, Utzinger J, Brooker S, Vounatsou P, Appleton CC, Stensgaard AS, Olsen A, Kristensen TK. Remote sensing, geographical information system and spatial analysis for schistosomiasis epidemiology and ecology in Africa. Parasitology 2009;136:1683-1693. PMID: 19627627.
crossref
21. Daniel M, Kolar J, Zeman P. GIS tools for tick and tick-borne disease occurrence. Parasitology 2004;129(Suppl):S329-S352. PMID: 15938517.
crossref
22. Mungrue K, Mahabir R. The rabies epidemic in Trinidad of 1923 to 1937: an evaluation with a geographic information system. Wilderness Environ Med 2011;22:28-36. PMID: 21377116.
crossref
23. Kelly GC, Hii J, Batarii W, Donald W, Hale E, Nausien J, Pontifex S, Vallely A, Tanner M, Clements A. Modern geographical reconnaissance of target populations in malaria elimination zones. Malar J 2010;9:289PMID: 20961423.
crossref
24. Sipe NG, Dale P. Challenges in using geographic information systems (GIS) to understand and control malaria in Indonesia. Malar J 2003;2:36PMID: 14613511.
crossref
25. Singer BH, de Castro MC. Agricultural colonization and malaria on the Amazon frontier. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2001;954:184-222. PMID: 11797857.
crossref
26. Ghebreyesus TA, Witten KH, Getachew A, O'Neill K, Bosman A, Teklehaimanot A. Community-based malaria control in Tigray, northern Ethiopia. Parassitologia 1999;41:367-371. PMID: 10697885.
pmid
27. Najera JA. Prevention and control of malaria epidemics. Parassitologia 1999;41:339-347. PMID: 10697881.
pmid
28. Kandwal R, Garg PK, Garg RD. Health GIS and HIV/AIDS studies: perspective and retrospective. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:748-755. PMID: 19426832.
crossref
29. Vanmeulebrouk B, Rivett U, Ricketts A, Loudon M. Open source GIS for HIV/AIDS management. Int J Health Geogr 2008;7:53PMID: 18945338.
crossref
30. Aneja S, Gross CP, Soulos PR, Yu JB. Geographical information systems: applications and limitations in oncology research. Oncology (Williston Park) 2011;25:1221-1225. PMID: 22229219.
pmid
31. Bell BS, Hoskins RE, Pickle LW, Wartenberg D. Current practices in spatial analysis of cancer data: mapping health statistics to inform policymakers and the public. Int J Health Geogr 2006;5:49PMID: 17092353.
crossref
32. Flahault A, Blanchon T, Dorléans Y, Toubiana L, Vibert JF, Valleron AJ. Virtual surveillance of communicable diseases: a 20-year experience in France. Stat Methods Med Res 2006;15:413-421. PMID: 17089946.
crossref
33. Rogers DJ, Randolph SE. Studying the global distribution of infectious diseases using GIS and RS. Nat Rev Microbiol 2003;1:231-237. PMID: 15035027.
crossref
34. Nyamogoba HD, Obala AA, Kakai R. Combating cholera epidemics by targeting reservoirs of infection and transmission routes: a review. East Afr Med J 2002;79:150-155. PMID: 12389962.
crossref
35. Cattand P, Jannin J, Lucas P. Sleeping sickness surveillance: an essential step towards elimination. Trop Med Int Health 2001;6:348-361. PMID: 11348530.
crossref
36. Tatem AJ, Adamo S, Bharti N, Burgert CR, Castro M, Dorelien A, Fink G, Linard C, Mendelsohn J, Montana L, Montgomery MR, Nelson A, Noor AM, Pindolia D, Yetman G, Balk D. Mapping populations at risk: improving spatial demographic data for infectious disease modeling and metric derivation. Popul Health Metr 2012;10:8PMID: 22591595.
crossref
37. Taylor J, Lai KM, Davies M, Clifton D, Ridley I, Biddulph P. Flood management: prediction of microbial contamination in large-scale floods in urban environments. Environ Int 2011;37:1019-1029. PMID: 21481472.
crossref
38. Levy JI, Clougherty JE, Baxter LK, Houseman EA, Paciorek CJ. HEI Health Review Committee. Evaluating heterogeneity in indoor and outdoor air pollution using land-use regression and constrained factor analysis. Res Rep Health Eff Inst 2010;(152):5-80. PMID: 21409949.

39. Zou B, Wilson JG, Zhan FB, Zeng Y. Air pollution exposure assessment methods utilized in epidemiological studies. J Environ Monit 2009;11:475-490. PMID: 19280026.
crossref
40. Zhou Y, Levy JI. Factors influencing the spatial extent of mobile source air pollution impacts: a meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 2007;7:89PMID: 17519039.
crossref
41. Mindell J, Barrowcliffe R. Linking environmental effects to health impacts: a computer modelling approach for air pollution. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:1092-1098. PMID: 16286501.
crossref
42. Scoggins A. Does air pollution pose a public health problem for New Zealand? Aust N Z J Public Health 2004;28:16-19. PMID: 15108741.
crossref pmid
43. Bytnerowicz A, Badea O, Barbu I, Fleischer P, Fraczek W, Gancz V, Godzik B, Grodzinska K, Grodzki W, Karnosky D, Koren M, Krywult M, Krzan Z, Longauer R, Mankovska B, Manning WJ, McManus M, Musselman RC, Novotny J, Popescu F, Postelnicu D, Prus-Głowacki W, Skawinski P, Skiba S, Szaro R, Tamas S, Vasile C. New international long-term ecological research on air pollution effects on the Carpathian Mountain forests, Central Europe. Environ Int 2003;29:367-376. PMID: 12676229.
crossref pmid
44. Dent AL, Fowler DA, Kaplan BM, Zarus GM, Henriques WD. Using GIS to study the health impact of air emissions. Drug Chem Toxicol 2000;23:161-178. PMID: 10711396.
crossref pmid
45. Jex AR, Lim YA, Bethony JM, Hotez PJ, Young ND, Gasser RB. Soil-transmitted helminths of humans in Southeast Asia - towards integrated control. Adv Parasitol 2011;74:231-265. PMID: 21295679.
crossref pmid
46. Khan NI, Owens G, Bruce D, Naidu R. Human arsenic exposure and risk assessment at the landscape level: a review. Environ Geochem Health 2009;31(Suppl 1):143-166. PMID: 19172401.
crossref pmid
47. Luber G, McGeehin M. Climate change and extreme heat events. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:429-435. PMID: 18929969.
crossref pmid
48. Maynard NG, Conway GA. A view from above: use of satellite imagery to enhance our understanding of potential impacts of climate change on human health in the Arctic. Alaska Med 2007;49:38-43. PMID: 17929607.

49. Twumasi YA, Merem EC. Using remote sensing and GIS in the analysis of ecosystem decline along the River Niger Basin: the case of Mali and Niger. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2007;4:173-184. PMID: 17617682.
crossref
50. Fenske RA. State-of-the-art measurement of agricultural pesticide exposures. Scand J Work Environ Health 2005;31(Suppl 1):67-73. PMID: 16190151.
pmid
51. Kamińska IA, Ołdak A, Turski WA. Geographical information system (GIS) as a tool for monitoring and analysing pesticide pollution and its impact on public health. Ann Agric Environ Med 2004;11:181-184. PMID: 15627322.
pmid
52. Nuckols JR, Ward MH, Jarup L. Using geographic information systems for exposure assessment in environmental epidemiology studies. Environ Health Perspect 2004;112:1007-1015. PMID: 15198921.
crossref pmid pmc
53. Jarup L. Health and environment information systems for exposure and disease mapping, and risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 2004;112:995-997. PMID: 15198919.
crossref
54. Davenhall B. Can geographic information make you healthy?. c2012. cited at 2012 Jun 11. Redlands, CA: ESRI; Available from: http://www.esri.com/industries/health/geomedicine/index.html.

55. ESRI [Internet]. c2012. cited at 2012 Jun 11. Redlands, CA: ESRI; Available from: http://www.esri.com/.

56. Macgregor S, Thickett A. Partnerships and communities in English drug policy: the challenge of deprivation. Int J Drug Policy 2011;22:478-490. PMID: 21890338.
crossref
57. Clark RA, Driscoll A. Access and quality of heart failure management programs in Australia. Aust Crit Care 2009;22:111-116. PMID: 19586780.
crossref pmid
58. Parker EB, Campbell JL. Measuring access to primary medical care: some examples of the use of geographical information systems. Health Place 1998;4:183-193. PMID: 10671022.
crossref
59. Lerner EB, Billittier AJ 4th, Sikora J, Moscati RM. Use of a geographic information system to determine appropriate means of trauma patient transport. Acad Emerg Med 1999;6:1127-1133. PMID: 10569385.
crossref pmid
60. Baumgardner DJ, Halsmer SE, Steber DL, Shah DS, Mundt MP. Does proximity to clinic affect immunization rates and blood pressure. Int J Psychiatry Med 2006;36:199-209. PMID: 17154149.
crossref pmid
61. Courtney KL. Visualizing nursing workforce distribution: policy evaluation using geographic information systems. Int J Med Inform 2005;74:980-988. PMID: 16085452.
crossref pmid
62. Bauer IL, Puotinen M. Geographic information systems and travel health. J Travel Med 2002;9:308-314. PMID: 12962585.
crossref pmid
63. Culham LE, Ryan B, Jackson AJ, Hill AR, Jones B, Miles C, Young JA, Bunce C, Bird AC. Low vision services for vision rehabilitation in the United Kingdom. Br J Ophthalmol 2002;86:743-747. PMID: 12084742.
crossref pmid pmc
64. Juang D, Feliz A, Miller KA, Gaines BA. Sledding injuries: a rationale for helmet usage. J Trauma 2010;69:S206-S208. PMID: 20938309.
crossref pmid
65. Schuurman N, Hameed SM, Fiedler R, Bell N, Simons RK. The spatial epidemiology of trauma: the potential of geographic information science to organize data and reveal patterns of injury and services. Can J Surg 2008;51:389-395. PMID: 18841227.
pmid pmc
66. Edelman LS. Using geographic information systems in injury research. J Nurs Scholarsh 2007;39:306-311. PMID: 18021129.
crossref pmid
67. Peleg K, Pliskin JS. A geographic information system simulation model of EMS: reducing ambulance response time. Am J Emerg Med 2004;22:164-170. PMID: 15138950.
crossref
68. Dulin MF, Ludden TM, Tapp H, Smith HA, de Hernandez BU, Blackwell J, Furuseth OJ. Geographic information systems (GIS) demonstrating primary care needs for a transitioning hispanic community. J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:109-120. PMID: 20051550.
crossref
69. Dulin MF, Ludden TM, Tapp H, Blackwell J, de Hernandez BU, Smith HA, Furuseth OJ. Using Geographic information systems (GIS) to understand a community's primary care needs. J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:13-21. PMID: 20051538.
crossref
70. Quon Huber MS, Van Egeren LA, Pierce SJ, Foster-Fishman PG. GIS applications for community-based research and action: mapping change in a community-building initiative. J Prev Interv Community 2009;37:5-20. PMID: 19197671.
crossref pmid
71. Ryan K, Norris P, Becket G. Capturing data on medicines usage: the potential of community pharmacy databases. N Z Med J 2005;118:U1677PMID: 16224501.
pmid
72. Boulos MN. Geographic information systems and the spiritual dimension of health: a short position paper. Int J Health Geogr 2003;2:6PMID: 14521713.
crossref pmid pmc
73. Cutchin MP, Eschbach K, Mair CA, Ju H, Goodwin JS. The socio-spatial neighborhood estimation method: an approach to operationalizing the neighborhood concept. Health Place 2011;17:1113-1121. PMID: 21684793.
crossref pmid pmc
74. Gray JA, Zimmerman JL, Rimmer JH. Built environment instruments for walkability, bikeability, and recreation: disability and universal design relevant? Disabil Health J 2012;5:87-101. PMID: 22429543.
crossref
75. Butler EN, Ambs AM, Reedy J, Bowles HR. Identifying GIS measures of the physical activity built environment through a review of the literature. J Phys Act Health 2011;8(Suppl 1):S91-S97. PMID: 21350268.
crossref pmid
76. Brownson RC, Hoehner CM, Day K, Forsyth A, Sallis JF. Measuring the built environment for physical activity: state of the science. Am J Prev Med 2009;36:S99-S123. PMID: 19285216.
crossref pmid pmc
77. Wong BY, Faulkner G, Buliung R. GIS measured environmental correlates of active school transport: a systematic review of 14 studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011;8:39PMID: 21545750.
crossref pmid pmc
78. Charreire H, Casey R, Salze P, Simon C, Chaix B, Banos A, Badariotti D, Weber C, Oppert JM. Measuring the food environment using geographical information systems: a methodological review. Public Health Nutr 2010;13:1773-1785. PMID: 20409354.
crossref pmid
79. Duncan MJ, Badland HM, Mummery WK. Applying GPS to enhance understanding of transport-related physical activity. J Sci Med Sport 2009;12:549-556. PMID: 19237315.
crossref pmid
80. Hammel J, Jones R, Smith J, Sanford J, Bodine C, Johnson M. Environmental barriers and supports to the health, function, and participation of people with developmental and intellectual disabilities: report from the State of the Science in Aging with Developmental Disabilities Conference. Disabil Health J 2008;1:143-149. PMID: 21122723.
crossref
81. Wieczorek WF, Hanson CE. New modeling methods: geographic information systems and spatial analysis. Alcohol Health Res World 1997;21:331-339. PMID: 15706745.
pmid pmc
82. Kamel Boulos MN, Resch B, Crowley DN, Breslin JG, Sohn G, Burtner R, Pike WA, Jezierski E, Chuang KY. Crowdsourcing, citizen sensing and sensor web technologies for public and environmental health surveillance and crisis management: trends, OGC standards and application examples. Int J Health Geogr 2011;10:67PMID: 22188675.
crossref pmid pmc
83. Mathew D. Information technology and public health management of disasters - a model for South Asian countries. Prehosp Disaster Med 2005;20:54-60. PMID: 15748016.
pmid
84. Kaiser R, Spiegel PB, Henderson AK, Gerber ML. The application of geographic information systems and global positioning systems in humanitarian emergencies: lessons learned, programme implications and future research. Disasters 2003;27:127-140. PMID: 12825436.
crossref
85. Higgs G, Smith DP, Gould MI. Findings from a survey on GIS use in the UK National Health Service: organisational challenges and opportunities. Health Policy 2005;72:105-117. PMID: 15760703.
crossref
86. Higgs G, Gould M. Is there a role for GIS in the 'new NHS'? Health Place 2001;7:247-259. PMID: 11439259.
crossref pmid
87. Croner CM. Public health, GIS, and the internet. Annu Rev Public Health 2003;24:57-82. PMID: 12543872.
crossref
88. Rushton G. Public health, GIS, and spatial analytic tools. Annu Rev Public Health 2003;24:43-56. PMID: 12471269.
crossref pmid
89. Cromley EK. GIS and disease. Annu Rev Public Health 2003;24:7-24. PMID: 12668753.
crossref pmid
Figure 1
Mapping Change of Canada Population, 2006-2011.
hir-18-88-g001.jpg


ABOUT
ARTICLE CATEGORY

Browse all articles >

BROWSE ARTICLES
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Editorial Office
1618 Kyungheegung Achim Bldg 3, 34, Sajik-ro 8-gil, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03174, Korea
Tel: +82-2-733-7637, +82-2-734-7637    E-mail: hir@kosmi.org                

Copyright © 2020 by Korean Society of Medical Informatics. All rights reserved.

Developed in M2community

Close layer
prev next