2010
DOI: 10.1201/9781420072884-c30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spatial Aggregation and the Ecological Fallacy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
62
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
(93 reference statements)
0
62
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In particular, it also allows us to model both exposures and disease risk as spatially continuous processes, irrespective of the resolution at which incidence data have been recorded. This has the main benefit that assessment of the regression relationships is not affected by the bias induced by the ecological fallacy (Wakefield & Lyons, 2010), thus overcoming the limits of other approaches based on Markov structures (e.g. Held et al (2005)).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, it also allows us to model both exposures and disease risk as spatially continuous processes, irrespective of the resolution at which incidence data have been recorded. This has the main benefit that assessment of the regression relationships is not affected by the bias induced by the ecological fallacy (Wakefield & Lyons, 2010), thus overcoming the limits of other approaches based on Markov structures (e.g. Held et al (2005)).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the exception of the geostatsp package, the model in Equation 14 can not be fitted in the other packages reported in Table 1 other than by replacing individual-level explanatory variables d ij by their locationlevel averages. However, this would invalidate inferences on the regression coefficients β by introducing ecological bias (Wakefield and Lyons 2010).…”
Section: Conclusion and Future Developmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ecological bias is the difference between estimated associations on ecological-and individual-level data [83]. Data used in DM and ESR, both for the number of cases and for the covariates are found rarely at individual-level, mainly due to confidentiality reasons, and therefore the association found at the aggregated level might not be the same if we would have used individual-level data.…”
Section: 3 S Ta N Da R D I Z E D M O R B I D I T Y R At I Omentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aggregated data is usually designated as areal data [5]. The objective of DM is not to estimate the associations between the cases and the covariates or to improve predictions, and therefore ecological bias is not a concern (for more details on the subject see Wakefield and Lyons [83]). …”
Section: 3 S Ta N Da R D I Z E D M O R B I D I T Y R At I Omentioning
confidence: 99%