Accuracy of residential geocoding in the Agricultural Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Environmental exposure assessments often require a study participant's residential location, but the positional accuracy of geocoding varies by method and the rural status of an address. We evaluated geocoding error in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS), a cohort of pesticide applicators and their spouses in Iowa and North Carolina, U.S.A. METHODS: For 5,064 AHS addresses in Iowa, we compared rooftop coordinates as a gold standard to two alternate locations: 1) E911 locations (intersection of the private and public road), and 2) geocodes generated by matching addresses to a commercial street database (NAVTEQ) or placed manually. Positional error (distance in meters (m) from the rooftop) was assessed overall and separately for addresses inside (non-rural) or outside town boundaries (rural). We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of proximity-based exposures (crops, animal feeding operations (AFOs)) and the attenuation in odds ratios (ORs) for a hypothetical nested case-control study. We also evaluated geocoding errors within two AHS subcohorts in Iowa and North Carolina by comparing them to GPS points taken at residences. RESULTS: Nearly two-thirds of the addresses represented rural locations. Compared to the rooftop gold standard, E911 locations were more accurate overall than address-matched geocodes (median error 39 and 90 m, respectively). Rural addresses generally had greater error than non-rural addresses, although errors were smaller for E911 locations. For highly prevalent crops within 500 m (>97% of homes), sensitivity was >95% using both data sources; however, lower specificities with address-matched geocodes (more common for rural addresses) led to substantial attenuation of ORs (e.g., corn <500 m ORobs = 1.47 vs. ORtrue = 2.0). Error in the address-matched geocodes resulted in even greater ORobs attenuation for AFO exposures. Errors for North Carolina addresses were generally smaller than those in Iowa. CONCLUSIONS: Geocoding error can be minimized when known coordinates are available to test alternative data and methods. Our assessment suggests that where E911 locations are available, they offer an improvement upon address-matched geocodes for rural addresses. Exposure misclassification resulting from positional error is dependent on the geographic database, geocoding method, and the prevalence of exposure.

Proximity to crops and residential exposure to agricultural herbicides in iowa.

Rural residents can be exposed to agricultural pesticides through the proximity of their homes to crop fields. Previously, we developed a method to create historical crop maps using a geographic information system. The aim of the present study was to determine whether crop maps are useful for predicting levels of crop herbicides in carpet dust samples from residences. From homes of participants in a case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Iowa (1998-2000), we collected vacuum cleaner dust and measured 14 herbicides with high use on corn and soybeans in Iowa. Of 112 homes, 58% of residences had crops within 500 m of their home, an intermediate distance for primary drift from aerial and ground applications. Detection rates for herbicides ranged from 0% for metribuzin and cyanazine to 95% for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. Six herbicides used almost exclusively in agriculture were detected in 28% of homes. Detections and concentrations were highest in homes with an active farmer. Increasing acreage of corn and soybean fields within 750 m of homes was associated with significantly elevated odds of detecting agricultural herbicides compared with homes with no crops within 750 m (adjusted odds ratio per 10 acres = 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.11). Herbicide concentrations also increased significantly with increasing acreage within 750 m. We evaluated the distance of crop fields from the home at < 100, 101-250, 251-500, and 501-750 m. Including the crop buffer distance parameters in the model did not significantly improve the fit compared with a model with total acres within 750 m. Our results indicate that crop maps may be a useful method for estimating levels of herbicides in homes from nearby crop fields.

Positional accuracy of two methods of geocoding.

BACKGROUND: Geocoding is often used in epidemiologic studies to map residences with geographic information systems (GIS). The accuracy of the method is usually not determined. METHODS: We collected global positioning system (GPS) measurements at homes in a case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Iowa. We geocoded the addresses by 2 methods: (1) in-house, using ArcView 3.2 software and the U.S. Census Bureau TIGER 2000 street database; and (2) automated geocoding by a commercial firm. We calculated the distance between the geocoded and GPS location (positional error) overall and separately for homes within towns and outside (rural). We evaluated the error in classifying homes with respect to their proximity to crop fields. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of homes were geocoded with positional errors of less than 100 m by both methods (ArcView/TIGER 2000, median = 62 m [interquartile range = 39-103]; commercial firm, median = 61 m [interquartile range = 35-137]). For town residences, the percent geocoded with errors of