Show simple item record

Validity of environmental audits using GigaPan® and Google Earth Technology

dc.contributor.authorTwardzik, Erica
dc.contributor.authorAntonakos, Cathy
dc.contributor.authorBaiers, Ross
dc.contributor.authorDubowitz, Tamara
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Philippa
dc.contributor.authorColabianchi, Natalie
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-08T03:42:33Z
dc.date.available2018-07-08T03:42:33Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-06
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Health Geographics. 2018 Jul 06;17(1):26
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-018-0147-7
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/144541
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Health behaviors are shaped by the context in which people live. However, documenting environmental context has remained a challenge. More specifically, direct observation techniques require large investments in time and resources and auditing the environment through web-based platforms has limited stability in spatio-temporal imagery. This study examined the validity of a new methodology, using GigaPan® imagery, where we took photos locally and, stitched them together using GigaPan® technology, and quantified environmental attributes from the resulting panoramic photo. For comparison, we examined validity using Google Earth imagery. Methods A total of 464 street segments were assessed using three methods: GigaPan® audits, Google Earth audits, and direct observation audits. Thirty-seven different attributes were captured representing three broad constructs: land use, traffic and safety, and amenities. Sensitivity (i.e. the proportion of true positives) and specificity (i.e. the proportion of true negatives) were used to estimate the validity of GigaPan® and Google Earth audits using direct observation audits as the gold standard. Results Using GigaPan®, sensitivity was 80% or higher for 6 of 37 items and specificity was 80% or higher for 31 of 37 items. Using Google Earth, sensitivity was 80% or higher for 8 of 37 items and specificity was 80% or higher for 30 of 37 items. The validity of GigaPan® and Google Earth was similar, with significant differences in sensitivity and specificity for 7 items and 2 items, respectively. Conclusion GigaPan® performed well, especially when identifying features absent from the environment. A major strength of the GigaPan® technology is its ability to be implemented quickly in the field relative to direct observation. GigaPan® is a method to consider as an alternative to direct observation when temporality is prioritized or Google Earth imagery is unavailable.
dc.titleValidity of environmental audits using GigaPan® and Google Earth Technology
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144541/1/12942_2018_Article_147.pdf
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s)
dc.date.updated2018-07-08T03:42:34Z
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.