Pollock EA, Gangnon RE, Gennuso KP, Givens ML. Cluster Analysis Methods to Support Population Health Improvement Among US Counties.
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH MANAGEMENT AND PRACTICE 2024:00124784-990000000-00310. [PMID:
38985976 DOI:
10.1097/phh.0000000000002034]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/12/2024]
Abstract
CONTEXT
Population health rankings can be a catalyst for the improvement of health by drawing attention to areas in need of relative improvement and summarizing complex information in a manner understood by almost everyone. However, ranks also have unintended consequences, such as being interpreted as "hard truths," where variations may not be significant. There is a need to improve communication about uncertainty in ranks, with accurate interpretation. The most common solutions discussed in the literature have included modeling approaches to minimize statistical noise or borrow strength from covariates. However, the use of complex models can limit communication and implementation, especially for broad audiences.
OBJECTIVES
Explore data-informed grouping (cluster analysis) as an easier-to-understand, empirical technique to account for rank imprecision that can be effectively communicated both numerically and visually.
DESIGN
Cluster analysis, specifically k-means clustering with Wasserstein (earth mover's) distance, was explored as an approach to identify natural and meaningful groupings and gaps in the data distribution for the County Health Rankings' (CHR) health outcomes ranks.
SETTING
County-level health outcomes from the 2022 CHR.
PARTICIPANTS
3082 counties that were ranked in the 2022 CHR.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
Data-informed health groups.
RESULTS
Cluster analysis identified 30 health groupings among counties nationwide, with cluster size ranging from 9 to 184 counties. On average, states had 16 identified clusters, ranging from 3 in Delaware and Hawaii to 27 in Virginia. Number of clusters per state was associated with number of counties per state and population of the state. The method helped address many of the issues that arise from providing rank estimates alone.
CONCLUSIONS
Public health practitioners can use this information to understand uncertainty in ranks, visualize distances between county ranks, have context around which counties are not meaningfully different from one another, and compare county performance to peer counties.
Collapse