Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Sexual and Reproductive Health Burden Index: Development, Validity, and Community-Level Analyses of a Composite Spatial Measure

  • Published:
Journal of Urban Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Sexual and Reproductive Health Burden Index (SRHBI) was developed to provide a composite spatial measure of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) indicators that can be widely adopted by urban public health departments for the planning of SRH services. The index was constructed using eight indicators: teen births, low birthweight, infant mortality, new HIV diagnoses, people living with HIV, and incidences of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and syphilis. Chicago Department of Public Health data (2014–2017) were used to calculate index scores for Chicago community areas; scores were mapped to provide geovisualization and global Moran’s I was calculated to assess spatial autocorrelation. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess internal reliability of the SRHBI. Pearson correlations were conducted to assess concurrent validity and correlation with community-level factors. Linear regression was conducted to assess community-level predictors of the SRHBI. Application of the SRHBI in Chicago demonstrates substantial variation in SRH burden across Chicago’s urban landscape with significant spatial autocorrelation of scores (I = .580, p = .001). Internal reliability of the measure was excellent with α = .937. The SRHBI was significantly correlated with other indicators of SRH including rate of prenatal care initiation in the first trimester, rate of preterm births, reported sexual assault incidence, cervical cancer incidence, prostate cancer incidence, and rate of smoking during pregnancy. This suggests good concurrent validity of the measure. Linear regression revealed that the percent of Black residents, percent of household couples that are same-sex, community violence, economic hardship, and population density were significant predictors of the SRHBI. The SRHBI provides a valid, useful, and replicable measure to assess and communicate community-level SRH burden in urban environments. The SRHBI may be scaled through a multi-city public data dashboard and utilized by urban public health departments to optimally target and tailor SRH interventions to communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Finer L, Zolna M. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011. N Engl J Med. 2016;274(9):843–52. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1506575.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cygan HR, McNaughton D, Reising V, Fogg L, Marshall B, Simon J. Teen pregnancy in Chicago: who is at risk? Public Health Nurs. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.12726.

  3. Goldberg SK, Reese BM, Halpern CT. Teen pregnancy among sexual minority women: results from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(4):429–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.05.009.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Everett BG, McCabe KF, Hughes TL. Sexual orientation disparities in mistimed and unwanted pregnancy among adult women. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2017;49(3):157–65. https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12032.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Anachebe NF. Racial and ethnic disparities in infant and maternal mortality. Ethn Dis. 2006;16(Suppl 3):S71–6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Surveillance Report, 2016. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/reports/surveillance/cdc-hiv-surveillance-report-2016-vol-28.pdf 2017. Published November, 2017. Accessed October 11, 2018.

  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2016. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats16/CDC_2016_STDS_Report-for508WebSep21_2017_1644.pdf. Published September, 2017. Accessed October 11, 2018.

  8. Baral SD, Poteat T, Stromdahl S, Wirtz AL, Guadamuz TE, Beyrer C. Worldwide burden of HIV in transgender women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13(3):214–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70315-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Denning P, DiNenno E. Communities in crisis: is there a generalized HIV epidemic in impoverished urban areas of the United States [Abstract WEPDD101]. Presented at: XVIII International AIDS Conference; July 18-23, 2010; Vienna, AT. Available at: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/DenningandDiNenno_XXXX-1.pdf. Accessed October 11, 2018.

  10. Millett GA, Peterson JL, Flores SA, Hart TA, Jeffries WL 4th, Wilson PA, et al. Comparisons of disparities and risks of HIV infection in black and other men who have sex with men in Canada, UK, and USA: a meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;380(9839):341–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60899-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pew Research Center. What unites and divides urban, suburban and rural communities. Available at: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2018/05/Pew-Research-Center-Community-Type-Full-Report-FINAL.pdf. Published May, 2018. Accessed June 20, 2019.

  12. Gates GJ. Geography of the LGBT population. In: Baumle AK, editor. International handbook on the demography of sexuality. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013. p. 229–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5512-3_12.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Schwarcz S, Hsu LC, Scheer S. Disparities and trends in viral suppression during a transition to a “test and treat” approach to the HIV epidemic, San Francisco, 2008–2012. JAIDS. 2015;70(5):529–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000000794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Teens in NYC Protection [mobile application]. New York: NYC DOHMH; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dehlin JM, Stillwagon R, Pickett J, Keene L, Schneider JA. # PrEP4Love: an evaluation of a sex-positive HIV prevention campaign. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019;5(2):e12822. https://doi.org/10.2196/12822.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Braeken D, Cardinal M. Comprehensive sexuality education as a means of promoting. Sex Health. 2008;20(1–2):50–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317610802157051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Braeken D, Rondinelli I. Sexual and reproductive health needs of young people: matching needs with systems 2012;119(S1):S60-S63. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.03.019

  18. Matthews LT, Beyeza-Kashesya J, Cooke I, et al. Consensus statement: Supporting safer conception and pregnancy for men and women living with and affected by HIV. 2017;22(6):1713–1724. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/10461-017-1777-7

  19. Starrs AM, Ezeh AC, Barker G, Basu A, Bertrand JT, Blum R, et al. Accelerate progress—sexual and reproductive health and rights for all: report of the Guttmacher–Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2018;391(10140):2642–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30293-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lam AG, Mak A, Lindsay PD, Russell ST. What really works? An exploratory study of condom negotiation strategies. AIDS Educ Prev. 2004;16(2):160–71. https://doi.org/10.1521/aeap.16.2.160.29396.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Miller E, Decker MR, McCauley HL, et al. Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy. Contraception. 2010;81(4):316–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Stone N, Ingham R. Factors affecting British teenagers’ contraceptive use at first intercourse: the importance of partner communication. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2002;34(4):191–7. https://doi.org/10.1363/3419102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hatcher AM, Colvin CJ, Ndlovu N, Dworkin SL. Intimate partner violence among rural South African men: alcohol use, sexual decision-making, and partner communication. Cult Health Sex. 2014;16(9):1023–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2014.924558.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Foshee VA, Reyes ML, Wykoff S. Approaches to preventing psychological, physical, and sexual partner abuse. In: O’Leary KD, Woodin EM, editors. Psychological and physical aggression in couples: causes and interventions. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2009. p. 165–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/11880-008.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Swartzendruber A, Zenilman JM. A national strategy to improve sexual health. JAMA. 2010;304(9):1005–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1252.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Miller MK, Chernick LS, Goyal MK, Reed JL, Ahmad FA, Hoehn EF, et al. A research agenda for emergency medicine-based adolescent sexual and reproductive health. Acad Emerg Med. 2019;26(12):1357–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13809.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Constantine NA, Jerman P, Huang AX. California parents’ preferences and beliefs regarding school-based sex education policy. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2007;39(3):167–75. https://doi.org/10.1363/3916707.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ito KE, Gizlice Z, Owen-O’Dowd J, Foust E, Leone PA, Miller WC. Parent opinion of sexuality education in a state with mandated abstinence education: does policy match parental preference? J Adolesc Health. 2006;39(5):634–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.04.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mollen CJ, Miller MK, Hayes KL, Wittink MN, Barg FK. Developing emergency department-based education about emergency contraception: adolescent preferences. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20(11):1164–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12243.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Ryan K, Arbuckle-Bernstein V, Smith G, Phillips J. Let’s talk about sex: a survey of patients’ preferences when addressing sexual health concerns in a family medicine residency program office. PRiMER. 2018;2:23. https://doi.org/10.22454/PRiMER.2018.728252.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Gibin M, Mateos P, Petersen J, Atkinson P. Google maps mashups for local public health service planning. In: Stillwell J, Geertman S, editors. Planning support systems best practice and new methods. New York: NY, Springer; 2009. p. 227–42.

  32. Soja EW. Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: MN, University of Minnesota Press; 2010.

  33. Plourde KF, Fischer S, Cunningham J, Brady K, McCarraher DR. Improving the paradigm of approaches to adolescent sexual and reproductive health. Reprod Health. 2016;13:72. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-016-0191-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Brahmbatt H, Kagesten A, Emerson M, et al. Prevalence and determinants of adolescent pregnancy in urban disadvantaged settings across five cities. J Adolesc Health. 2014;55(Suppl 6):S48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.07.023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Burns PA, Snow RC. The built environment & the impact of neighborhood characteristics on youth sexual risk behavior in Cape Town, South Africa. Health Place. 2012;18(5):1088–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.04.013.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Lovasi G, Adams J, Bearman P. Social support, sex, and food: social networks and health. In: Bird CE, Conrad P, Fremont AM, Timmermans S, editors. Handbook of medical sociology. 6th ed. Nashville: TN, Vanderbilt University Press; 2010. p. 75–91.

  37. Ellingson S, Schroeder K. Race and the construction of same-sex sex markets in four Chicago neighborhoods. In: Laumann EO, Ellingson S, Mahay J, Paik A, Youm Y, editors. The sexual organization of the city. Chicago: IL, University of Chicago Press; 2004. p. 69–92.

  38. Rosentel K, VandeVusse A, Hill BJ. Racial and socioeconomic inequity in the spatial distribution of LGBTQ human services: an exploratory analysis of LGBTQ services in Chicago. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2020;17(1):87–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-019-0374-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pierce SJ, Miller RL, Morales MM, Forney J. Identifying HIV prevention service needs of African American men who have sex with men: an application of spatial analysis techniques to service planning. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2007;13(Suppl):S72–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ridgeway J, Almirol E, Schmitt J, Schuble T, Schneider J. Travel time to clinic but not neighborhood crime rate is associated with retention in care among HIV-positive patients. AIDS Behav. 2018;22(9):3003–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-018-2094-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Bares S, Eavou R, Bertozzi-Villa C, et al. Expanded HIV testing and linkage to care: conventional vs. point-of-care testing and assignment of patient notification and linkage to care to an HIV care program. Public Health Rep. 2016;131(S1):107–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549161310S113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Chicago Department of Public Health. Health data and reports. Available at: https://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdph/provdrs/health_data_and_reports.html. Accessed October 11, 2018

  43. Wennberg J, Gittelsohn A. Small area variations in health care delivery. Science. 1973;182(4117):1102–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.182.4117.1102.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Segall M. Planning and politics of resource allocation for primary health care: promotion of meaningful national policy. Soc Sci Med. 1983;17(24):1947–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(83)90135-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Etches V, Frank J, Di Ruggiero E, Manuel D. Measuring population health: a review of indicators. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:29–55. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Corburn J, Cohen AK. Why we need urban health equity indicators: integrating science, policy, and community. PLoS Med. 2012;9(8):e1001285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001285.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Rothenberg R, Stauber C, Weaver S, Dai D, Prasad A, Kano M. Urban health indicators and indices—current status. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):494. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1827-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Woolf S, Purnell J, Simon S, et al. Translating evidence into population health improvement: strategies and barriers. Annu Rev Public Health. 2015;36(1):463–82. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-082214-110901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Saisana M, Tarantola S. State-of-the-art report on current methodologies and practices for composite indicator development. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.402.5612&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Published 2002.

  50. Shih M, Dumke KA, Goran MI, Simon PA. The association between community-level economic hardship and childhood obesity prevalence in Los Angeles. Pediatr Obes. 2013;8(6):411–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2047-6310.2012.00123.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mellor JM, Milyo J. Is exposure to income inequality a public health concern? Lagged effects of income inequality on individual and population health. Health Serv Res. 2003;38(1p1):137–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.00109.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Deller S, Canto A, Brown L. Rural poverty, health and food access. Reg Sci Policy Pract. 2015;7(2):61–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Winters A, Alson J. Development of a Socioecological Adolescent Sexual Health Index and Atlas: a case study in Washington State. Am J Sex Educ. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2018.1443301.

  54. McKay A. Adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Canada: a report card in 2004. Can J Hum Sex. 2004;13(2):67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  55. World Health Organization. Reproductive health indicators: guidelines for their generation, interpretation and analysis for global monitoring. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43185/924156315X_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Published 2006. Accessed June 20, 2019.

  56. National Center for Health Statistics. Births: final data for 2017. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_08-508.pdf. Published November 7, 2018. Accessed June 20, 2019.

  57. National Center for Health Statistics. Timeliness of infant death data for infant mortality surveillance and quarterly provisional estimates. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/report005.pdf. Published June, 2018. Accessed June 20, 2019.

  58. Rob Paral & Associates. Chicago Community Area Data. Available at: https://robparal.com/chicago-data/. Accessed April 24, 2020.

  59. US Census Bureau. American Community Survey 5-year Estimates. Available at: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/. Accessed April 24, 2020.

  60. Rob Paral & Associates. 2010 Tract to community area equivalency file. Available at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kzS_feX7y-vJPxvY3gVGPn_hW3Wc1dtdoSrX8I3oMzU/edit#gid=0. Accessed April 24, 2020.

  61. Federal Bureau of Investigation. FBI releases 2017 crime statistics. Available at: https://ucrfbigov/crime-in-the-us/2017/crime-in-the-us-2017/downloads/download-printable-files Published September 24, 2018. Accessed 11 Oct 2018.

  62. City of Chicago. Chicago Data Portal. Available at: https://data.cityofchicago.org/. Accessed October 11, 2018.

  63. University of Illinois at Chicago Great Cities Institute. Fact sheet #2: Chicago Community Area Economic Hardship Index. Available at: https://greatcities.uic.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/GCI-Hardship-Index-Fact-SheetV2.pdf. Published September 19, 2016. Accessed October 11, 2018.

  64. Anselin L. Exploring spatial data with GeoDa: a workbook. Urbana: IL, Spatial Analysis Laboratory, University of Illinois; 2005.

  65. Davidshofer KR, Murphy CO. Psychological testing: principles and applications. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: NJ, Pearson Education; 2005.

  66. Boyle G. Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in psychometric scales? Personal Individ Differ. 1991;12(3):291–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90115-R.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Voisin DR, Jenkins EJ, Takahashi L. Toward a conceptual model linking community violence exposure to HIV-related risk behaviors among adolescents: directions for research. J Adolesc Health. 2011;49(3):230–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.01.002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Kalmuss D, Austrian K. Real men do… real men don’t: young Latino and African American men’s discourses regarding sexual health care utilization. Am J Mens Health. 2010;4(3):218–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988309331797.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Peipert JF, Madden T, Allsworth JE, Secur GM. Preventing unintended pregnancies by providing no-cost contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(6):1291–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318273eb56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Gelberg L, Gallagher TC, Andersen RM, Koegel P. Competing priorities as a barrier to medical care among homeless adults in Los Angeles. Am J Public Health. 1997;97(2):217–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Paasche-Orlow MK, Wolf MS. The causal pathways linking health literacy to health outcomes. Am J Health Behav. 2007;31(1):S19–26. https://doi.org/10.5555/ajhb.2007.31.supp.S19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University. AIDSVu. Available at: aidsvu.org. Accessed April 24, 2020.

  73. Jackson DL. Sample size and number of parameter estimates in maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis: a Monte Carlo investigation. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 2001;8(2):205–23. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0802_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Fotheringham AS, Wong DWS. The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environ Plan A: Economy and Space. 1991;23(7):1025–44. https://doi.org/10.1068/a231025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

The second author’s affiliation is included for informational purposes only; this work was not conducted under the auspices of the Guttmacher Institute. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Guttmacher Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Kris Rosentel

  2. Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY, USA

    Alicia VandeVusse

  3. Erie Family Health Center, Chicago, IL, USA

    Tina Schuh

Authors
  1. Kris Rosentel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alicia VandeVusse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tina Schuh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alicia VandeVusse.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rosentel, K., VandeVusse, A. & Schuh, T. The Sexual and Reproductive Health Burden Index: Development, Validity, and Community-Level Analyses of a Composite Spatial Measure. J Urban Health 98, 481–495 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-020-00457-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-020-00457-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation