Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 459–476 | Cite as

Reconsidering the Rural–Urban Continuum in Rural Health Research: A Test of Stable Relationships Using Mortality as a Health Measure

  • Ronald E. CossmanEmail author
  • Jeralynn S. Cossman
  • Arthur G. Cosby
  • Rebel M. Reavis


Health researchers commonly use existing rural–urban continua based on population size and adjacency to metro areas to categorize counties. When these continua are collapsed into simple rural-versus-urban aggregations, significant differences within the categories are masked. We show that when the entire range of the 10-category Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) is used, the direction of the coefficients may differ and the fit of the model varies substantially across contiguous categories. However, collapsing contiguous categories masks variations within the continuum. To the extent that health policy decisions are made based on such aggregations, inappropriate policy choices may result (e.g., low payments to counties with relatively high needs). Given Congressional calls to address rural health, and the new Office of Management and Budget (OMB) statistical area classification system, debate over appropriate categorizations schemes is timely. We regress age-adjusted all-causes of death on various socioeconomic factors to assess the appropriate use of variants of the rural–urban continuum for health research. Our findings support two main conclusions. First, researchers collapsing urban–rural categorization schemes may be masking important categorical differences, inadvertently influencing policymaking predicated on their work. Second, finer classification of settlements yields uneven results. That is, coefficients shift signs across the continuum, indicating that collapsed models may be inappropriate. Results derived using collapsed variants of the RUCC may be too unstable to use as health research and funding categorization schemes. We suggest that a health status or outcomes categorization scheme is likely to be a more appropriate metric for rural health research.


Rural–urban continuum Health policy Mortality Inequality Research methods 



This study was funded by a grant from the Office of Rural Health Policy of the Department of Health and Human Services (Grant 4-D1A-RH-00005-01-01) through the Rural Health Safety and Security Institute, Social Science Research Center (SSRC), Mississippi State University (MSU). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Rural Health Policy. The authors thank Carol Campbell, graduate assistant, for data analysis, Debra Street (FSU), Isaac W. Eberstein (FSU), Troy Blanchard (MSU), and Wesley James (MSU) for helpful comments on earlier drafts.


  1. Anderson, R. N., & Rosenberg, H. M. (1998a). Report on the Second Workshop on Age Adjustment. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Statistics, 4(30).Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. N., & Rosenberg, H. M. (1998b). Age standardization of death rates: Implementation of the Year 2000 Standard. National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics Reports, 47(3).Google Scholar
  3. Beale, C. (2001). Measuring rurality: Rural–Urban Continuum Codes. US Department of Agriculture website (Briefing Room, Economic Research Service). Retrieved 9 September 2006 from:
  4. Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  5. Berliant, M., & Zenou, Y. (1995). Labour specialization and city formation. Centre for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper: 1270. London, UK.Google Scholar
  6. Berry, B. (1962). Cities as systems within systems of cities. Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, 13, 147–164.Google Scholar
  7. Britnell, R. H. (2001). Specialization of work in England, 1100–1300. Economic History Review, 54(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butler, M. A., & Beale, C. A. (1994). Rural-Urban Continuum Codes for Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Counties, 1993. Agriculture and Rural Economy Division, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. AGES 9425.Google Scholar
  9. Christaller, W. (1966). Central places in southern Germany. Translated from Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland (1933), (C. W. Baskin, translator). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Clifford, W. B., & Brannon, Y. S. (1985). Rural–urban differences in mortality. Rural Sociology, 50, 210–224.Google Scholar
  11. Clifford, W. B., Miller, M. K., & Stokes, C. S. (1986). Rural-urban differences in mortality in the United States, 1970–1980. In D. Jahn, J. W. Johnson & R. C. Wimberley (Eds.), New dimensions in rural policy: Building upon our heritage (pp. 63–70). Washington: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  12. Committee on Health & Behavior: Research, Practice, & Policy Board on Neuroscience & Behavioral Health (2001). Health and behavior: The interplay of biological, behavioral, and societal influences. Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cossman, R. E., Blanchard, T., James, W., Jackson-Belli, R., & Cosby, A. (2002). Healthy and unhealthy places in America: Are these really spatial clusters? Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ESRI International User Conference. 2002. Published as a CD-ROM. Retrieved 9 September 2006, from:
  14. Cossman, R. E., Cossman, J. S., Jackson, R., & Cosby, A. (2003). Mapping high or low mortality places across time in the United States: A research note on a health visualization and analysis project. Health & Place, 9(4), 361–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cromartie, J. B., & Swanson, L. L. (1996). Census tracts more precisely define rural populations and areas. Rural Development Perspectives, 11(3), 31–39.Google Scholar
  16. Cromartie, J. (2001). Measuring rurality: What is rural? US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Retrieved 9 September 2006, from:
  17. Desan, P. (1995). Work in the Renaissance. Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 25(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  18. Dillon, W., & Goldstein, M. (1984). Multivariate analysis: Methods and applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  19. Eberhardt, M. S., Ingram, D. D., Makuc, D. M., et al. (2001). Urban and Rural Health Chartbook. Health, United States, 2001. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  20. Evan, R. G., Barer, M. L. & Marmor, T. R. (Eds.). (1994). Why are some people healthy and others not?: The determinants of health of populations. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  21. Feinleib, M., & Zarate, A. O. (Eds.). (1992). Reconsidering age adjustment procedures: Workshop proceedings. Vital Health Statistics, 4(29).Google Scholar
  22. Fisher, E. S., Wennberg, J. E., Stukel, T. A., Skinner, J. S., Sharp, S. M., Freeman, J. L., & Gittelsohn, A. M. (2000). Associations among hospital capacity, utilization, and mortality of US Medicare beneficiaries, controlling for sociodemographic factors. Health Services Research, 34(6), 1351–1362.Google Scholar
  23. Fluharty, C. W. (2000). Comments regarding the final report and recommendations from the metropolitan area standards review committee to the Office of Management and Budget concerning changes to the standards for defining metropolitan area [letter submitted to OMB regarding OMB’s review of metropolitan areas standards]. National Rural Network, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. Friedrichs, C. (1995). The early modern city, 1450–1750. New York: Longman Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ghelfi, L. M., & Parker, T. S. (1995). A new county-level measure of urban influence. Staff Paper, Rural Economy Division, Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
  26. Goldsmith, H. F., Puskin, D. S., & Stiles, D. J. (1993). Improving the operational definition of “rural areas” for federal programs. Federal Office of Rural Health Policy. Retrieved 9 September 2006 from:
  27. Goodall, C. R., Kafadar, K., & Tukey, J. W. (1998). Computing and using rural versus urban measures in statistical applications. The American Statistician, 52(2), 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greenland, S. (1992). Divergent biases in ecologic and individual-level studies. Statistics in Medicine, 11, 1209–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gritzer, G. (1982). Occupational specialization in medicine: Knowledge and market explanations. Research in the Sociology of Health Care, 2, 251–283.Google Scholar
  30. Hayward, M. D., Pienta, A. M., & McLaughlin, D. K. (1997). Inequality in men’s mortality: The socioeconomic status gradient and geographic context. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 313–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Health Resources and Services Administration (2000). Community Health Status Indicators Project: CHSI Stratification Process.Google Scholar
  32. Hewitt, M. (1992). Defining “rural” areas: Impact on health care policy research. In W. M. Gesler, & T. C. Ricketts (Eds.), Health in rural North America: The geography of health care services and delivery (pp. 25–54). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  33. LeClere, F. B., Rogers, R. G., & Peters, K. D. (1997). Ethnicity and mortality in the United States: Individual and community correlates. Social Forces, 76, 169–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leeming, W. (2001). Professionalization theory, medical specialists and the concept of “national patterns of specialization.” Social Science Information, 40(3), 455–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lomax, R. G. (1992). Statistical concepts: A second course for education and the behavioral sciences. New York: Longman Press.Google Scholar
  36. Losch, A. (1954). The economics of location. (W.H. Woglom, translator). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lynch, J. W., & Kaplan, G. A. (1997). Understanding how inequality in the distribution of income affects health. Journal of Health Psychology, 2, 297–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lynch, J. W., Kaplan, G. A., Pamuk, E. R., Cohen, R. D., Heck, K. E., Balfour, J. L., & Yen, I. H. (1998). Income inequality and mortality in metropolitan areas of the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 88(7), 1074–1080.Google Scholar
  39. Mansfield, C. J., Wilson, J. L., Kobrinski, E. J., & Mitchell, J. (1999). Premature mortality in the United States: The roles of geographic area, socioeconomic status, household type, and availability of medical care. American Journal of Public Health, 89(6), 893–898.Google Scholar
  40. McLaughlin, D. K., Stokes, C. S., & Nonoyama, A. (2001). Residence and income inequality: Effects on mortality among US counties. Rural Sociology, 66(4), 579–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Miller, M. K., Farmer, F. L., & Clarke L. L. (1994). Rural populations and their health. In J. E. Beaulieu & D. E. Berry (Eds.), Rural health services (pp. 3–26). Ann Arbor: AUPHA Press/Health Administration Press.Google Scholar
  42. Miller, M. K., Stokes, C. S., & Clifford, W. B. A. (1987). Comparison of the rural-urban mortality differential from death from all causes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The Journal of Rural Health, 3, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Miller, M. K., Voth, D. E., & Danforth, D. M. (1982). The medical care system and community malady: Rural, urban, and suburban variations. Rural Sociology, 47, 634–654.Google Scholar
  44. Morgan, A. A. (2002). National call to action: CDC’s 2001 Urban and Rural Health Chartbook. The Journal of Rural Health, 18(3), 382–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Morgenstern, H. (1998). Ecologic study. In P. Armitage & T. Colton (Eds.), Encyclopedia of biostatistics, (Vol. 2, pp. 255–276). New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  46. Morrill, R., Cromartie, J., & Hart, G. (1999). Metropolitan, urban, and rural commuting areas: Toward a better depiction of the United States settlement system. Urban Geography, 20(8), 727–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. National Center for Health Statistics (2000). Compressed mortality file: 1968–88. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Hyattsville.Google Scholar
  48. National Center for Health Statistics (2001a). Compressed mortality file: 1989–98. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Hyattsville.Google Scholar
  49. National Center for Health Statistics (2001b). Documentation for the compressed mortality file: 1989–98. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Hyattsville.Google Scholar
  50. Office of Management and Budget (1995). Metropolitan areas: 1995 Lists I-IV, Statistical Policy Office, Office of Management and Budget, Attachment to OMB Bulleting No. 95-04. Retrieved 9 September 2006 from:
  51. Office of Management and Budget (2000). Standards for defining metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. Federal Register, 65(249), 82228–82238, December 27.Google Scholar
  52. Parker, T. (2001). Measuring rurality: Urban influence codes. US Department of Agriculture Web Site (Briefing Room, Economic Research Service). Retrieved 9 September 2006 from:
  53. Pfaffenberger, R. C., & Patterson, J. H. (1987). Statistical methods for business and economics. Homewood: Irwin.Google Scholar
  54. Rashevsky, N. (1947). Mathematical theory of human relations. Mathematical Biophysics Monograph Series, No. 2. Bloomington: The Principia Press.Google Scholar
  55. Ricketts, T. C. III. (2002). Rural health research and rural health in the 21st century: The future of rural health and the future of rural health services research. The Journal of Rural Health, 18(Supplement), 140–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ricketts, T. C. III. (Ed.). (1999). Rural health in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Ricketts, T. C. III., Johnson-Webb, K. D., & Taylor, P. (1998). Definitions of rural: A handbook for health policy makers and researchers. Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, Health Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  58. Ricketts, T. C., Savitz, L. A., Gesler, W. M., & Osborne, D. N. (Eds.). (1994). Geographic methods for health services research: A focus on the rural-urban continuum. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  59. Rural Policy Research Institute (2000). The importance of place in public policy. Retrieved 9 September 2006 from:
  60. Sassen, S. (1991). Global cities: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Shryock, H., Siegel, J., et al. (1976). The methods and materials of demography. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  62. Simon, H. A. (1955). On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 42, 425–440.Google Scholar
  63. Strauss, A., Fagerhaugh, S., Suczek, B., & Wiener, C. (1982). Medical technology’s impact on hospital organization and specialization. International Sociological Association paper.Google Scholar
  64. U.S. Bureau of the Census (1995). Urban and rural definitions. Retrieved 9 September 2006, from US Bureau of Census Web site:
  65. Wright, J. S., & Lick, D. W. (1986). Health in rural America. In D. Jahr, J. W. Johnson, & R. C. Wimberly (Eds.), New dimensions in rural policy: Building upon our heritage (pp. 461–469). Washington: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  66. Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald E. Cossman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jeralynn S. Cossman
    • 1
  • Arthur G. Cosby
    • 1
  • Rebel M. Reavis
    • 2
  1. 1.Social Science Research CenterMississippi State UniversityMississippi StateUSA
  2. 2.University of Tennessee at MartinMartinUSA

Personalised recommendations