Abstract
Geospatial modeling methods in population-level kidney research have not been used to full potential because few studies have completed associative spatial analyses between risk factors and exposures and kidney conditions and outcomes. Spatial modeling has several advantages over traditional modeling, including improved estimation of statistical variation and more accurate and unbiased estimation of coefficient effect direction or magnitudes by accounting for spatial data structure. Because most population-level kidney research data are geographically referenced, there is a need for better understanding of geospatial modeling for evaluating associations of individual geolocation with processes of care and clinical outcomes. In this review, we describe common spatial models, provide details to execute these analyses, and perform a case-study to display how results differ when integrating geographic structure. In our case-study, we used U.S. nationwide 2019 chronic kidney disease (CKD) data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Kidney Disease Surveillance System and 2006 to 2010 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency environmental quality index (EQI) data and fit a nonspatial count model along with global spatial models (spatially lagged model [SLM]/pseudo-spatial error model [PSEM]) and a local spatial model (geographically weighted quasi-Poisson regression [GWQPR]). We found the SLM, PSEM, and GWQPR improved model fit in comparison to the nonspatial regression, and the PSEM model decreased the positive relationship between EQI and CKD prevalence. The GWQPR also revealed spatial heterogeneity in the EQI-CKD relationship. To summarize, spatial modeling has promise as a clinical and public health translational tool, and our case-study example is an exhibition of how these analyses may be performed to improve the accuracy and utility of findings.