Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristic of the scales used in the review

From: Urbanisation, urbanicity, and health: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of urbanicity scales

Study, author, country N Study characteristics No. of scale items Methods of data collection Reliability and validityproperties discussed Yes/No Duration of scale
Allender et al. 2011, Sri Lanka [8] 4485 >18 yrs male and female 10 Interviewer –administered questionnaire for individual level and personal/telephone interview for village heads for community level No Not given
Vavken et al. 2011, Austria [35] 14,507 Mean age 36 yrs Not given Survey No Not given
6569 men 45% male
55% female
7938 women
Jones-Smith et al. 2010, China [34] 218 provinces in China   12 Individual, household and community level surveys Yes Data from survey used to construct the scale
Antai et al. 2010, Nigeria [37] Children born to 2118 mothers Children under 5 yrs Scale measured urban area disadvantage and not urbanicity Data from 2003 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey used No Not given
Monda et al. 2007, China [23] 8760 Men and women aged between 18 and 55 10 items Data derived from CHNS survey No Not given
Van de Poel et al. 2009, China [17] 6484 >16 years Not mentioned Individual and community surveys Yes no
Allender et al. 2010, India [19] 3705 Men and women aged 15 – 64 years 7 Individual and household surveys Only face validity discussed Not given
Dahly et al. 2007, Phillipines [3] 3327 Any woman giving birth between May 1 1983 to April 30 1984 7 Individual and community surveys Yes Not given
McDade et al. 2001, Phillipines [4] 3327 Pregnant women Not mentioned Individual, household and community surveys No no
Liu et al. 2003, China [36] 33,404 individuals Mean age 28.9 years Not mentioned Individual and household surveys No no
Van de Poel et al. 2012, China [20] 31,333 person-wave observations across 5 waves Not specified Adapted from Van de Poel 2009 Individual and community surveys (with community heads) No Not given