Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 26, 2025

Large-scale Reconstructions and Independent, Unbiased Clustering Based on Morphological Metrics to Classify Neurons in Selective Populations
Published on: February 15, 2017
Determining County-Level Counterfactuals for Evaluation of Population Health Interventions: A Novel Application of
Kelly L Strutz1, Zhehui Luo2, Jennifer E Raffo1
112268 Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, East Lansing and Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
Objectives:
Evaluating population health initiatives at the community level necessitates valid counterfactual communities, which includes having similar population composition, health care access, and health determinants. Estimating appropriate county counterfactuals is challenging in states with large intercounty variation. We describe an application of K-means cluster analysis for determining county-level counterfactuals in an evaluation of an intervention, a county perinatal system of care for Medicaid-insured pregnant women.
Methods:
We described counties by using indicators from the American Community Survey, Area Health Resources Files, University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health Rankings, and vital records for Michigan Medicaid-insured births for 2009, the year the intervention began (or the closest available year). We ran analyses of 1000 iterations with random starting cluster values for each of a range of number of clusters from 3 to 10 with commonly used variability and reliability measures to identify the optimal number of clusters.
Results:
The use of unstandardized features resulted in the grouping of 1 county with the intervention county in all solutions for all iterations and the frequent grouping of 2 additional counties with the intervention county. Standardized features led to no solution, and other distance measures gave mixed results. However, no county was ideal for all subpopulation analyses.
Practice Implications:
Although the K-means method was successful at identifying comparison counties, differences between the intervention county and comparison counties remained. This limitation may be specific to the intervention county and the constraints of a within-state study. This method could be more useful when applied to other counties in and outside Michigan.
More Related Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
13:44Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Cluster Sampling Method
To choose a cluster sample, divide the population into clusters (groups) and then randomly select some of the clusters. All the members from these clusters are in the cluster sample. For example, if you randomly sample four departments from your...
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Sampling Plans
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data