Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to site content
CDC Home

PCD Logo

ERRATUM

Erratum, Vol. 10, June 6 Release

Suggested citation for this article: Erratum, Vol. 10, June 6 Release. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;11:120265e. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.120265e.

In the article “Using Geographic Information Systems to Compare Municipal, County, and Commercial Parks Data,” the author made inadvertent errors in several calculations as a result of overlapping park shape files that were not accounted for in the analysis. This erratum provides corrected results that account for the overlap. The corrections were made to our website on March 27, 2014, and corrected article appears online at http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2013/12_0265.htm. The authors regret any confusion or inconvenience these errors may have caused.

The following corrections have been made to the article:

Results (Abstract)

Commercial parks data did not include 30.5% (116/380, 20.2 sq mi) of North Carolina, 42.9% (187/436, 21.3 sq mi) of Maryland, and 71.7% (629/881, 12.7 sq mi) of New York parks that we found and verified from municipal/county sources. Municipal/county data did not include 15.8% (60/380, 10.1 sq mi) of North Carolina parks, 27.5% (120/436, 74.8) of Maryland parks, and 9.1% (80/881, 7.8 sq mi) of New York parks that we found and verified from commercial sources.

Results

Overall, we verified the existence of 380 parks in the NC study area, 436 parks in the Maryland study area, and 881 parks in the New York study area (Table 1). The commercial data source did not include the following percentage of parks found and verified in municipal/county sources: 30.5% (116/380, 20.2 sq mi) in North Carolina, 42.9% (187/436, 21.3 sq mi) in Maryland, and 71.7% (629/881, 12.7 sq mi) in New York. The municipal/county data sources did not include the following parks found and verified in the commercial source: 15.8% (60/380, 10.1 sq mi) in North Carolina, 27.5% (120/436, 74.8 sq mi) in Maryland, and 9.1% (80/881, 7.8 sq mi) in New York. Municipal/county data sources showed higher percentages of land area with parks for North Carolina and New York than did the commercial data sources but a lower percentage for Maryland.

Tables

Return to your place in the textTable 1. Comparison of Parks Data Obtained From Municipal/County Sources with Data Obtained from Commercial Sources in 3 Locations: North Carolina, Maryland, and New York, 2009–2012
Park Details North Carolinaa, n = 380b Marylandc, n = 436b New Yorkd, n = 881b
Municipal/ Countye Commercialf Municipal/ Countye Commercialf Municipal/ Countye Commercialf
Number of parks
Number of parks, total 320261 316246 801251
Parks in both data sourcesg 204201 129126 172171
Parks in municipal/county data but not in commercial data 116NA 187NA 629NA
Parks in commercial data but not in municipal/county datah NA60 NA120 NA80
Park area (sq mi)
Park area, total 42.732.5 67.2 120.7 29.524.7
Park area spatially overlaidi 22.522.5 45.945.9 16.916.9
Park area in municipal/county data but not in commercial data 20.2NA 21.3NA 12.7NA
Park area in commercial data but not in municipal/county data NA10.1 NA74.8 NA7.8
Percentage of study area in parks 2.31.8 5.08.9 11.49.5

Abbreviation: NA, not applicable.
a North Carolina study area comprised Davidson, Davie, Guilford, Forsyth, Randolph, Rockingham, Stokes, Surry, and Yadkin Counties (1,837 sq mi).
b Total number of parks derived from combining verified municipal/county and commercial data.
c Maryland study area comprised 79 zip code areas in Anne Arundel, Carroll, Harford, Howard, and Baltimore counties and Baltimore city (1,351 sq mi).
d New York study area comprised 183 zip code areas in Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens boroughs and Westchester County (260 sq mi).
e Data from municipal/county government sources collected from 2009 through 2012.
f Data from Esri (Esri, Redlands, California), 2010.
g Parks that were identified in both data sources.
h Includes 28 parks in North Carolina, 55 in Maryland, and 30 in New York that did not meet our definition of a park, which was defined as public place set aside for physical activity and enjoyment. This definition did not include cemeteries, mobile home parks, historic sites, professional stadiums, country clubs, zoos, private parks, private facilities (such as stand-alone baseball or tennis facilities), and stand-alone recreation centers.
i The exact area where parks from municipal/county data were overlaid with parks from the commercial data.

 

Return to your place in the textTable 3. Park Facilities Missed by Relying on 1 Data Source, by Study Areaa
Parks with Each Facility Park Facilities Missed if Relying on Municipal/County Data Onlyb Park Facilities Missed if Relying on Commercial Data Onlyb
North Carolina (n = 32) na (%) Maryland (n = 65) na (%) New York (n = 49) na (%) North Carolina (n = 116) na (%) Maryland (n = 187) na (%) New York (n = 629) na (%)
Outdoors
Baseball or softball fields 12 (37.5) 30 (46.2) 13 (26.0) 34 (29.3) 72 (38.9) 104 (16.5)
Basketball hoops 5 (15.6) 26 (40.0) 17 (34.0) 25 (21.6) 84 (44.9) 383 (60.9)
Bocce ball courts 00 1 (2.0)0 1 (0.5) 14 (2.2)
Cricket fields 00 00 02 (0.3)
General purpose fields 2 (6.3) 23 (35.4) 5 (10.0) 7 (6.0) 60 (32.1) 19 (3.0)
Golf holes 1 (3.1)0 1 (2.0)7 (6.0)3 (1.6)4 (0.6)
Football fields 01 (1.5) 1 (2.0)3 (2.6)0 14 (2.2)
Skate park 01 (1.5) 1 (2.0)4 (3.4)2 (1.1)5 (0.8)
Soccer fields 1 (3.1)0 (0.0)0 11 (9.5) 2 (1.1) 13 (2.1)
Swimming pools 3 (9.4)2 (3.1)2 (4.0)7 (6.0)9 (4.8)23 (3.7)
Tennis courts 7 (21.9) 14 (21.5) 4 (8.0) 17 (14.7) 32 (17.1) 33 (5.2)
Tracks0 01 (2.0) 00 12 (1.9)
Volleyball courts 9.44 (6.2)0 9 (7.8)9 (4.8)32 (5.1)
Outdoors or indoors
Racquetball, handball, or squash courts 1 (3.1)0 5 (10.0) 01 (0.5) 387 (61.5)
Indoors
General purpose fields 00 1 (2.0)0 2 (1.1)0
Swimming pools 1 (3.1)0 00 07 (1.1)

a Parks missed when relying only on commercial data or only on municipal/county data. The numbers given in this table for “parks missed when relying only on municipal/county data” (32, North Carolina; 65, Maryland; and 49, New York) are lower numbers than those shown in Table 1 (60, 120, 80, respectively). The difference is because some parks in the municipal and county data did not meet the study’s park definition.
b Number and percentage of facilities in missed parks.

Top of Page



The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.


 
For Questions About This Article Contact pcdeditor@cdc.gov
USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web PortalDepartment of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention   1600 Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA 30333, USA
800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636) TTY: (888) 232-6348 - Contact CDC–INFO
A-Z Index
  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
  7. G
  8. H
  9. I
  10. J
  11. K
  12. L
  13. M
  14. N
  15. O
  16. P
  17. Q
  18. R
  19. S
  20. T
  21. U
  22. V
  23. W
  24. X
  25. Y
  26. Z
  27. #