Accuracy of seven GPS-based geolocation techniques versus a surveyor map: a cross-sectional study in a village in the Comoros.

Authors

Stefanie Dens, Maya Ronse, Tom Smekens, Kate Shih, Rian Snijders, Claudia Nieto-Sanchez, Hilma Ali Maoulida, Enoudine Moundji, Ibrahim Saïd Ali, Chamda Ben Absoir, Widjidane Miadjah Ny Aina Anny, Mourissaenti Azihari, Anrnati Attoumane, Epco Hasker, Younoussa Assoumani, Koen Peeters, Kristien Verdonck

Published in

BMJ open. Volume 16. Issue 8. Pages e120178. Aug 26, 2026. Epub Aug 26, 2026.

Abstract

To assess the accuracy of seven commonly used Global Positioning System (GPS)-based geolocation techniques, including a handheld GPS device and smartphones using Google Maps, Open Data Kit (ODK) and Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) with and without internet connectivity, for measuring distances between houses in a field epidemiology setting.
Cross-sectional study conducted in February-March 2024.
Field study in a village in the Comoros where leprosy is endemic.
55 randomly selected house pairs, of which 50 were included in the analysis.
Measurement error, defined as the difference in straight-line distance between house pairs measured by each index test (GPS-based geolocation technique) and the reference standard (surveyor map).
Three index tests showed substantial shortcomings, including indeterminate results (one technique), outliers (two techniques), systematic underestimation (mean measurement error -3.0 m for one technique) and high variability (SD of measurement error ranging from 9.4 m to 16.6 m). The remaining four index tests showed little bias (mean measurement error ranging from -1.7 m to 0.4 m across techniques) and low variability (SD of measurement error ranging from 5.7 m to 7.4 m). For the most precise technique, 95% of measurements were estimated to fall between an underestimation of 11.9 m (95% CI 8.9 to 17.5 m) and an overestimation of 10.5 m (95% CI 8.4 to 13.7 m). Even this narrowest range was two to three times wider than the claimed accuracy.
GPS-based geolocation techniques may show substantial variability under field conditions and may give rise to misplaced confidence in their accuracy when this is assumed rather than empirically assessed. Careful selection and testing of techniques in context, along with transparent data handling and consideration of uncertainty, are needed to improve the reliability of geospatial data in public health research and practice.

PMID:
42648777
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 27 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.