Who’s really No. 1? Rice University statisticians build better way to make sense of competing sports rankings

New Bayesian model tested on MLB data can combine conflicting rankings, measure uncertainty and reveal what drives them

Rice University

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

image: 

Rose Graves, a doctoral student studying statistics at Rice and the study’s corresponding author.

view more 

Credit: Rice University.

Who, really, is the best player in baseball?

Ask five sports media outlets and you may get five different answers. Rankings can vary dramatically from one source to another, change from year to year and leave out different players altogether, making it difficult to determine where there is genuine consensus and where opinions diverge.

Now, Rice University statisticians, in collaboration with Cornell University, have developed a new method designed to find clearer answers in messy rankings data. The research was recently published in the Journal of Quantitative Analysis of Sports.

The approach, called Bayesian Multivariate Rank Regression, or BMRR, combines rankings from multiple sources and across multiple time points while accounting for disagreements among the rankers, incomplete lists and factors that might influence the rankings. And just as importantly, the method measures just how certain or uncertain the resulting consensus is.

“Rankings look simple on the surface, but statistically they’re actually very complicated,” said Rose Graves, a doctoral student studying statistics at Rice and the study’s corresponding author. “Two experts may rank different numbers of items, disagree about the order or even change their opinions over time. We wanted to create a way to bring all of that information together while accounting for uncertainty.”

Turning baseball debates into data

For their real-world test case, the researchers turned to one of the most closely scrutinized ranking systems in sports: annual lists of Major League Baseball’s best players. They analyzed preseason rankings published by ESPN, CBS, Bleacher Report, Yahoo Sports and MLB from 2021 through 2024. Each outlet ranked its top 100 players, but the lists varied in both who was included and where players were ranked. To create a consistent pool for comparison, the researchers focused on 55 players who appeared in at least one outlet’s rankings in each of the four years.

Those differences illustrate exactly what makes ranking data difficult to analyze. Simply averaging a player’s position across several lists can mask meaningful information, especially when a player is omitted from one list altogether or when assessments shift substantially from year to year.

BMRR instead treats the rankings as evidence about an underlying value and uses a hierarchical Bayesian framework to combine that evidence. The model can incorporate incomplete rankings and ties, borrow information across years and estimate how closely each source aligns with the overall consensus. Unlike a single definitive list, the result also includes a measure of uncertainty, showing when the data strongly favor one player and when two players are effectively too close to separate.

That distinction matters because rankings can carry real economic consequences. In professional baseball, for example, perceptions of player value can influence trades, salary negotiations, arbitration and draft decisions.

“Rather than asking only who ranks first, this framework lets us ask how confident we are in that conclusion, why someone may be ranked highly and how much agreement actually exists among the people doing the ranking,” said Marina Vannucci, the Noah Harding Professor of Statistics at Rice and one of the authors of the paper. “That kind of uncertainty quantification can be extremely important when rankings are being used to inform decisions.”

What makes a player rank higher?

The model also allowed the researchers to investigate what characteristics were associated with higher rankings. They incorporated three player-level variables: age, base salary and wins above replacement, or WAR, a widely used statistic that estimates a player’s overall contribution to his team.

All three were associated with rankings. Higher WAR had the strongest positive effect, followed closely in magnitude by age with younger players tending to rank more favorably. Higher salaries were also associated with higher rankings. The findings suggest that media rankings reflect not just recent on-field performance but expectations about a player’s future potential and value.

The statisticians’ analysis also produced some recognizable results. For the 2023 season, the model’s four highest-ranked players were Shohei Ohtani, Aaron Judge, Mike Trout and Mookie Betts. All four were selected as All-Star starters that season, and Ohtani went on to win the American League MVP Award.

Looking across multiple years allowed the researchers to capture something that a one-season ranking cannot: the difference between sustained excellence and a rapid rise or fall.

Ohtani, for example, showed unusually high variability across the four-year period. After injuries affected his earlier seasons, only one of the five outlets included him in its top 100 for 2021. By 2022, two ranked him No. 1, and by 2024 all five placed him in their top 10. The model captured both his eventual ranking near the top and the dramatic trajectory that got him there.

This method can also calculate the probability that one player should rank above another, potentially making it useful for head-to-head decisions. Among four infielders who entered free agency after the 2024 season, for example, the analysis showed strong consensus that Alex Bregman, Pete Alonso and Paul Goldschmidt ranked above Willy Adames.

Measuring the rankers, too

BMRR does not only evaluate the players being ranked — it can also reveal how individual rankers behave.

In the baseball analysis, MLB’s own rankings aligned most closely with the model’s overall consensus, followed closely by ESPN. Bleacher Report and Yahoo deviated more substantially from the aggregate rankings, and the authors noted that Yahoo’s lists, for example, appeared more inclined to elevate younger, rising players over established veterans. That does not necessarily make one ranking “right” and another “wrong.” Instead, the model provides a quantitative way to see which sources tend to track the broader consensus and which bring a different perspective.

When the researchers tested BMRR on simulated data, it consistently performed well compared with existing rank-aggregation methods. Notably, its advantage was especially pronounced when rankings were incomplete, which is a common real-world scenario in which different people rank only their preferred subset of a much larger group.

Beyond the ballpark

While MLB provided a compelling proving ground, the researchers designed BMRR for a much broader problem.

Rankings appear almost everywhere: Search engines order websites, voters rank candidates, experts prioritize intelligence information and clinicians may rank treatment preferences. Existing statistical approaches often struggle when different raters evaluate different items, when rankings are repeated across multiple criteria or points in time or when analysts want to incorporate additional information about what is being ranked.

“The biggest challenges when working with ranking data are remarkably similar across different fields and industries,” said Dan Kowal, a previous Rice statistics faculty member now at Cornell University and second author on the paper. “We believe that BMRR can be impactful in many of these areas beyond Major League Baseball.”

The authors encourage broader application of their method and have made the code for BMRR available on GitHub, so other statisticians can apply this method to their own data.

“Wherever multiple sources disagree about what belongs at the top, our framework offers a way to identify a consensus while measuring how confident that consensus should be,” Graves added.

---

Journal

Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports

DOI

10.1515/jqas-2026-0012

Article Title

Bayesian multivariate rank regression models for the analysis of sports data

Article Publication Date

28-Sep-2026

 

Ancient tools reveal how Ice Age humans learned the land

Study of projectile points offers clues about how knowledge shaped early human behavior

University of Mississippi

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

image: 

 Jesse Tune, director of the Center for Archaeological Research, examines a replica of a Cumberland spear point, one of two types of stone projectiles he and Shane Miller, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Alabama, studied to gain insights into the lives of ancient inhabitants of the Tennessee River Valley. The Cumberland people were the second known group of humans living in the region some 12,000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age.

view more 

Credit: Photo by Kevin Bain/Ole Miss Digital Imaging Services

At the end of the last Ice Age, early humans crisscrossed the Americas following seasons, rivers and game, often with a trusty spear in hand. Nearly 13,000 years later, archeologists are using those spearheads to study how America's first inhabitants understood risk.

Stone projectile points are among the few surviving traces from the Tennessee River Valley's earliest settlers, but the chipped stone weapons can be an indicator of how humans adapted to unfamiliar environments, according to a new study published in the Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory.

"We're talking about Ice Age hunter-gatherers, people that looked and acted just like us and had the same needs that we do," said Jesse Tune, associate professor of anthropology at the University of Mississippi and director of its Center for Archaeological Research. "But they're living in a world that is dominated by mastodons, mammoths, giant sloths – all these animals that are totally unfamiliar to us today.

"What we're looking at – the points – is a tiny part of their life, but we're trying to see the rest of their behaviors through the lens of these spear points because that's what we have."

Tune and Shane Miller, assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Alabama, studied some 500 spear points recovered from the Tennessee River Valley region to glean insights into the lives of the Clovis and Cumberland people.

The Clovis people are thought to be among the earliest inhabitants of the Tennessee River Valley region, with the earliest evidence of the group being dated to around 13,200 years ago. Being in a new landscape meant not knowing where to find resources such as chert, a type of sedimentary rock ideal for making weapons.

"How did they adapt to a place no one has ever been before?" Miller said. "We can't interview these people, so we have to look at the things they left behind.

"There aren't that many archeological sites for these people that we can dig, but what we have instead are lots and lots of points that people have found in this region."

Tune and Miller found that the Clovis groups were more likely to resharpen spearheads, possibly signaling that they were concerned about managing their resources.

"We hang on to stuff today, but when we're talking about mobile hunter-gatherers, they had a different understanding and worldview when it came to personal possessions," Tune said. "Spear points were designed to be disposable objects, and that makes what the Clovis were doing interesting."

By the time the Cumberland people came along several hundred years later, they inherited the knowledge of where chert deposits and other resources were located from their predecessors.

"When we look at the Cumberland points, we can see where they got the raw material, roughly the time period that they lived and that they've used the point multiple times," the Ole Miss researcher said. "But (the point) was rarely completely broken to the point that it couldn't be used anymore.

"So how did it end up in what was essentially the trash, and then in the archeological record?"

Being more knowledgeable of the landscape allowed the Cumberland people to discard points that were still useable, evidence that they had learned where to gather new resources and were more comfortable in their surroundings, the researchers said.

"When you think about a people who are moving around a lot, understand that they didn't have any pack animals," Miller said. "That puts limitations on what tools you discard and what you carry around.

"You really don't want to be carrying around a bag of rocks, and so you're going to be judicious about balancing what you need versus what you can carry."

While the question of what to discard and what to keep from local resources may seem like a problem of the past, humans are making the same decisions today, Tune said.

"Think about space exploration," Tune said. "There really is no difference between Ice Age hunter-gatherers and the people sending missions and rovers to Mars. We're moving into an area, deciding what to take with us, learning the resources and slowly expanding. It's the exact same process.

"What we learn and how we pass on that knowledge are the same things that we're still dealing with today. The only thing that's changed is the technology."

---

Journal

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

DOI

10.1007/s10816-026-09825-w

Article Title

Foraging Theory and the Colonization of Unfamiliar Landscapes: Assessing Late Pleistocene Projectile Point Reduction Strategies

The amount of resharpening and wear on 13,000-year-old spearheads, similar to these replicas, is helping archeologists understand how North America's first inhabitants understood risk during the last Ice Age. On the right is a replica of a projectile point from the Clovis people, who were among the first people to live in the Tennessee River Valley region. On the left are two spear points from the Cumberland people, who inhabited the region after the Clovis.

Credit

Photo by Kevin Bain/Ole Miss Digital Imaging Services

 

Clinical trial tests psilocybin-assisted therapy for depression in advanced lung cancer patients

It’s the first trial specific to lung cancer using hallucinogenic mushroom-assisted therapy

Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

image: 

At The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, Alan Davis, PhD (left) and Theodore Wagener, PhD (right) developed the first-ever clinical trial treating lung cancer patients with psilocybin-based therapy.

view more 

Credit: The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center

Nearly 40% of people with lung cancer experience depression, and many also face anxiety, hopelessness and questions about mortality after diagnosis. Researchers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC – James) and the Center for Psychedelic Drug Research and Education (CPDRE) in the College of Social Work (CSW) are leading a clinical trial to test whether psilocybin-assisted therapy can help reduce depression and emotional distress among patients with lung cancer.

An unmet mental health need

This new research addresses a pressing gap in cancer care: Many people with advanced lung cancer are living longer because of treatment advances, but depression, anxiety and distress can still affect daily life, relationships and the ability to cope with treatment.

This is the first study to test psilocybin-assisted therapy for depression specifically in people with lung cancer. The emotional strain can be especially intense for people with lung cancer, yet treatment options for cancer-related depression have changed little as cancer care has improved.

Psilocybin is a naturally occurring psychedelic compound found in certain mushrooms. In this study, it is given in a carefully controlled medical setting with counseling and support from trained therapists.

"There is growing evidence that psilocybin-assisted therapy may help relieve depression in people with cancer, but no study has focused specifically on patients with lung cancer," said Alan Davis, PhD, co-principal investigator of the study and directs Ohio State's Center for Psychedelic Drug Research and Education. "This is the first clinical trial designed to determine whether this approach can address the unique psychological challenges faced by this patient population."

"Many patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and are forced to confront questions about their future very quickly," said Theodore Wagener, PhD, co-principal investigator of the study and director of Ohio State's Center for Tobacco Research. Both Wagener and Davis are scientists with the OSUCCC – James Cancer Control Research Program. "Patients may experience anxiety, existential distress, loss of meaning and concerns about their families. Some also carry guilt tied to the stigma that can be associated with lung cancer."

Researchers say these emotional burdens can affect quality of life, daily routines, relationships and how patients experience cancer treatment.

Testing a guided treatment model

During this clinical trial, researchers will measure changes in depression and emotional well-being to learn whether the approach could offer another option for patients facing advanced cancer.

The trial combines psychotherapy with one supervised dose of psilocybin. Participants first complete about eight hours of preparation with two trained therapists. They then receive psilocybin during a daylong treatment session in a comfortable clinical setting, followed by counseling to help them process the experience.

"From the moment patients enter the study, they are paired with two therapists who support them throughout the entire process," Davis said. "The goal is to help participants feel safe, build trust and make sense of their experiences in ways that may improve their well-being."

Researchers also are studying whether psilocybin may affect inflammation, though more research is needed.

Looking beyond the cancer

For study participant Betty Paschall, the therapy was part of a turning point after a devastating diagnosis. Paschall was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer and initially felt overwhelmed by depression despite receiving treatment for her cancer.

"I didn't want to live," she said. "It was like I was the walking dead."

After participating in the study, Paschall said she noticed meaningful changes in her outlook and daily life. She began engaging in activities she had stopped doing and found herself reconnecting with the people and experiences that brought her joy.

"My sister and daughter both saw a difference in me," Paschall said. "I started to get back to myself a little more."

Researchers caution that psilocybin-assisted therapy remains experimental and is not appropriate for every patient. Participants undergo careful screening, and treatment is provided only under close medical supervision.

A successful study, investigators say, could help identify which patients are most likely to benefit and lay the groundwork for larger studies aimed at expanding treatment options for cancer-related depression.

"Cancer care has made major advances, but treatment for the depression, anxiety and distress that can come with advanced cancer has not moved as quickly," Wagener said. "We hope this research helps us better support the whole person, not just the cancer."

More Information 

Patients interested in being screened to participate in the study should contact Angela Douglas at douglas.496@osu.edu. To learn more about lung cancer treatment at the OSUCCC - James, visit cancer.osu.edu or call 1-800-293-5066.

---

Method of Research

Randomized controlled/clinical trial

Subject of Research

People

Betty Paschall, a stage 4 lung cancer survivor, plays with her dog Mocha at their home in Delaware, Ohio.

Psychedelics Could Lessen Depression in Lung Cancer Patients [VIDEO] 

A clinical trial at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute is exploring a novel approach to treat mental health struggles in lung cancer patients: psilocybin-assisted therapy.

Credit

The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center

Early interventions for depression tied to better cancer survival

Large Medicare analysis finds depression was linked to higher cancer mortality, while psychotherapy soon after diagnosis was associated with lower risk

American Society for Radiation Oncology

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

BOSTON, September 28, 2026 — Depression may be an overlooked factor in cancer outcomes, according to a large SEER-Medicare analysis of more than 265,000 adults with six common cancers.

Researchers found that patients with major depressive disorder had a higher risk of dying from their cancer, while those who received psychotherapy within four weeks of their cancer diagnosis had a 21% lower risk of cancer-specific mortality. Only 3% of patients with depression received psychotherapy in that early window, however. Results will be presented today at the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Annual Meeting.

“Depression can be easy to miss in cancer care because symptoms such as fatigue, difficulty concentrating and loss of interest often overlap with the effects of cancer or its treatment,” said Edmund M. Qiao, MD, lead study author and a radiation oncology resident at the University of California San Diego. “But when depression goes unrecognized or untreated, it can add another layer of difficulty at a time when patients need support the most. Our findings suggest that earlier screening and referral for psychotherapy could help address an important gap in comprehensive cancer care.”

Depression is common among people with cancer, but mental health services are not always integrated into oncology care. For the current study, researchers sought to understand whether depression itself was associated with cancer mortality and whether outcomes differed according to the type and timing of mental health treatment. The retrospective analysis examined two common approaches to treating depression: psychotherapy and antidepressant medication.

Researchers analyzed records from 265,639 Medicare beneficiaries age 66 or older who were diagnosed from 2010 to 2017 with breast, colorectal, prostate, bladder, kidney or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). More than one in five patients (22%) also had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder.

Psychotherapy was identified through Medicare procedure codes, while pharmacotherapy was identified through Medicare Part D claims for antidepressant medications. Researchers evaluated treatment within four weeks of cancer diagnosis, with additional analyses at eight and 12 weeks.

Patients with both cancer and depression had an 11% higher risk of cancer-specific mortality than those without depression. One year after diagnosis, 29% of patients with depression had died from their cancer, compared with 21% of patients without depression. At five years, cancer-specific mortality was 43% for patients with depression, compared to 35% for those without it.

Psychotherapy soon after cancer diagnosis showed the strongest association with lower cancer mortality among patients with depression. Patients who received psychotherapy within four weeks had a 21% lower risk of cancer-specific mortality in adjusted analyses using propensity score weighting. There were smaller reductions associated with psychotherapy at eight weeks (13% lower risk) and 12 weeks (12% lower risk).

“Patients who connected with psychotherapy earlier tended to have better outcomes than those who did not receive it during that period,” Dr. Qiao said. “For oncology providers, these findings support identifying patients who may need mental health care and connecting them with appropriate services as early as possible.”

Five-year cancer-specific mortality was 31% among patients who received psychotherapy and 44% among those who did not. In this large patient cohort, however, only 3% of patients with depression had a psychotherapy session within four weeks of their cancer diagnosis, growing to just 4.6% by 12 weeks.

Medication was used much more often than psychotherapy, by 32.5% of patients within four weeks of their cancer diagnosis. It was not associated with lower cancer-specific mortality at any of the measured timepoints when analyzing the cohort without accounting for specific cancer type, however.

Researchers also examined associations between mental health, treatment and cancer-specific mortality for each of the six cancer types. Depression was most common among patients with NSCLC (27%) and least common among those with prostate cancer (13%). It was significantly associated with higher cancer-specific mortality in every cancer group, with the strongest association seen in prostate cancer.

The association between psychotherapy and cancer-specific mortality varied by cancer type, reaching statistical significance for prostate, breast and kidney cancer. Pharmacotherapy was significantly associated with lower cancer-specific mortality among patients with prostate cancer.

The differences across cancer types suggest that the relationship between mental health and cancer outcomes may be more nuanced than a single approach to depression management can capture, Dr. Qiao said.

“In the general population, psychotherapy and medication can both be effective ways to manage depression,” he said. “But cancer care adds context. A patient’s cancer type, prognosis and treatment course may influence both their mental health needs and which interventions are most helpful.”

Because the study was retrospective, it cannot establish that psychotherapy caused the reduction in cancer mortality. Although the researchers used statistical methods to account for measured differences between patients who did and did not receive mental health treatment, unmeasured factors could have influenced both access to psychotherapy and cancer outcomes. The analysis also was limited to Medicare beneficiaries, and future research is needed to examine whether similar patterns are seen in younger patients.

“Cancer care has become increasingly personalized, but mental health care in oncology often remains generalized,” Dr. Qiao said. “These findings suggest we need to think more carefully about how depression may affect different types of cancer and how we can work with patients to create individualized support plans early in their care.”

ASTRO Expert Perspective

“Depression is common among people facing cancer, but it is often under recognized and undertreated. This study shows that timely treatment for depression is associated with better cancer survival. Patients who received treatment within 1 month of diagnosis had a lower risk of cancer death; it also shows that psychotherapy may potentially be underutilized given larger benefits over medication. Tailored and appropriate screening and referral for mental health care is an essential part of life-saving oncology care,” said ASTRO expert Fumiko Chino, MD, a radiation oncologist at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

###

This release contains updated study data provided by the authors. Where figures differ from the abstract, please use those reported in this release.

Attribution to the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Annual Meeting is requested in all coverage.

Study & Presentation Details

• Dr. Qiao will discuss this study in a news briefing on Tuesday, Sept. 29; register here.
• Abstract details (available after 5:00pm ET on Sept. 25; embargoed abstract available on request)
• Session details & virtual meeting link
• Dr. Qiao’s bio & disclosures
• Find more information about the meeting in our press kit.

ABOUT ASTRO

The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) is the world’s largest professional society dedicated to advancing radiation medicine, with 11,000 members including physicians, nurses, physicists, radiation therapists, dosimetrists and other professionals who work to improve patient outcomes through clinical care, research, education and advocacy. Radiation therapy is integral to 40% of cancer cures worldwide, and more than one million Americans receive radiation treatments for their cancer each year. For information on radiation therapy, visit Speed of Light – The ASTRO Foundation. To learn more about ASTRO, visit our website and press room and connect with us on social media.

Today’s urban inequality goes far beyond legacy of ‘redlining,’ study shows

'The complex, evolving picture of inequality in cities'

Emory University

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

The use of racially discriminatory housing maps in the 1930s, a practice known as “redlining,” perpetuated multi-generational cycles of poverty and segregation that continue today. While redlining shaped cities, its legacy does not fully explain current urban patterns of privilege and disadvantage, finds a new study.

The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) published the research, based on the metropolitan area of Portland, Oregon.

“Our research shows that simply mapping redlined neighborhoods does not capture the complex, evolving picture of inequality in cities,” says Jola Ajibade, co-lead author of the study and associate professor of environmental sciences at Emory University. “When we keep focusing on redlining we miss the fact that most cities in the United States have grown far beyond their original city centers. At the same time, gentrification and displacement create new and uneven landscapes of risk and opportunity.”

Kevan B. Moffett, associate professor of environmental hydrology at Washington State University, Vancouver, is co-lead author of the PNAS paper.

In 1935, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board tasked the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, or HOLC, to create “residential security maps” for real-estate investments in cities throughout the country. These areas were ranked and color-coded. Neighborhoods were outlined in green to indicate those most desirable for investment, blue to indicate some desirability, yellow to indicate they were on the decline and red to indicate they were at the highest risk for mortgage support.

The areas mapped at highest-risk, or redlined neighborhoods, included most of the African-American and other racial minority urban households and tended to be in the older areas of city centers. The discriminatory practice of basing mortgage eligibility on these maps, known as redlining, limited opportunities for home ownership and wealth creation among minority populations.

To explore current disparities in Portland, the researchers analyzed publicly available socio-economic data along with more than 100 environmental and health indicators. The analyses considered a modern-day map of the city, while also factoring in the former borders of HOLC “residential security maps.”

Highlights of their findings include:

• Persistent privilege: Affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods, whether they were historically redlined or not, enjoy cleaner environments, more trees, better healthcare access and lower disaster risk. However, they also experienced high levels of air pollution, especially in areas within the city core.
• Persistent disadvantage: Poorer neighborhoods, often outside the former HOLC zones, face the worst environmental conditions, including little access to nature, aging infrastructure, higher levels of pollution, greater disaster risk and pollution burdens and higher rates of diabetes, obesity and disability.
• Gentrifying areas: Areas that were once redlined and have now gentrified have more transit and community resources, but residents face hotter streets, less tree cover and more pollution. Wealthier newcomers can offset some health risks, but long-time residents often cannot.
• Displacement hosting: Communities where families displaced by gentrification move are greener and less polluted but they lack services like health care, good schools and transit. This isolation threatens long-term well-being.

“Our findings add complexity, but a better understanding, of how many different socio-economic and environmental factors shape people’s health and quality of life,” Ajibade says. “To build healthier, more equitable cities, policymakers and planners must look beyond the narrow lens of redlining.”

While the study focused on Portland, the researchers hope their methods will be applied to other cities throughout the United States.

“This study offers a new, data-driven approach to identify where environmental and health inequities persist, where they are shifting, and how policies and investments in efforts such as tree planting, improving housing, health interventions and disaster-risk reduction can make the biggest difference,” Ajibade says.

The work was supported by the National Science Foundation (2010014).

---

Journal

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

DOI

10.1073/pnas.242276012

Method of Research

Data/statistical analysis

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Today’s urban inequality goes far beyond legacy of ‘redlining,’ study shows