Back

Optimizing Mobile Health Clinic Placement via Geospatial Modeling

Tanim, S. H.; White, D.; Witrick, B.; Rennert, L.

2026-01-02 health systems and quality improvement
10.64898/2025.12.29.25342286
Show abstract

ObjectivesMobile health clinics (MHCs) provide flexible, community-based care to underserved populations facing geographic and socioeconomic barriers. Maximizing coverage enables MHCs to reach more individuals, improve preventive and continuous care, and reduce health disparities. However, few strategies exist to guide placement and routing decisions. We present a framework to increase MHC utilization by optimizing service coverage. Study DesignThis is a retrospective study. MethodsWe analyzed MHC deployments for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) screening and treatment from a local health system in South Carolina. We used a location-allocation model to identify potential MHC placement sites that maximized the number of uninsured residents within a 5-minute drive or 10-minute walk. Demand was represented by block centroids weighted by the size of the uninsured population. We compared service area population, defined as the size of the target population within driving or walking distance, for model-proposed sites with coverage from previous MHC deployments. We fit negative binomial mixed effects models to evaluate the association between service area population and MHC utilization. ResultsOptimized placements can nearly double population coverage, expanding access to uninsured residents within practical travel distances by 90% for driving and 135% for walking--without requiring additional vehicles or resources. This approach also substantially reduces redundant service areas while shortening average travel times. Results show that small geographic shifts can yield significant improvements. In rural regions, greater geographic coverage is significantly associated with higher MHC utilization for HCV screening (drive p=.0037; walk p=.0095). We applied this framework with local health partners to guide real-world MHC deployment in South Carolina. ConclusionsThis framework connects spatial analytics to service delivery, offering a replicable, operationally ready tool adaptable to various travel modes, site types, and disease contexts. It supports strategic placement in high-need locations by reducing travel time and service redundancy and ultimately improving health outcomes in medically underserved populations.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 13%
22.6%
2
BMC Health Services Research
based on 43 papers
Top 0.2%
8.6%
3
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 2%
6.0%
4
PLOS Global Public Health
based on 287 papers
Top 7%
6.0%
5
Frontiers in Public Health
based on 135 papers
Top 10%
2.8%
6
Clinical Infectious Diseases
based on 219 papers
Top 10%
2.8%
7
JAMA Network Open
based on 125 papers
Top 6%
2.8%
50% of probability mass above
8
CMAJ Open
based on 12 papers
Top 0.3%
2.1%
9
Nature Human Behaviour
based on 18 papers
Top 0.5%
2.0%
10
npj Digital Medicine
based on 85 papers
Top 8%
1.8%
11
JMIR Formative Research
based on 31 papers
Top 2%
1.8%
12
Nature
based on 58 papers
Top 5%
1.8%
13
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 74%
1.5%
14
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
based on 36 papers
Top 5%
1.5%
15
BMJ Global Health
based on 95 papers
Top 9%
1.5%
16
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 42%
1.5%
17
Journal of Medical Internet Research
based on 81 papers
Top 10%
1.5%
18
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
based on 13 papers
Top 2%
1.5%
19
BMC Infectious Diseases
based on 110 papers
Top 12%
1.4%
20
Frontiers in Digital Health
based on 18 papers
Top 3%
1.4%
21
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
based on 45 papers
Top 7%
1.4%
22
JMIRx Med
based on 29 papers
Top 3%
1.4%
23
Nature Communications
based on 483 papers
Top 38%
0.9%
24
BMC Medical Research Methodology
based on 41 papers
Top 4%
0.9%
25
BMC Public Health
based on 148 papers
Top 20%
0.9%
26
Science Advances
based on 52 papers
Top 4%
0.9%
27
Journal of General Internal Medicine
based on 19 papers
Top 3%
0.9%
28
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
based on 53 papers
Top 6%
0.9%
29
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
based on 16 papers
Top 4%
0.8%
30
The Lancet Global Health
based on 24 papers
Top 4%
0.8%