PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 20, 2026Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes0 citations

Introducing the Canadian Accessibility and Remoteness Index (CARI+)

View Full Paper
TMTomoko McGaugheyCarleton UniversityPPPaul A. PetersUniversité Bourgogne Franche-Comté

Key Points

  • This research aims to develop CARI+ to evaluate access to services across Canada, especially for rural populations.
  • CARI+ developed as an accessibility index at the dissemination-area level.
  • Scores based on road-network travel to service centres and stratified by settlement size.
  • Comparison of CARI+ values with socio-demographic indicators and the Index of Remoteness (IOR).
  • CARI+ shows 39% in the most accessible category compared to 77% in the IOR.
  • Material deprivation and Indigenous identity rise with remoteness in CARI+ findings.
  • In very remote areas, CARI+ identifies 25% Indigenous and 27% with less than high school education.

Abstract

Abstract Rurality and remoteness are policy‐relevant concepts for planning and evaluating equitable access to services across Canada, yet existing measures rely on categorical, urban‐centric, and coarse spatial definitions that obscure variation in accessibility across the rural‐urban continuum. The Canadian Accessibility and Remoteness Index Plus (CARI+) is a small‐area accessibility index at the dissemination‐area level. It is based on road‐network travel to stratified service centres, including population centres and 24‐hour emergency departments stratified by settlement size. Category‐specific scores are capped at 3, summed to produce an overall score, then normalized. We examined the CARI+ values against socio‐demographic indicators and compared them with the Index of Remoteness (IOR). CARI+ yields a more even population distribution than the IOR (39% vs 77% in the most accessible category) and reveals socio‐demographic gradients: material deprivation and Indigenous identity increase with remoteness, while educational attainment and immigrant representation decline. In very remote areas, CARI+ identifies 25% of Indigenous residents and 27% of the population with less than high school education, versus 78% and over 50% respectively under the IOR. The CARI+ provides a transparent, service‐specific, high‐resolution measure of accessibility that addresses key limitations of existing Canadian indices and supports nuanced analysis for health and social service planning.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

McGaughey et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a363224db0793dc1a538db9https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.70082
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Where should we go - Estimating travel times for modelling accessibility to 24-hour emergency departments in Canada2024 · 6 citations
  2. 2Towards the construction of place‐specific measures of deprivation: a case study from the Vancouver metropolitan area2007 · 72 citations
  3. 3The two-ness of rural life and the ends of rural scholarship2007 · 152 citations
  4. 4Delivering more equitable primary health care in Northern Canada2017 · 28 citations
  5. 5Does geography matter in mortality? An analysis of potentially avoidable mortality by remoteness index in Canada2019 · 108 citations