About this item:

608 Views | 394 Downloads

Author Notes:

Correspondence: Dr. Matthew J. Strickland, Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA. Tel.: +1 404 712 8912. Fax: +1 404 727 8744. E-mail: mjstric@emory.edu

The contents of the publication are solely the responsibility of the grantee and do not necessarily represent the official views of the USEPA. Further, USEPA does not endorse the purchase of any commercial products or services mentioned in this publication.

Subjects:

Research Funding:

The authors acknowledge financial support from the following grants: NIEHS K01ES019877, USEPA grant R834799, and EPRI EP-P277231/C13172.

Keywords:

  • air pollution
  • measurement error
  • outdoor
  • time series
  • environmental health

Effects of ambient air pollution measurement error on health effect estimates in time-series studies: a simulation-based analysis

Tools:

Journal Title:

Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology

Volume:

Volume 25, Number 2

Publisher:

, Pages 160-166

Type of Work:

Article | Post-print: After Peer Review

Abstract:

In this study we investigated bias caused by spatial variability and spatial heterogeneity in outdoor air pollutant concentrations, instrument imprecision, and choice of daily pollutant metric on risk ratio estimates obtained from a Poisson time series analysis. Daily concentrations for 12 pollutants were simulated for Atlanta, Georgia at 5 km resolution during a 6-year period. Viewing these as being representative of the true concentrations, a population-level pollutant health effect (risk ratio) was specified, and daily counts of health events were simulated. Error representative of instrument imprecision was added to the simulated concentrations at the locations of fixed site monitors in Atlanta, and these mismeasured values were combined to create three different city-wide daily metrics (central monitor, unweighted average, population-weighted average). Given our assumptions, the median bias in the risk ratio per unit increase in concentration was found to be lowest for the population-weighted average metric. Although the Berkson component of error caused bias away from the null in the log-linear models, the net bias due to measurement error tended to be towards the null. The relative differences in bias among the metrics were lessened, although not eliminated, by scaling results to interquartile range increases in concentration.

Copyright information:

© 2013, Rights Managed by Nature Publishing Group

Export to EndNote