↓ Skip to main content

A simulation study to quantify the impacts of exposure measurement error on air pollution health risk estimates in copollutant time-series models

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A simulation study to quantify the impacts of exposure measurement error on air pollution health risk estimates in copollutant time-series models
Published in
Environmental Health, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12940-016-0186-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathie L. Dionisio, Howard H. Chang, Lisa K. Baxter

Abstract

Exposure measurement error in copollutant epidemiologic models has the potential to introduce bias in relative risk (RR) estimates. A simulation study was conducted using empirical data to quantify the impact of correlated measurement errors in time-series analyses of air pollution and health. ZIP-code level estimates of exposure for six pollutants (CO, NOx, EC, PM2.5, SO4, O3) from 1999 to 2002 in the Atlanta metropolitan area were used to calculate spatial, population (i.e. ambient versus personal), and total exposure measurement error. Empirically determined covariance of pollutant concentration pairs and the associated measurement errors were used to simulate true exposure (exposure without error) from observed exposure. Daily emergency department visits for respiratory diseases were simulated using a Poisson time-series model with a main pollutant RR = 1.05 per interquartile range, and a null association for the copollutant (RR = 1). Monte Carlo experiments were used to evaluate the impacts of correlated exposure errors of different copollutant pairs. Substantial attenuation of RRs due to exposure error was evident in nearly all copollutant pairs studied, ranging from 10 to 40% attenuation for spatial error, 3-85% for population error, and 31-85% for total error. When CO, NOx or EC is the main pollutant, we demonstrated the possibility of false positives, specifically identifying significant, positive associations for copollutants based on the estimated type I error rate. The impact of exposure error must be considered when interpreting results of copollutant epidemiologic models, due to the possibility of attenuation of main pollutant RRs and the increased probability of false positives when measurement error is present.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 27%
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 11 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Mathematics 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 9 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,355,479
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#1,347
of 1,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#349,453
of 415,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#25
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.