Journal
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 178, Issue 8, Pages 1342-1346Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwt127
Keywords
air pollution; bias (epidemiology); measurement error; regression analysis
Categories
Funding
- Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria [PI060258]
- Fundacio La Marato de TV3 [081632]
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III [FI-9/00989]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Land-use regression (LUR) models are increasingly used to estimate air pollution exposure in epidemiologic studies. These models use air pollution measurements taken at a small set of locations and modeling based on geographical covariates for which data are available at all study participant locations. The process of LUR model development commonly includes a variable selection procedure. When LUR model predictions are used as explanatory variables in a model for a health outcome, measurement error can lead to bias of the regression coefficients and to inflation of their variance. In previous studies dealing with spatial predictions of air pollution, bias was shown to be small while most of the effect of measurement error was on the variance. In this study, we show that in realistic cases where LUR models are applied to health data, bias in health-effect estimates can be substantial. This bias depends on the number of air pollution measurement sites, the number of available predictors for model selection, and the amount of explainable variability in the true exposure. These results should be taken into account when interpreting health effects from studies that used LUR models.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available