Dataset Information

Uncertainty associated with ambient ozone metrics in epidemiologic studies and risk assessments.

ABSTRACT: Epidemiologic studies relating ambient ozone concentrations to adverse health outcomes have typically relied on spatial averages of concentrations from nearby monitoring stations, referred to as "composite monitors." This practice reflects the assumption that ambient ozone concentrations within an urban area are spatially homogenous. We tested the validity of this assumption by comparing ozone data measured at individual monitoring sites within selected US urban areas to their respective composite monitor time series. We first characterized the temporal correlation between the composite monitor and individual monitors in each area. Next, we analyzed the heteroskedasticity of each relationship. Finally, we compared the distribution of concentrations measured at individual monitors to the composite monitor distribution. Individual monitors showed high correlation with the composite monitor over much of the range of ambient ozone concentrations, though correlations were lower at higher concentrations. The variance between individual monitors and the composite monitor increased as a function of concentration in nearly all the urban areas. Finally, we observed statistical bias in the composite monitor concentrations at the high end of the distribution. The degree to which these results introduce uncertainty into studies that utilize composite monitors depends on the contributions of peak ozone concentrations to reported health effect associations.

SUBMITTER: Wells B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7321928 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Uncertainty associated with ambient ozone metrics in epidemiologic studies and risk assessments.

Wells Benjamin B Simon Heather H Luben Thomas J TJ Pekar Zachary Z Jenkins Scott M SM

Air quality, atmosphere, & health 20190301 5

Epidemiologic studies relating ambient ozone concentrations to adverse health outcomes have typically relied on spatial averages of concentrations from nearby monitoring stations, referred to as "composite monitors." This practice reflects the assumption that ambient ozone concentrations within an urban area are spatially homogenous. We tested the validity of this assumption by comparing ozone data measured at individual monitoring sites within selected US urban areas to their respective composi ...[more]

PMID: 32601527

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe quantification of uncertainty and variability is a key component of quantitative risk analysis. Recent advances in Bayesian statistics make it ideal for integrating multiple sources of information, of different types and quality, and providing a realistic estimate of the combined uncertainty in the final risk estimates.MethodsWe present two case studies related to foodborne microbial risks. In the first, we combine models to describe the sequence of events resulting in illness from consumption of milk contaminated with VTEC O157. We used Monte Carlo simulation to propagate uncertainty in some of the inputs to computer models describing the farm and pasteurisation process. Resulting simulated contamination levels were then assigned to consumption events from a dietary survey. Finally we accounted for uncertainty in the dose-response relationship and uncertainty due to limited incidence data to derive uncertainty about yearly incidences of illness in young children. Options for altering the risk were considered by running the model with different hypothetical policy-driven exposure scenarios. In the second case study we illustrate an efficient Bayesian sensitivity analysis for identifying the most important parameters of a complex computer code that simulated VTEC O157 prevalence within a managed dairy herd. This was carried out in 2 stages, first to screen out the unimportant inputs, then to perform a more detailed analysis on the remaining inputs. The method works by building a Bayesian statistical approximation to the computer code using a number of known code input/output pairs (training runs).ResultsWe estimated that the expected total number of children aged 1.5-4.5 who become ill due to VTEC O157 in milk is 8.6 per year, with 95% uncertainty interval (0,11.5). The most extreme policy we considered was banning on-farm pasteurisation of milk, which reduced the estimate to 6.4 with 95% interval (0,11). In the second case study the effective number of inputs was reduced from 30 to 7 in the screening stage, and just 2 inputs were found to explain 82.8% of the output variance. A combined total of 500 runs of the computer code were used.ConclusionThese case studies illustrate the use of Bayesian statistics to perform detailed uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, integrating multiple information sources in a way that is both rigorous and efficient.

Project description:Assessment of spatial and temporal variation in the impacts of ozone on human health, vegetation, and climate requires appropriate metrics. A key component of the Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report (TOAR) is the consistent calculation of these metrics at thousands of monitoring sites globally. Investigating temporal trends in these metrics required that the same statistical methods be applied across these ozone monitoring sites. The nonparametric Mann-Kendall test (for significant trends) and the Theil-Sen estimator (for estimating the magnitude of trend) were selected to provide robust methods across all sites. This paper provides the scientific underpinnings necessary to better understand the implications of and rationale for selecting a specific TOAR metric for assessing spatial and temporal variation in ozone for a particular impact. The rationale and underlying research evidence that influence the derivation of specific metrics are given. The form of 25 metrics (4 for model-measurement comparison, 5 for characterization of ozone in the free troposphere, 11 for human health impacts, and 5 for vegetation impacts) are described. Finally, this study categorizes health and vegetation exposure metrics based on the extent to which they are determined only by the highest hourly ozone levels, or by a wider range of values. The magnitude of the metrics is influenced by both the distribution of hourly average ozone concentrations at a site location, and the extent to which a particular metric is determined by relatively low, moderate, and high hourly ozone levels. Hence, for the same ozone time series, changes in the distribution of ozone concentrations can result in different changes in the magnitude and direction of trends for different metrics. Thus, dissimilar conclusions about the effect of changes in the drivers of ozone variability (e.g., precursor emissions) on health and vegetation exposure can result from the selection of different metrics.

Project description:BackgroundThe apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) (or one of its derivatives) is the primary clinical metric for characterizing sleep disordered breathing-the value of which with respect to a threshold determines severity of diagnosis and eligibility for treatment reimbursement. The index value, however, is taken as a perfect point estimate, with no measure of statistical uncertainty. Thus, current practice does not robustly account for variability in diagnosis/eligibility due to chance. In this paper, we quantify the statistical uncertainty associated with respiratory event indices for sleep disordered breathing and the effect of uncertainty on treatment eligibility.MethodsWe develop an empirical estimate of uncertainty using a non-parametric bootstrap on the interevent times, as well as a theoretical Poisson estimate reflecting the current formulation of the AHI. We then apply these methods to estimate AHI uncertainty for 2049 subjects (954/1095 M/F, age: mean 69 ± 9.1) from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).Results and conclusionsThe mean 95% empirical confidence interval width was 11.500 ± 6.208 events per hour and the mean 95% theoretical Poisson confidence interval width was 5.998 ± 2.897 events per hour, suggesting that uncertainty is likely a major confounding factor within the current diagnostic framework. Of the 278 subjects in the symptomatic population (ESS>10), 27% (76/278) had uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval. Of the 2049 subjects in the full population, 43% (880/2049) had uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval. The inclusion of subjects with uncertain diagnoses increases the number of eligible patients by 21.3% for the symptomatic population and by 84.8% for the full population. The exclusion of subjects with uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval decreases the number of eligible patients by 12.4% for the symptomatic population and by 34.8% for full population. Additional analyses suggest that it is practically infeasible to gain diagnostic statistical significance through additional testing for a broad range of borderline cases. Overall, these results suggest that AHI uncertainty is a vital additional piece of information that would greatly benefit clinical practice, and that the inclusion of uncertainty in epidemiological analysis might help improve the ability for researchers to robustly link AHI with co-morbidities and long-term outcomes.

Dataset Information

Uncertainty associated with ambient ozone metrics in epidemiologic studies and risk assessments.

Publications

Uncertainty associated with ambient ozone metrics in epidemiologic studies and risk assessments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets