Dataset Information

An examination of exposure measurement error from air pollutant spatial variability in time-series studies.

ABSTRACT: Relatively few studies have evaluated the effects of heterogeneous spatiotemporal pollutant distributions on health risk estimates in time-series analyses that use data from a central monitor to assign exposures. We present a method for examining the effects of exposure measurement error relating to spatiotemporal variability in ambient air pollutant concentrations on air pollution health risk estimates in a daily time-series analysis of emergency department visits in Atlanta, Georgia. We used Poisson generalized linear models to estimate associations between current-day pollutant concentrations and circulatory emergency department visits for the 1998-2004 time period. Data from monitoring sites located in different geographical regions of the study area and at different distances from several urban geographical subpopulations served as alternative measures of exposure. We observed associations for spatially heterogeneous pollutants (CO and NO(2)) using data from several different urban monitoring sites. These associations were not observed when using data from the most rural site, located 38 miles from the city center. In contrast, associations for spatially homogeneous pollutants (O(3) and PM(2.5)) were similar, regardless of the monitoring site location. We found that monitoring site location and the distance of a monitoring site to a population of interest did not meaningfully affect estimated associations for any pollutant when using data from urban sites located within 20 miles from the population center under study. However, for CO and NO(2), these factors were important when using data from rural sites located > or = 30 miles from the population center, most likely owing to exposure measurement error. Overall, our findings lend support to the use of pollutant data from urban central sites to assess population exposures within geographically dispersed study populations in Atlanta and similar cities.

SUBMITTER: Sarnat SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3780363 | biostudies-other | 2010 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An examination of exposure measurement error from air pollutant spatial variability in time-series studies.

Sarnat Stefanie E SE Klein Mitchel M Sarnat Jeremy A JA Flanders W Dana WD Waller Lance A LA Mulholland James A JA Russell Armistead G AG Tolbert Paige E PE

Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology 20090311 2

Relatively few studies have evaluated the effects of heterogeneous spatiotemporal pollutant distributions on health risk estimates in time-series analyses that use data from a central monitor to assign exposures. We present a method for examining the effects of exposure measurement error relating to spatiotemporal variability in ambient air pollutant concentrations on air pollution health risk estimates in a daily time-series analysis of emergency department visits in Atlanta, Georgia. We used P ...[more]

PMID: 19277071

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTwo distinctly different types of measurement error are Berkson and classical. Impacts of measurement error in epidemiologic studies of ambient air pollution are expected to depend on error type. We characterize measurement error due to instrument imprecision and spatial variability as multiplicative (i.e. additive on the log scale) and model it over a range of error types to assess impacts on risk ratio estimates both on a per measurement unit basis and on a per interquartile range (IQR) basis in a time-series study in Atlanta.MethodsDaily measures of twelve ambient air pollutants were analyzed: NO2, NOx, O3, SO2, CO, PM10 mass, PM2.5 mass, and PM2.5 components sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, elemental carbon and organic carbon. Semivariogram analysis was applied to assess spatial variability. Error due to this spatial variability was added to a reference pollutant time-series on the log scale using Monte Carlo simulations. Each of these time-series was exponentiated and introduced to a Poisson generalized linear model of cardiovascular disease emergency department visits.ResultsMeasurement error resulted in reduced statistical significance for the risk ratio estimates for all amounts (corresponding to different pollutants) and types of error. When modelled as classical-type error, risk ratios were attenuated, particularly for primary air pollutants, with average attenuation in risk ratios on a per unit of measurement basis ranging from 18% to 92% and on an IQR basis ranging from 18% to 86%. When modelled as Berkson-type error, risk ratios per unit of measurement were biased away from the null hypothesis by 2% to 31%, whereas risk ratios per IQR were attenuated (i.e. biased toward the null) by 5% to 34%. For CO modelled error amount, a range of error types were simulated and effects on risk ratio bias and significance were observed.ConclusionsFor multiplicative error, both the amount and type of measurement error impact health effect estimates in air pollution epidemiology. By modelling instrument imprecision and spatial variability as different error types, we estimate direction and magnitude of the effects of error over a range of error types.

Project description:Vehicle emissions represent one of the most important air pollution sources in most urban areas, and elevated concentrations of pollutants found near major roads have been associated with many adverse health impacts. To understand these impacts, exposure estimates should reflect the spatial and temporal patterns observed for traffic-related air pollutants. This paper evaluates the spatial resolution and zonal systems required to estimate accurately intraurban and near-road exposures of traffic-related air pollutants. The analyses use the detailed information assembled for a large (800 km2) area centered on Detroit, Michigan, USA. Concentrations of nitrogen oxides (NOx) due to vehicle emissions were estimated using hourly traffic volumes and speeds on 9,700 links representing all but minor roads in the city, the MOVES2010 emission model, the RLINE dispersion model, local meteorological data, a temporal resolution of 1 hr, and spatial resolution as low as 10 m. Model estimates were joined with the corresponding shape files to estimate residential exposures for 700,000 individuals at property parcel, census block, census tract, and ZIP code levels. We evaluate joining methods, the spatial resolution needed to meet specific error criteria, and the extent of exposure misclassification. To portray traffic-related air pollutant exposure, raster or inverse distance-weighted interpolations are superior to nearest neighbor approaches, and interpolations between receptors and points of interest should not exceed about 40 m near major roads, and 100 m at larger distances. For census tracts and ZIP codes, average exposures are overestimated since few individuals live very near major roads, the range of concentrations is compressed, most exposures are misclassified, and high concentrations near roads are entirely omitted. While smaller zones improve performance considerably, even block-level data can misclassify many individuals. To estimate exposures and impacts of traffic-related pollutants accurately, data should be geocoded or estimated at the most-resolved spatial level; census tract and larger zones have little if any ability to represent intraurban variation in traffic-related air pollutant concentrations. These results are based on one of the most comprehensive intraurban modeling studies in the literature and results are robust. Recommendations address the value of dispersion models to portray spatial and temporal variation of air pollutants in epidemiology and other studies; techniques to improve accuracy and reduce the computational burden in urban scale modeling; the necessary spatial resolution for health surveillance, demographic, and pollution data; and the consequences of low resolution data in terms of exposure misclassification.

Project description:Spatiotemporal air pollution models are increasingly being used to estimate health effects in epidemiological studies. Although such exposure prediction models typically result in improved spatial and temporal resolution of air pollution predictions, they remain subject to shared measurement error, a type of measurement error common in spatiotemporal exposure models which occurs when measurement error is not independent of exposures. A fundamental challenge of exposure measurement error in air pollution assessment is the strong correlation and sometimes identical (shared) error of exposure estimates across geographic space and time. When exposure estimates with shared measurement error are used to estimate health risk in epidemiological analyses, complex errors are potentially introduced, resulting in biased epidemiological conclusions. We demonstrate the influence of using a three-stage spatiotemporal exposure prediction model and introduce formal methods of shared, multiplicative measurement error (SMME) correction of epidemiological health risk estimates. Using our three-stage, ensemble learning based nitrogen oxides (NOx) exposure prediction model, we quantified SMME. We conducted an epidemiological analysis of wheeze risk in relation to NOx exposure among school-aged children. To demonstrate the incremental influence of exposure modeling stage, we iteratively estimated the health risk using assigned exposure predictions from each stage of the NOx model. We then determined the impact of SMME on the variance of the health risk estimates under various scenarios. Depending on the stage of the spatiotemporal exposure model used, we found that wheeze odds ratio ranged from 1.16 to 1.28 for an interquartile range increase in NOx. With each additional stage of exposure modeling, the health effect estimate moved further away from the null (OR=1). When corrected for observed SMME, the health effects confidence intervals slightly lengthened, but our epidemiological conclusions were not altered. When the variance estimate was corrected for the potential "worst case scenario" of SMME, the standard error further increased, having a meaningful influence on epidemiological conclusions. Our framework can be expanded and used to understand the implications of using exposure predictions subject to shared measurement error in future health investigations.

Project description:BackgroundMost epidemiological studies estimate associations without considering exposure measurement error. While some studies have estimated the impact of error in single-exposure models we aimed to quantify the effect of measurement error in multi-exposure models, specifically in time-series analysis of PM2.5, NO2, and mortality using simulations, under various plausible scenarios for exposure errors. Measurement error in multi-exposure models can lead to effect transfer where the effect estimate is overestimated for the pollutant estimated with more error to the one estimated with less error. This complicates interpretation of the independent effects of different pollutants and thus the relative importance of reducing their concentrations in air pollution policy.MethodsMeasurement error was defined as the difference between ambient concentrations and personal exposure from outdoor sources. Simulation inputs for error magnitude and variability were informed by the literature. Error-free exposures with their consequent health outcome and error-prone exposures of various error types (classical/Berkson) were generated. Bias was quantified as the relative difference in effect estimates of the error-free and error-prone exposures.ResultsMortality effect estimates were generally underestimated with greater bias observed when low ratios of the true exposure variance over the error variance were assumed (27.4% underestimation for NO2). Higher ratios resulted in smaller, but still substantial bias (up to 19% for both pollutants). Effect transfer was observed indicating that less precise measurements for one pollutant (NO2) yield more bias, while the co-pollutant (PM2.5) associations were found closer to the true. Interestingly, the sum of single-pollutant model effect estimates was found closer to the summed true associations than those from multi-pollutant models, due to cancelling out of confounding and measurement error bias.ConclusionsOur simulation study indicated an underestimation of true independent health effects of multiple exposures due to measurement error. Using error parameter information in future epidemiological studies should provide more accurate concentration-response functions.

Project description:Mobile platform measurements provide new opportunities for characterizing spatial variations of air pollution within urban areas, identifying emission sources, and enhancing knowledge of atmospheric processes. The Aclima, Inc. mobile measurement and data acquisition platform was used to equip four Google Street View cars with research-grade instruments, two of which were available for the duration of this study. On-road measurements of air quality were made during a series of sampling campaigns between May 2016 and September 2017 at high (i.e., 1-second [s]) temporal and spatial resolution at several California locations: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and the northern San Joaquin Valley (including non-urban roads and the cities of Tracy, Stockton, Manteca, Merced, Modesto, and Turlock). The results demonstrate that the approach is effective for quantifying spatial variations of air pollutant concentrations over measurement periods as short as two weeks. Measurement accuracy and precision are evaluated using results of weekly performance checks and periodic audits conducted through the sampler inlets, which show that research instruments located within stationary vehicles are capable of reliably measuring nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), methane (CH4) black carbon (BC), and particle number (PN) concentration with bias and precision ranging from <10 % for gases to <25 % for BC and PN at 1-s time resolution. The quality of the mobile measurements in the ambient environment is examined by comparisons with data from an adjacent (< 9 m) stationary regulatory air quality monitoring site and by paired collocated vehicle comparisons, both stationary and driving. The mobile measurements indicate that U.S. EPA classifications of two Los Angeles stationary regulatory monitors' scales of representation are appropriate. Paired time-synchronous mobile measurements are used to characterize the spatial scales of concentration variations when vehicles were separated by <1 to 10 kilometers (km). A data analysis approach is developed to characterize spatial variations while limiting the confounding influence of diurnal variability. The approach is illustrated using data from San Francisco, revealing 1-km scale differences in mean NO2 and O3 concentrations up to 117 % and 46 %, respectively, of mean values during a two-week sampling period. In San Francisco and Los Angeles, spatial variations up to factors of 6 to 8 occur at sampling scales of 100 - 300m, corresponding to 1-minute averages.

Dataset Information

An examination of exposure measurement error from air pollutant spatial variability in time-series studies.

Publications

An examination of exposure measurement error from air pollutant spatial variability in time-series studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets