Suppr超能文献

哈佛六城市研究的重新分析,第一部分:验证与复制。

Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study, part I: validation and replication.

作者信息

Krewski D, Burnett R T, Goldberg M, Hoover K, Siemiatycki J, Abrahamowicz M, White W

机构信息

McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment, Institute for Population Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Inhal Toxicol. 2005 Jun-Jul;17(7-8):335-42. doi: 10.1080/08958370590929402.

Abstract

Because the results of the Harvard Six Cities Study played a critical role in the establishment of the current U.S. ambient air quality objective for fine particles (PM(2.5)), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, industry, and nongovernmental organizations called for an independent reanalysis of this study to validate the original findings reported by Dockery and colleagues in the New England Journal of Medicine (vol. 329, pp. 1753-1759) in 1993. Validation of the original findings was accomplished by a detailed statistical audit and replication of original results. With the exception of occupational exposure to dust (14 discrepancies of 249 questionnaires located for evaluation) and fumes (15/249), date of death (2/250), and cause of death (2/250), the audit identified no discrepancies between the original questionnaires and death certificates in the audit sample and the analytic file used by the original investigators. The data quality audit identified a computer programming problem that had resulted in early censorship in 5 of the 6 cities, which resulted in the loss of approximately 1% of the reported person-years of follow-up; the reanalysis team updated the Six Cities cohort to include the missing person-years of observation, resulting in the addition of 928 person-years of observation and 14 deaths. The reanalysis team was able to reproduce virtually all of the original numerical results, including the 26% increase in all-cause mortality in the most polluted city (Stubenville, OH) as compared to the least polluted city (Portage, WI). The audit and validation of the Harvard Six Cities Study conducted by the reanalysis team generally confirmed the quality of the data and the numerical results reported by the original investigators. The discrepancies noted during the audit were not of epidemiologic importance, and did not substantively alter the original risk estimates associated with particulate air pollution, nor the main conclusions reached by the original investigators.

摘要

由于哈佛六城市研究的结果在美国当前细颗粒物(PM(2.5))环境空气质量目标的制定过程中发挥了关键作用,美国环境保护局、行业组织和非政府组织呼吁对该研究进行独立重新分析,以验证多克里及其同事于1993年发表在《新英格兰医学杂志》(第329卷,第1753 - 1759页)上报告的原始研究结果。通过详细的统计审核和原始结果的复制完成了对原始研究结果的验证。除了职业性接触粉尘(249份用于评估的问卷中有14份存在差异)、烟雾(15/249)、死亡日期(2/250)和死因(2/250)外,审核发现审核样本中的原始问卷与死亡证明以及原始调查人员使用的分析文件之间没有差异。数据质量审核发现一个计算机编程问题,该问题导致六个城市中的五个城市出现早期截尾,这导致约1%的报告随访人年数丢失;重新分析团队更新了六城市队列,以纳入缺失的观察人年数,从而增加了928人年的观察时间和14例死亡病例。重新分析团队几乎能够重现所有原始数值结果,包括污染最严重的城市(俄亥俄州斯图本维尔)与污染最轻的城市(威斯康星州波蒂奇)相比全因死亡率增加26%。重新分析团队对哈佛六城市研究进行的审核和验证总体上证实了原始调查人员报告的数据质量和数值结果。审核过程中发现的差异在流行病学上并不重要,也没有实质性改变与颗粒空气污染相关的原始风险估计,以及原始调查人员得出的主要结论。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验