National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode B-243-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA.
Am J Epidemiol. 2012 Oct 1;176(7):622-34. doi: 10.1093/aje/kws135. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
With the advent of multicity studies, uniform statistical approaches have been developed to examine air pollution-mortality associations across cities. To assess the sensitivity of the air pollution-mortality association to different model specifications in a single and multipollutant context, the authors applied various regression models developed in previous multicity time-series studies of air pollution and mortality to data from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (May 1992-September 1995). Single-pollutant analyses used daily cardiovascular mortality, fine particulate matter (particles with an aerodynamic diameter ≤2.5 µm; PM(2.5)), speciated PM(2.5), and gaseous pollutant data, while multipollutant analyses used source factors identified through principal component analysis. In single-pollutant analyses, risk estimates were relatively consistent across models for most PM(2.5) components and gaseous pollutants. However, risk estimates were inconsistent for ozone in all-year and warm-season analyses. Principal component analysis yielded factors with species associated with traffic, crustal material, residual oil, and coal. Risk estimates for these factors exhibited less sensitivity to alternative regression models compared with single-pollutant models. Factors associated with traffic and crustal material showed consistently positive associations in the warm season, while the coal combustion factor showed consistently positive associations in the cold season. Overall, mortality risk estimates examined using a source-oriented approach yielded more stable and precise risk estimates, compared with single-pollutant analyses.
随着多城市研究的出现,已经开发出了统一的统计方法来检验跨城市的空气污染与死亡率之间的关联。为了评估在单污染物和多污染物环境下不同模型对空气污染与死亡率关联的敏感性,作者将先前多城市时间序列空气污染与死亡率研究中开发的各种回归模型应用于宾夕法尼亚州费城(1992 年 5 月至 1995 年 9 月)的数据。单污染物分析采用了每日心血管死亡率、细颗粒物(空气动力学直径≤2.5 µm 的颗粒物;PM(2.5))、PM(2.5)特定物质、气态污染物数据,而多污染物分析采用了通过主成分分析确定的源因素。在单污染物分析中,对于大多数 PM(2.5)成分和气态污染物,风险估计在大多数模型中相对一致。然而,在全年度和暖季分析中,臭氧的风险估计不一致。主成分分析得出了与交通、地壳物质、残余油和煤有关的因子。与单污染物模型相比,这些因素的风险估计对替代回归模型的敏感性较低。与交通和地壳物质有关的因素在暖季始终呈正相关,而煤炭燃烧因素在冷季始终呈正相关。总体而言,与单污染物分析相比,采用面向源的方法检查死亡率风险估计产生了更稳定和准确的风险估计。