Su Feng-Chiao, Jia Chunrong, Batterman Stuart
Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 109 Observatory Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2029, USA.
University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA.
Atmos Environ (1994). 2012 Dec 1;62:97-106. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.038.
Extreme value theory, which characterizes the behavior of tails of distributions, is potentially well-suited to model exposures and risks of pollutants. In this application, it emphasizes the highest exposures, particularly those that may be high enough to present acute or chronic health risks. The present study examines extreme value distributions of exposures and risks to volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Exposures of 15 different VOCs were measured in the Relationship between Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air (RIOPA) study, and ten of the same VOCs were measured in the nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Both studies used similar sampling methods and study periods. Using the highest 5 and 10% of measurements, generalized extreme value (GEV), Gumbel and lognormal distributions were fit to each VOC in these two large studies. Health risks were estimated for individual VOCs and three VOC mixtures. Simulated data that matched the three types of distributions were generated and compared to observations to evaluate goodness-of-fit. The tail behavior of exposures, which clearly neither fit normal nor lognormal distributions for most VOCs in RIOPA, was usually best fit by the 3-parameter GEV distribution, and often by the 2-parameter Gumbel distribution. In contrast, lognormal distributions significantly underestimated both the level and likelihood of extrema. Among the RIOPA VOCs, 1,4-dichlorobenzene (1,4-DCB) caused the greatest risks, e.g., for the top 10% extrema, all individuals had risk levels above 10, and 13% of them exceeded 10. NHANES had considerably higher concentrations of all VOCs with two exceptions, methyl tertiary-butyl ether and 1,4-DCB. Differences between these studies can be explained by sampling design, staging, sample demographics, smoking and occupation. This analysis shows that extreme value distributions can represent peak exposures of VOCs, which clearly are neither normally nor lognormally distributed. These exposures have the greatest health significance, and require accurate modeling.
极值理论描述了分布尾部的行为,可能非常适合用于对污染物的暴露和风险进行建模。在这种应用中,它强调最高暴露水平,特别是那些可能高到足以呈现急性或慢性健康风险的暴露水平。本研究考察了挥发性有机化合物(VOCs)暴露和风险的极值分布。在室内、室外与个人空气关系(RIOPA)研究中测量了15种不同VOCs的暴露水平,在具有全国代表性的国家健康与营养检查调查(NHANES)中测量了其中10种相同VOCs的暴露水平。两项研究都采用了相似的抽样方法和研究周期。利用测量值中最高的5%和10%,在这两项大型研究中对每种VOC拟合了广义极值(GEV)、耿贝尔和对数正态分布。估计了单个VOCs和三种VOC混合物的健康风险。生成了与这三种分布类型匹配的模拟数据,并与观测值进行比较以评估拟合优度。在RIOPA中,大多数VOCs的暴露尾部行为显然既不拟合正态分布也不拟合对数正态分布,通常最适合用三参数GEV分布拟合,也经常能用两参数耿贝尔分布拟合。相比之下,对数正态分布显著低估了极值的水平和可能性。在RIOPA的VOCs中,1,4 - 二氯苯(1,4 - DCB)造成的风险最大,例如,对于前10%的极值,所有个体的风险水平都高于10,其中13%超过了10。除甲基叔丁基醚和1,4 - DCB外,NHANES中所有VOCs的浓度都要高得多。这些研究之间的差异可以通过抽样设计、阶段、样本人口统计学、吸烟和职业来解释。该分析表明,极值分布可以代表VOCs的峰值暴露,这些暴露显然既不呈正态分布也不呈对数正态分布。这些暴露具有最大的健康意义,需要进行准确建模。