Samoli Evangelia, Butland Barbara K, Rodopoulou Sophia, Atkinson Richard W, Barratt Benjamin, Beevers Sean D, Beddows Andrew, Dimakopoulou Konstantina, Schwartz Joel D, Yazdi Mahdieh Danesh, Katsouyanni Klea
Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Environ Epidemiol. 2020 May 27;4(3):e094. doi: 10.1097/EE9.0000000000000094. eCollection 2020 Jun.
Various spatiotemporal models have been proposed for predicting ambient particulate exposure for inclusion in epidemiological analyses. We investigated the effect of measurement error in the prediction of particulate matter with diameter <10 µm (PM) and <2.5 µm (PM) concentrations on the estimation of health effects.
We sampled 1,000 small administrative areas in London, United Kingdom, and simulated the "true" underlying daily exposure surfaces for PM and PM for 2009-2013 incorporating temporal variation and spatial covariance informed by the extensive London monitoring network. We added measurement error assessed by comparing measurements at fixed sites and predictions from spatiotemporal land-use regression (LUR) models; dispersion models; models using satellite data and applying machine learning algorithms; and combinations of these methods through generalized additive models. Two health outcomes were simulated to assess whether the bias varies with the effect size. We applied multilevel Poisson regression to simultaneously model the effect of long- and short-term pollutant exposure. For each scenario, we ran 1,000 simulations to assess measurement error impact on health effect estimation.
For long-term exposure to particles, we observed bias toward the null, except for traffic PM for which only LUR underestimated the effect. For short-term exposure, results were variable between exposure models and bias ranged from -11% (underestimate) to 20% (overestimate) for PM and of -20% to 17% for PM. Integration of models performed best in almost all cases.
No single exposure model performed optimally across scenarios. In most cases, measurement error resulted in attenuation of the effect estimate.
已经提出了各种时空模型来预测环境颗粒物暴露,以便纳入流行病学分析。我们研究了直径<10微米(PM)和<2.5微米(PM)浓度预测中的测量误差对健康效应估计的影响。
我们在英国伦敦对1000个小行政区进行了采样,并结合伦敦广泛监测网络提供的时间变化和空间协方差,模拟了2009 - 2013年PM和PM的“真实”潜在每日暴露表面。我们通过比较固定站点的测量值和时空土地利用回归(LUR)模型、扩散模型、使用卫星数据并应用机器学习算法的模型以及通过广义相加模型组合这些方法的预测值来评估测量误差。模拟了两种健康结局,以评估偏差是否随效应大小而变化。我们应用多水平泊松回归来同时模拟长期和短期污染物暴露的效应。对于每种情况,我们进行了1000次模拟,以评估测量误差对健康效应估计的影响。
对于长期暴露于颗粒物,我们观察到向无效值的偏差,交通PM除外,只有LUR低估了其效应。对于短期暴露,暴露模型之间的结果各不相同,PM的偏差范围为 - 11%(低估)至20%(高估),PM的偏差范围为 - 20%至17%。几乎在所有情况下,模型整合表现最佳。
没有一个单一的暴露模型在所有情况下都能达到最佳效果。在大多数情况下,测量误差导致效应估计值衰减。