Pastides H
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, USA.
World Health Stat Q. 1995;48(2):140-3.
There is a great amount of ongoing discussion about the need to develop new ways to assess and monitor a population's disease susceptibility to environmental factors. The ultimate goal in developing these tools, called environmental health indicators, is to increase the public health community's capacity for implementing interventions to prevent disease. Much of the discussion focuses on the requirement that the indicators be relatively easy and quick to apply. However, in the rush to find useful existing indicators, or to develop new ones, there is the danger that certain other important attributes of the indicator may be overlooked. These include: (a) whether the indicator truly represents an underlying causal relationship between an environmental exposure and a health consequence; and (b) whether the proposed indicator is a reasonably valid estimate of the underlying causal factor. This article provides a framework for relating environmental health indicators to the methods of epidemiology including some guidance for selecting and evaluating the appropriateness of proposed environmental health indicators. Examples are given which demonstrate how environmental health indicators can lead to a biased interpretation of underlying associations between environmental factors and the potential for disease when they are improperly conceived. These problems can be avoided by employing routine epidemiological concepts and methods as indicators are developed and evaluated.
关于开发新方法来评估和监测人群对环境因素的疾病易感性,目前有大量的讨论。开发这些被称为环境健康指标的工具的最终目标,是提高公共卫生界实施预防疾病干预措施的能力。大部分讨论集中在指标需相对易于应用且快速的要求上。然而,在急于寻找有用的现有指标或开发新指标的过程中,存在忽视指标某些其他重要属性的风险。这些属性包括:(a)指标是否真正代表环境暴露与健康后果之间的潜在因果关系;以及(b)提议的指标是否是对潜在因果因素的合理有效估计。本文提供了一个将环境健康指标与流行病学方法相关联的框架,包括一些选择和评估提议的环境健康指标适当性的指导。文中给出了一些例子,展示了环境健康指标在构思不当时如何导致对环境因素与疾病潜在关联的偏差解读。通过在开发和评估指标时运用常规流行病学概念和方法,可以避免这些问题。