Literature DB >> 19820458

The impact of dosimetry uncertainties on dose-response analyses.

Ethel S Gilbert1.   

Abstract

Radiation dose estimates used in epidemiological studies are subject to many sources of uncertainty, and the error structure may be a complicated mixture of different types of error. Increasingly, efforts are being made to evaluate dosimetry uncertainties and to take account of them in statistical analyses. The impact of these uncertainties on dose-response analyses depends on the magnitude and type of error. Errors that are independent from subject to subject (random errors) reduce statistical power for detecting a dose-response relationship, increase uncertainties in estimated risk coefficients, and may lead to underestimation of risk coefficients. The specific effects of random errors depend on whether the errors are "classical" or "Berkson." Classical error can be thought of as error that arises from an imprecise measuring device, whereas Berkson error occurs when a single dose is used to represent a group of subjects (with varying true doses). Uncertainties in quantities that are common to some or all subjects are "shared" uncertainties. Such uncertainties increase the possibility of bias, and accounting for this possibility increases the length of confidence intervals. In studies that provide a direct evaluation of risk at low doses and dose rates, dosimetry errors are more likely to mask a true effect than to create a spurious one. In addition, classical errors and shared dosimetry uncertainties increase the potential for bias in estimated risks coefficients, but this potential may already be large due to the extreme vulnerability to confounding in studies involving very small relative risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19820458      PMCID: PMC4051435          DOI: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181adc3b1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Phys        ISSN: 0017-9078            Impact factor:   1.316


  24 in total

1.  Residential radon and lung cancer risk in a high-exposure area of Gansu Province, China.

Authors:  Zuoyuan Wang; Jay H Lubin; Longde Wang; Shouzhi Zhang; John D Boice; Hongxing Cui; Shurong Zhang; Susan Conrath; Ying Xia; Bing Shang; Alina Brenner; Suwen Lei; Catherine Metayer; Jisheng Cao; Katherine W Chen; Shujie Lei; Ruth A Kleinerman
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-03-15       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Power and uncertainty analysis of epidemiological studies of radiation-related disease risk in which dose estimates are based on a complex dosimetry system: some observations.

Authors:  Daniel O Stram; Kenneth J Kopecky
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  Allowing for random errors in radiation dose estimates for the atomic bomb survivor data.

Authors:  D A Pierce; D O Stram; M Vaeth
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  The effects of measurement errors on relative risk regressions.

Authors:  B G Armstrong
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Accounting for errors in dose estimates used in studies of workers exposed to external radiation.

Authors:  E S Gilbert
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 1.316

6.  Residential radon and lung cancer in Sweden: risk analysis accounting for random error in the exposure assessment.

Authors:  F Lagarde; G Pershagen; G Akerblom; O Axelson; U Bäverstam; L Damber; A Enflo; M Svartengren; G A Swedjemark
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 1.316

Review 7.  Exposure measurement error: influence on exposure-disease. Relationships and methods of correction.

Authors:  D Thomas; D Stram; J Dwyer
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 21.981

Review 8.  Low-dose radiation epidemiology studies: status and issues.

Authors:  Roy E Shore
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.316

9.  A reanalysis of thyroid neoplasms in the Israeli tinea capitis study accounting for dose uncertainties.

Authors:  Jay H Lubin; Daniel W Schafer; Elaine Ron; Marilyn Stovall; Raymond J Carroll
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.841

10.  Risk of lung cancer associated with residential radon exposure in south-west England: a case-control study.

Authors:  S Darby; E Whitley; P Silcocks; B Thakrar; M Green; P Lomas; J Miles; G Reeves; T Fearn; R Doll
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Issues in Interpreting Epidemiologic Studies of Populations Exposed to Low-Dose, High-Energy Photon Radiation.

Authors:  Ethel S Gilbert; Mark P Little; Dale L Preston; Daniel O Stram
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2020-07-01

2.  Early life exposure to phthalates in the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development (CHILD) study: a multi-city birth cohort.

Authors:  Garthika Navaranjan; Tim K Takaro; Amanda J Wheeler; Miriam L Diamond; Huan Shu; Meghan B Azad; Allan B Becker; Ruixue Dai; Shelley A Harris; Diana L Lefebvre; Zihang Lu; Piush J Mandhane; Kathleen McLean; Theo J Moraes; James A Scott; Stuart E Turvey; Malcolm R Sears; Padmaja Subbarao; Jeffrey R Brook
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 5.563

3.  The two-dimensional Monte Carlo: a new methodologic paradigm for dose reconstruction for epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Steven L Simon; F Owen Hoffman; Eduard Hofer
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  Radiation dose and subsequent risk for stomach cancer in long-term survivors of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Ruth A Kleinerman; Susan A Smith; Eric Holowaty; Per Hall; Eero Pukkala; Leila Vaalavirta; Marilyn Stovall; Rita Weathers; Ethel Gilbert; Berthe M P Aleman; Magnus Kaijser; Michael Andersson; Hans Storm; Heikki Joensuu; Charles F Lynch; Graça M Dores; Lois B Travis; Lindsay M Morton; Rochelle E Curtis
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 5.  Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer.

Authors:  Robert D Daniels; Gerald M Kendall; Isabelle Thierry-Chef; Martha S Linet; Harry M Cullings
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2020-07-01

Review 6.  A meta-analysis of leukaemia risk from protracted exposure to low-dose gamma radiation.

Authors:  R D Daniels; M K Schubauer-Berigan
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 4.402

Review 7.  Is the Linear No-Threshold Dose-Response Paradigm Still Necessary for the Assessment of Health Effects of Low Dose Radiation?

Authors:  Ki Moon Seong; Songwon Seo; Dalnim Lee; Min-Jeong Kim; Seung-Sook Lee; Sunhoo Park; Young Woo Jin
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Recommendations for Multicentre Clinical Trials Involving Dosimetry for Molecular Radiotherapy.

Authors:  J Taprogge; J Wadsley; E Miles; G D Flux
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 4.126

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.