Literature DB >> 27681941

When evidence of heat-related vulnerability depends on the contrast measure.

Tarik Benmarhnia1, Jay S Kaufman2,3.   

Abstract

Many studies assessing which population subgroups are more vulnerable to heat-related mortality and morbidity have been conducted in recent years. However, given the non-linear (U or J shaped) relationship of temperature with mortality and morbidity, they generally consider only a single contrast measure to report evidence of heat-related vulnerability, despite the possibility that vulnerability depends on the selected contrast measure. In this manuscript, we highlight the importance of considering such issue in further studies by providing evidence for and against heat-related vulnerability using two different temperature contrast measures. We conducted time series analyses to characterize the association between mortality and mean daily temperature in Montreal, Canada (1990-2010). We used age (≥65 vs. 0-64 years) as the effect modifier in stratified analyses. We assessed the presence of effect modification using Cochran Q tests. As contrast measures, we used (1) the percentage change in the outcome above 25 °C, obtained through spline functions showing a linear relationship after this threshold and (2) a comparison of two percentiles (26 vs. 20 °C) of the temperature. We found that evidence of effect modification depended on the contrast measure used. We encourage researchers aiming to identify populations more vulnerable to heat to perform sensitivity analyses using different contrast measures.

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27681941     DOI: 10.1007/s00484-016-1248-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Biometeorol        ISSN: 0020-7128            Impact factor:   3.787


  9 in total

Review 1.  Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates.

Authors:  Douglas G Altman; J Martin Bland
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-01-25

2.  The Two Ways of Assessing Heat-Related Mortality and Vulnerability.

Authors:  Jaime Madrigano; Sabrina McCormick; Patrick L Kinney
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Which of these things is not like the others?

Authors:  Jay S Kaufman; Richard F MacLehose
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Heat stress and public health: a critical review.

Authors:  R Sari Kovats; Shakoor Hajat
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 21.981

Review 5.  Evaluating the effectiveness of heat warning systems: systematic review of epidemiological evidence.

Authors:  Ghasem Toloo; Gerard FitzGerald; Peter Aitken; Kenneth Verrall; Shilu Tong
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2013-04-07       Impact factor: 3.380

6.  Heat-related illness in China, summer of 2013.

Authors:  Shaohua Gu; Cunrui Huang; Li Bai; Cordia Chu; Qiyong Liu
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.787

7.  Vulnerability to extreme heat by socio-demographic characteristics and area green space among the elderly in Michigan, 1990-2007.

Authors:  Carina J Gronlund; Veronica J Berrocal; Jalonne L White-Newsome; Kathryn C Conlon; Marie S O'Neill
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 6.498

Review 8.  High ambient temperature and mortality: a review of epidemiologic studies from 2001 to 2008.

Authors:  Rupa Basu
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 5.984

9.  Time series regression studies in environmental epidemiology.

Authors:  Krishnan Bhaskaran; Antonio Gasparrini; Shakoor Hajat; Liam Smeeth; Ben Armstrong
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 7.196

  9 in total
  1 in total

1.  Is Sensible Heat Flux Useful for the Assessment of Thermal Vulnerability in Seoul (Korea)?

Authors:  You Jin Kwon; Dong Kun Lee; You Ha Kwon
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 3.390

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.