Christopher N Morrison1,2, Hilary F Byrnes3, Brenda A Miller3, Emily Kaner3, Sarah E Wiehe4, William R Ponicki3, Douglas J Wiebe5. 1. From the Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 3. Prevention Research Center, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Berkeley, CA. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN. 5. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many approaches are available to researchers who wish to measure individuals' exposure to environmental conditions. Different approaches may yield different estimates of associations with health outcomes. Taking adolescents' exposure to alcohol outlets as an example, we aimed to (1) compare exposure measures and (2) assess whether exposure measures were differentially associated with alcohol consumption. METHODS: We tracked 231 adolescents 14-16 years of age from the San Francisco Bay Area for 4 weeks in 2015/2016 using global positioning systems (GPS). Participants were texted ecologic momentary assessment surveys six times per week, including assessment of alcohol consumption. We used GPS data to calculate exposure to alcohol outlets using three approach types: residence-based (e.g., within the home census tract), activity location-based (e.g., within buffer distances of frequently attended places), and activity path-based (e.g., average outlets per hour within buffer distances of GPS route lines). Spearman correlations compared exposure measures, and separate Tobit models assessed associations with the proportion of ecologic momentary assessment responses positive for alcohol consumption. RESULTS: Measures were mostly strongly correlated within approach types (ρ ≥ 0.7), but weakly (ρ < 0.3) to moderately (0.3 ≤ ρ < 0.7) correlated between approach types. Associations with alcohol consumption were mostly inconsistent within and between approach types. Some of the residence-based measures (e.g., census tract: β = 8.3, 95% CI = 2.8, 13.8), none of the activity location-based approaches, and most of the activity path-based approaches (e.g., outlet-hours per hour, 100 m buffer: β = 8.3, 95% CI = 3.3, 13.3) were associated with alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Methodologic decisions regarding measurement of exposure to environmental conditions may affect study results.
BACKGROUND: Many approaches are available to researchers who wish to measure individuals' exposure to environmental conditions. Different approaches may yield different estimates of associations with health outcomes. Taking adolescents' exposure to alcohol outlets as an example, we aimed to (1) compare exposure measures and (2) assess whether exposure measures were differentially associated with alcohol consumption. METHODS: We tracked 231 adolescents 14-16 years of age from the San Francisco Bay Area for 4 weeks in 2015/2016 using global positioning systems (GPS). Participants were texted ecologic momentary assessment surveys six times per week, including assessment of alcohol consumption. We used GPS data to calculate exposure to alcohol outlets using three approach types: residence-based (e.g., within the home census tract), activity location-based (e.g., within buffer distances of frequently attended places), and activity path-based (e.g., average outlets per hour within buffer distances of GPS route lines). Spearman correlations compared exposure measures, and separate Tobit models assessed associations with the proportion of ecologic momentary assessment responses positive for alcohol consumption. RESULTS: Measures were mostly strongly correlated within approach types (ρ ≥ 0.7), but weakly (ρ < 0.3) to moderately (0.3 ≤ ρ < 0.7) correlated between approach types. Associations with alcohol consumption were mostly inconsistent within and between approach types. Some of the residence-based measures (e.g., census tract: β = 8.3, 95% CI = 2.8, 13.8), none of the activity location-based approaches, and most of the activity path-based approaches (e.g., outlet-hours per hour, 100 m buffer: β = 8.3, 95% CI = 3.3, 13.3) were associated with alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Methodologic decisions regarding measurement of exposure to environmental conditions may affect study results.
Authors: Mary O Hearst; Jayne A Fulkerson; Mildred M Maldonado-Molina; Cheryl L Perry; Kelli A Komro Journal: Prev Med Date: 2007-03-01 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Stephen J Mooney; Daniel M Sheehan; Garazi Zulaika; Andrew G Rundle; Kevin McGill; Melika R Behrooz; Gina Schellenbaum Lovasi Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Christopher R Browning; Catherine A Calder; Jodi L Ford; Bethany Boettner; Anna L Smith; Dana Haynie Journal: Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci Date: 2016-12-20
Authors: Christopher N Morrison; Hilary F Byrnes; Brenda A Miller; Sarah E Wiehe; William R Ponicki; Douglas J Wiebe Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Christina Mair; Jessica Frankeberger; Paul J Gruenewald; Christopher N Morrison; Bridget Freisthler Journal: Curr Epidemiol Rep Date: 2019-09-13