Danielle N Medgyesi1, Jared A Fisher1, Meredith M Cervi1,2, Peter J Weyer3, Deven M Patel1, Joshua N Sampson4, Mary H Ward1, Rena R Jones1. 1. Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland. 2. College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. 3. Center for Health Effects of Environmental Contamination, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Biostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland.
Abstract
Longitudinal studies of environmental hazards often rely on exposure estimated at the participant's enrollment residence. This could lead to exposure misclassification if participants move over time. METHODS: We evaluated residential mobility in the Iowa Women's Health Study (age 55-69 years) over 19 years of follow-up (1986-2004). We assessed several environmental exposures of varying spatial scales at enrollment and follow-up addresses. Exposures included average nitrate concentrations in public water supplies, percent of agricultural land (row crops and pasture/hay) within 750 m, and the presence of concentrated animal feeding operations within 5 km. In comparison to gold standard duration-based exposures averaged across all residences, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of exposure metrics and attenuation bias for a hypothetical nested case-control study of cancer, which assumed participants did not move from their enrollment residence. RESULTS: Among 41,650 participants, 32% moved at least once during follow-up. Mobility was predicted by working outside the home, being a former/current smoker, having a higher education level, using a public drinking water supply, and town size of previous residence. Compared with duration-based exposures, the sensitivity and specificity of exposures at enrollment ranged from 94% to 99% and 97% to 99%, respectively. A hypothetical true odds ratio of 2.0 was attenuated 8% for nitrate, 9%-10% for agricultural land, and 6% for concentrated animal feeding operation exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found low rates of mobility and mobility-related exposure misclassification in the Iowa Women's Health Study. Misclassification and attenuation of hypothetical risk estimates differed by spatial variability and exposure prevalence.
Longitudinal studies of environmental hazards often rely on exposure estimated at the participant's enrollment residence. This could lead to exposure misclassification if participants move over time. METHODS: We evaluated residential mobility in the Iowa Women's Health Study (age 55-69 years) over 19 years of follow-up (1986-2004). We assessed several environmental exposures of varying spatial scales at enrollment and follow-up addresses. Exposures included average nitrate concentrations in public water supplies, percent of agricultural land (row crops and pasture/hay) within 750 m, and the presence of concentrated animal feeding operations within 5 km. In comparison to gold standard duration-based exposures averaged across all residences, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of exposure metrics and attenuation bias for a hypothetical nested case-control study of cancer, which assumed participants did not move from their enrollment residence. RESULTS: Among 41,650 participants, 32% moved at least once during follow-up. Mobility was predicted by working outside the home, being a former/current smoker, having a higher education level, using a public drinking water supply, and town size of previous residence. Compared with duration-based exposures, the sensitivity and specificity of exposures at enrollment ranged from 94% to 99% and 97% to 99%, respectively. A hypothetical true odds ratio of 2.0 was attenuated 8% for nitrate, 9%-10% for agricultural land, and 6% for concentrated animal feeding operation exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found low rates of mobility and mobility-related exposure misclassification in the Iowa Women's Health Study. Misclassification and attenuation of hypothetical risk estimates differed by spatial variability and exposure prevalence.
Authors: Mary H Ward; Briseis A Kilfoy; Peter J Weyer; Kristin E Anderson; Aaron R Folsom; James R Cerhan Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Susan Hodgson; Peter W W Lurz; Mark D F Shirley; Mary Bythell; Judith Rankin Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 5.840
Authors: Maki Inoue-Choi; Peter J Weyer; Rena R Jones; Benjamin J Booth; Kenneth P Cantor; Kim Robien; Mary H Ward Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Sandra Cortés; Cinthya Leiva; María José Ojeda; Natalia Bustamante-Ara; Wanjiku Wambaa; Alan Dominguez; Carlos Pasten Salvo; Camila Rodriguez Peralta; Bárbara Rojas Arenas; Diego Vargas Mesa; Ericka Ahumada-Padilla Journal: Environ Health Insights Date: 2022-06-27
Authors: Danielle N Medgyesi; Britton Trabert; Joshua Sampson; Peter J Weyer; Anna Prizment; Jared A Fisher; Laura E Beane Freeman; Mary H Ward; Rena R Jones Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 11.035
Authors: Ian D Buller; Deven M Patel; Peter J Weyer; Anna Prizment; Rena R Jones; Mary H Ward Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 3.390