Literature DB >> 35434460

Is maternal employment site a source of exposure misclassification in studies of environmental exposures and birth outcomes? A simulation-based bias analysis of haloacetic acids in tap water and hypospadias.

Ibrahim Zaganjor1, Alexander P Keil1, Thomas J Luben1,2, Tania A Desrosiers1, Lawrence S Engel1, Jennita Reefhuis3, Adrian M Michalski4, Peter H Langlois5, Andrew F Olshan1.   

Abstract

In population research, exposure to environmental contaminants is often indirectly assessed by linking residence to geocoded databases of environmental exposures. We explored the potential for misclassification of residence-based environmental exposure as a result of not accounting for the workplace environments of employed pregnant women using data from a National Birth Defects Prevention Study (NBDPS) analysis of drinking water haloacetic acids and hypospadias.
Methods: The original analysis used NBDPS data from women with haloacetic acid exposure information in eight states who delivered an infant with second- or third-degree hypospadias (cases) or a male infant without a birth defect (controls) between 2000 and 2005. In this bias analysis, we used a uniform distribution to randomly select 11%-14% of employed women that were assumed to change municipal water systems between home and work and imputed new contaminant exposures for tap water beverages consumed at work among the selected women using resampled values from the control population. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between hypospadias and haloacetic acid ingestion with the same covariates and exposure cut-points as the original study. We repeated this process across 10,000 iterations and then completed a sensitivity analysis of an additional 10,000 iterations where we expanded the uniform distribution (i.e., 0%, 28%).
Results: In both simulations, the average results of the 10,000 iterations were nearly identical to those of the initial study. Conclusions: Our results suggest that household estimates may be sufficient proxies for worksite exposures to haloacetic acids in tap water.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The Environmental Epidemiology. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bias analysis; Birth defects; Disinfection by-products; Exposure misclassification; Haloacetic acids; Hypospadias

Year:  2022        PMID: 35434460      PMCID: PMC9005252          DOI: 10.1097/EE9.0000000000000207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Epidemiol        ISSN: 2474-7882


  23 in total

1.  A comparison of several procedures to estimate the confidence interval for attributable risk in case-control studies.

Authors:  J Llorca; M Delgado-Rodríguez
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Differences in exposure assignment between conception and delivery: the impact of maternal mobility.

Authors:  Philip J Lupo; Elaine Symanski; Wenyaw Chan; Laura E Mitchell; D Kim Waller; Mark A Canfield; Peter H Langlois
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.980

Review 3.  The National Birth Defects Prevention Study: A review of the methods.

Authors:  Jennita Reefhuis; Suzanne M Gilboa; Marlene Anderka; Marilyn L Browne; Marcia L Feldkamp; Charlotte A Hobbs; Mary M Jenkins; Peter H Langlois; Kimberly B Newsome; Andrew F Olshan; Paul A Romitti; Stuart K Shapira; Gary M Shaw; Sarah C Tinker; Margaret A Honein
Journal:  Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol       Date:  2015-06-02

4.  Exposure to drinking water disinfection by-products and pregnancy loss.

Authors:  David A Savitz; Philip C Singer; Amy H Herring; Katherine E Hartmann; Howard S Weinberg; Christina Makarushka
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Assessing spatial fluctuations, temporal variability, and measurement error in estimated levels of disinfection by-products in tap water: implications for exposure assessment.

Authors:  E Symanski; D A Savitz; P C Singer
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.402

6.  Exposure misclassification bias in studies of environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer.

Authors:  A H Wu
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Assessment of water use for estimating exposure to tap water contaminants.

Authors:  G H Shimokura; D A Savitz; E Symanski
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Drinking water disinfection byproducts and risk of orofacial clefts in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study.

Authors:  Peter Weyer; Anthony Rhoads; Jonathan Suhl; Thomas J Luben; Kristin M Conway; Peter H Langlois; Dereck Shen; Dong Liang; Soman Puzhankara; Marlene Anderka; Erin Bell; Marcia L Feldkamp; Adrienne T Hoyt; Bridget Mosley; Jennita Reefhuis; Paul A Romitti
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2018-07-17       Impact factor: 2.344

9.  Birth Weight, Ethnicity, and Exposure to Trihalomethanes and Haloacetic Acids in Drinking Water during Pregnancy in the Born in Bradford Cohort.

Authors:  Rachel B Smith; Susan C Edwards; Nicky Best; John Wright; Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen; Mireille B Toledano
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Disinfection By-Product Exposures and the Risk of Specific Cardiac Birth Defects.

Authors:  J Michael Wright; Amanda Evans; John A Kaufman; Zorimar Rivera-Núñez; Michael G Narotsky
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.