Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search

Search Results

Selecting an exposure lag period.

Authors
Salvan-A; Stayner-L; Steenland-K; Smith-R
Source
Epidemiology 1995 Jul; 6(4):387-390
NIOSHTIC No.
20035564
Abstract
In epidemiology, there is an inclination to consider more credible the larger estimates of exposure effect. For example, higher relative risks or rate ratios are often emphasized as a criterion for choosing among various hypothesized exposure-lag values. An alternative criterion for this choice might be based on a goodness of-fit measure. We present examples, based on hypothetical data, in which an exposure lag parameter is:estimated by trial and error fitting: we compare the behavior of the likelihood-ratio goodness of-fit statistic ob rained over the assigned values of the parameter with that of the relative risk. We show that there can be inconsistencies between the highest estimate and likelihood based goodness-of-fit criteria. Concern about the validity of the highest-estimate criterion prompts us to recommend that this criterion not be used for the estimation of exposure weighting parameters, which should preferably be based on a priori biological knowledge edge or on goodness of-fit criteria.
Keywords
Epidemiology; Exposure-assessment; Exposure-levels; Exposure-limits; Exposure-methods; Models; Occupational-exposure; Time-weighted-average-exposure; Work-environment; Worker-health; Workplace-studies; Work-practices; Biological-effects; Biological-factors; Biological-monitoring; Exposure-levels; Sample-preparation; Sampling; Standards; Statistical-analysis; Author Keywords: epidemiologic methods; data analysis; misclassification
CODEN
EPIDEY
Publication Date
19950701
Document Type
Journal Article
Fiscal Year
1995
NTIS Accession No.
NTIS Price
Issue of Publication
4
ISSN
1044-3983
NIOSH Division
DSDTT; DSHEFS
Source Name
Epidemiology
State
OH
TOP