Table 3 Examples of results of non-radiation environmental epidemiological studies with and without adjusting for exposure estimation errors
From: Methods to account for uncertainties in exposure assessment in studies of environmental exposures
| Studies | Exposure | Outcome | Error-correction Method | Measures of Association | Unadjusted risk effect with 95% confidence interval | Adjusted risk effect with 95% confidence interval | Percent change after adjustment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumar (2016) [48] | PM2.5 (μg/m3)* | Birth weight (g) | SIMEX | Linear regression coefficient | −1.01 (−2.017, 0.003) | −0.98 (−1.689, − 0.263) | + 3% |
| PM10 (μg/m3)** | Birth weight (g) | SIMEX | Linear regression coefficient | −1.01 (−2.017, 0.003) | −0.98 (−1.689, − 0.263) | + 0.1% | |
| Wang and Song (2016) [56] | % Energy from protein | Breast cancer | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | −0.15 (−1.79,1.49) | 0.53 (−1.74, 0.72) | − 248% |
| Keogh and White (2014) [39] | Log fiber intake (gram/day) | Colorectal cancer | Regression Calibration | Log odds ratio | − 0.19 (− 0.33, − 0.06) | − 0.29 (− 0.49, − 0.09) | −48.2% |
| Beulens et al. (2007) [65] | Alcohol consumption | Total myocardial infarction | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 0.85 (0.78, 0.92) | 0.68 (0.46, 1.00) | −20% |
| Alcohol consumption | Total death | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 0.96 (0.91, 1.02) | 0.94 (0.75, 1.18) | −2% | |
| Alcohol consumption | Total stroke | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 1.03 (0.92, 1.15) | 1.04 (0.72, 1.51) | + 0.9% | |
| Molina-Montes et al. (2012) [66] | Energy-adjusted magnesium intake | Pancreatic cancer | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 0.98 (0.86, 1.11) | 0.68 (0.46, 1.00) | + 2% |
| Energy-adjusted iron intake | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 0.97 (0.91, 1.03) | 0.94 (0.75, 1.18) | −4% | ||
| Energy-adjusted heme-iron intake | Regression Calibration | Hazard ratio | 1.01 (0.90, 1.12) | 1.04 (0.72, 1.51) | + 7% | ||
| Beydoun et al. (2007) [67] | n-3 C18 polyunsaturated fatty acids | Cognitive functioning (measured by Word Fluency Test) | Regression Calibration | Odds ratio | 1.01 (0.92, 1.12) | 1.22 (0.90, 1.64) | + 20.8% |
| n-3 C18 polyunsaturated fatty acids | Cognitive functioning (measured by Word Fluency Test) | SIMEX | Odds ratio | 1.01 (0.92, 1.12) | 1.15 (0.96,1.39) | + 13.9% |