Bias in Environmental Cohort Studies: The Example of Bone Lead and Mortality

Carol Potera, based in Montana, also writes for Microbe, Genetic Engineering News, and the American Journal of Nursing. About This Article open Citation: Potera C. 2015. Bias in environmental cohort studies: the example of bone lead and mortality. Environ Health Perspect 123:A288; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.123-A288 Published: 1 November 2015 PDF Version (252 KB) Related EHP Article Biased Exposure–Health Effect Estimates from Selection in Cohort Studies: Are Environmental Studies at Particular Risk? Marc G. Weisskopf, David Sparrow, Howard Hu, and Melinda C. Power Unrecognized biases in prospective environmental cohort studies may result in under- or overestimating the health effects of the exposure under investigation. In this issue of EHP, researchers examine the problem of bias using data on lead exposure and mortality in men and directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to illustrate causal relationships between variables that could bias results.1 The study data came from 835 white male participants, average age 67 years, who were part of the Normative Aging Study (NAS), which began in 1963. Between 1991 and 1999, the men had undergone measurement of lead in their patellas. For the current analysis, the researchers looked at associations between patella lead and mortality from all causes, from cardiovascular disease, and from ischemic heart disease. Bone lead, rather than blood lead, is a better biomarker for cumulative environmental exposure,2 and patella ...
Source: EHP Research - Category: Environmental Health Authors: Tags: Featured News Science Selection November 2015 Source Type: research