Improving population attributable fraction methods: Examining smoking-attributable mortality for 87 geographic regions in Canada

被引:30
作者
Tanuseputro, P
Manuel, DG
Schultz, SE
Johansen, H
Mustard, CA
机构
[1] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Fac Med, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] STAT Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Inst Work & Hlth, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
bias (epidemiology); effect modifiers (epidemiology); epidemiologic methods; mortality; prevalence; risk; smoking;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kwi093
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Smoking-attributable mortality (SAM) is the number of deaths in a population caused by smoking. In this study, the authors examined and empirically quantified the effects of methodological problems in the estimation of SAM through population attributable fraction methods. In addition to exploring common concerns regarding generalizability and residual confounding in relative risks, the authors considered errors in measuring estimates of risk exposure prevalence and mortality in target populations and estimates of relative risks from etiologic studies. They also considered errors resulting from combining these three sources of data. By modifying SAM estimates calculated using smoking prevalence obtained from the 2000-2001 Canadian Community Health Survey, a population-based survey of 131,535 Canadian households, the authors observed the following effects of potential errors on estimated national SAM (and the range of effects on 87 regional SAMs): 1) using a slightly biased, mismatched definition of former smoking: 5.3% (range, 1.8% to 11.6%); 2) using age-collapsed prevalence and relative risks: 6.9% (range, 1.1% to 15.5%) and -15.4% (range, -7.9% to -21.0%), respectively; 3) using relative risks derived from the same cohort but with a shorter follow-up period: 8.7% (range, 4.5% to 11.8%); 4) using relative risks for all diseases with age-collapsed prevalence: 49.7% (range, 24.1% to 82.2%); and 5) using prevalence estimates unadjusted for exposure-outcome lag: -14.5% (range, -20.8% to 42.6%) to -1.4% (range, -0.8% to -2.7%), depending on the method of adjustment. Applications of the SAM estimation method should consider these sources of potential error.
引用
收藏
页码:787 / 798
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1992, MMWR-MORBID MORTAL W, V44, P372
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2002, World Health Report, 2002: Reducing risks, promoting healthy life
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1995, MMWR-MORBID MORTAL W, V44, P372
[4]  
BECKETT WS, 1993, CLIN CHEST MED, V14, P1
[5]   Estimating mortality due to cigarette smoking: Two methods, same result [J].
Bronnum-Hansen, H ;
Juel, K .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 11 (04) :422-426
[7]  
*CDCP, 1996, SMOK ATTR MORT MORB
[8]  
*CDCP, 2004, AD SAMMEC SMOK ATTR
[9]  
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004, The health consequences of smoking: a report of the Surgeon General
[10]  
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1989, RED HLTH CONS SMOK 2