The Impact of Uncertainty in the AIDS Incubation Period on Reconstructions of the HIV Epidemic

Backcalculation is the primary method used to reconstruct past human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection rates, to estimate current prevalence of HIV infection, and to project future incidence of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). The method is very sensitive to uncertainty about the incubation period. We estimate incubation distributions from three sets of cohort data and find that the estimates for the cohorts are substantially different. Backcalculations employing the different estimates produce equally good fits to reported AIDS counts but quite different estimates of cumulative infections. These results suggest that the incubation distribution is likely to differ for different populations and that the differences are large enough to have a big impact on the resulting estimates of HIV infection rates. This seriously limits the usefulness of backcalculation for populations (such as intravenous drug users, heterosexuals, and women) that lack precise information on incubation times.

Underestimation of Standard Errors in Multi-Site Time Series Studies

Multi-site time series studies of air pollution and mortality and morbidity have figured prominently in the literature as comprehensive approaches for estimating acute effects of air pollution on health. Hierarchical models are generally used to combine site-specific information and estimate pooled air pollution effects taking into account both within-site statistical uncertainty, and across-site heterogeneity. Within a site, characteristics of time series data of air pollution and health (small pollution effects, missing data, highly correlated predictors, non linear confounding etc.) make modelling all sources of uncertainty challenging. One potential consequence is underestimation of the statistical variance of the site-specific effects to be combined. In this paper we investigate the impact of variance underestimation on the pooled relative rate estimate. We focus on two-stage normal-normal hierarchical models and on under- estimation of the statistical variance at the first stage. By mathematical considerations and simulation studies, we found that variance underestimation does not affect the pooled estimate substantially. However, some sensitivity of the pooled estimate to variance underestimation is observed when the number of sites is small and underestimation is severe. These simulation results are applicable to any two-stage normal-normal hierarchical model for combining information of site-specific results, and they can be easily extended to more general hierarchical formulations. We also examined the impact of variance underestimation on the national average relative rate estimate from the National Morbidity Mortality Air Pollution Study and we found that variance underestimation as much as 40% has little effect on the national average.