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.

Ozone and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Time-Series Studies and Comparison to a Multi-City Study (The National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study)

While many time-series studies of ozone and daily mortality identified positive associations,others yielded null or inconclusive results. We performed a meta-analysis of 144 effect estimates from 39 time-series studies, and estimated pooled effects by lags, age groups,cause-specific mortality, and concentration metrics. We compared results to estimates from the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study (NMMAPS), a time-series study of 95 large U.S. cities from 1987 to 2000. Both meta-analysis and NMMAPS results provided strong evidence of a short-term association between ozone and mortality, with larger effects for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality, the elderly, and current day ozone exposure as compared to other single day lags. In both analyses, results were not sensitive to adjustment for particulate matter and model specifications. In the meta-analysis we found that a 10 ppb increase in daily ozone is associated with a 0.83 (95% confidence interval: 0.53, 1.12%) increase in total mortality, whereas the corresponding NMMAPS estimate is 0.25%(0.12, 0.39%). Meta-analysis results were consistently larger than those from NMMAPS,indicating publication bias. Additional publication bias is evident regarding the choice of lags in time-series studies, and the larger heterogeneity in posterior city-specific estimates in the meta-analysis, as compared with NMAMPS.