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.

Uncertainty About the Incubation Period of AIDS and its Impact on Backcalculation

We analyze three sets of doubly-censored cohort data on incubation times, estimating incubation distributions using semi-parametric methods and assessing the comparability of the estimates. Weibull models appear to be inappropriate for at least one of the cohorts, and the estimates for the different cohorts are substantially different. We use these estimates as inputs for backcalculation, using a nonparametric method based on maximum penalized likelihood. The different incubations all produce fits to the reported AIDS counts that are as good as the fit from a nonstationary incubation distribution that models treatment effects, but the estimated infection curves are very different. We also develop a method for estimating nonstationarity as part of the backcalculation procedure and find that such estimates also depend very heavily on the assumed incubation distribution. We conclude that incubation distributions are so uncertain that meaningful error bounds are difficult to place on backcalculated estimates and that backcalculation may be too unreliable to be used without being supplemented by other sources of information in HIV prevalence and incidence.