A new model for investigating the mortality effects of multiple air pollutants in air pollution mortality time-series studies
Abstract
Because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulates air pollutants independently, the majority of time-series studies on air pollution and mortality have focused on estimating the adverse health effects of a single pollutant. However, due to the sometimes high correlation between air pollutants, the results from studies that focus on a single air pollutant can be difficult to interpret. In addition, the high correlation between air pollutants can produce problems of interpretation for the standard method of investigating the adverse health effects due to multiple air pollutants. The standard method involves simultaneously including the multiple air pollutants in a single statistical model. Because of this, the development of new models to concurrently estimate the adverse health effects of multiple air pollutants has recently been identified as an important area of future research. In this article, a new model for disentangling the joint effects of multiple air pollutants in air pollution mortality time-series studies is introduced. This new model uses the time-series data to assign each air pollutant a weight that indicates the pollutant's contribution to the air pollution mixture that affects mortality and to estimate the effect of this air pollution mixture on mortality. This model offers an improvement in statistical estimation precision over the standard method. It also avoids problems of interpretation that can occur if the standard method is used. This new model is then illustrated by applying it to time-series data from two U.S. counties.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
SO2 and NO2 were not adjusted for because PM was highly correlated with SO2 and NO2 in Shanghai and simultaneously entering SO2 (or NO2) into the models can yield unstable parameter estimates when the pollutants involved suffer high inter-correlation.
“We did not adjust for sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in our regression models because PM was highly correlated with SO2 and NO2 in Shanghai (Zhang et al. 2006) and simultaneously entering SO2 (or NO2) into the models can yield unstable parameter estimates when the pollutants involved suffer high inter-correlation (Roberts 2006).”
From Differentiating the effects of fine and coarse particles on daily mortality in Shanghai, China (2007) · cites this paper as Roberts 2006
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 32
- Authors
- Roberts, S.
- Affiliations
- Australian National University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Roberts, Steven
- Venue
- Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-04
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 417-435
- ISSN
- 0098-4108 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-7394
- 1087-2620
- OpenAlex
- W2169359190
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Climate Change and Health Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- air pollution mortality, air pollutant mixtures, time series analysis, environmental health effects
- MeSH terms
- Air Pollutants, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Mortality, Public Health, Sensitivity and Specificity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review