Scinovex
article Open AccessTop 1% cited

Epidemiologic Evaluation of Measurement Data in the Presence of Detection Limits

Environmental Health Perspectives · 2004 · Vol. 112(17) · pp. 1691–1696
Jay H. LubinJoanne S. ColtDavid CamannScott DavisJames R. CerhanRichard K. SeversonLeslie BernsteinPatricia Hartge

Abstract

Quantitative measurements of environmental factors greatly improve the quality of epidemiologic studies but can pose challenges because of the presence of upper or lower detection limits or interfering compounds, which do not allow for precise measured values. We consider the regression of an environmental measurement (dependent variable) on several covariates (independent variables). Various strategies are commonly employed to impute values for interval-measured data, including assignment of one-half the detection limit to nondetected values or of "fill-in" values randomly selected from an appropriate distribution. On the basis of a limited simulation study, we found that the former approach can be biased unless the percentage of measurements below detection limits is small (5-10%). The fill-in approach generally produces unbiased parameter estimates but may produce biased variance estimates and thereby distort inference when 30% or more of the data are below detection limits. Truncated data methods (e.g., Tobit regression) and multiple imputation offer two unbiased approaches for analyzing measurement data with detection limits. If interest resides solely on regression parameters, then Tobit regression can be used. If individualized values for measurements below detection limits are needed for additional analysis, such as relative risk regression or graphical display, then multiple imputation produces unbiased estimates and nominal confidence intervals unless the proportion of missing data is extreme. We illustrate various approaches using measurements of pesticide residues in carpet dust in control subjects from a case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Pesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceImputation (statistics)StatisticsTobit modelConfidence intervalRegressionRegression analysisMissing dataCovariateMathematicsComputer science

MeSH terms

DustEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsFloors and FloorcoveringsHumansLymphoma, Non-HodgkinRegression AnalysisSensitivity and SpecificityReproducibility of ResultsBiasEpidemiologic StudiesCase-Control Studies

Funding

  • National Cancer Institute
Citations
964
FWCI
19.66
field-weighted impact
References
39
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
References
Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data
Technometrics · 2000 · 5,644 citations
Statistical Analysis With Missing Data
Journal of the American Statistical Association · 1989 · 17,494 citations
Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife
The Annals of Statistics · 1979 · 17,226 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.

Epidemiologic Evaluation of Measurement Data in the Presence of Detection Limits · Scinovex