Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Mar 1;179(5):641-7.
doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt309. Epub 2013 Dec 18.

Accounting for outcome misclassification in estimates of the effect of occupational asbestos exposure on lung cancer death

Accounting for outcome misclassification in estimates of the effect of occupational asbestos exposure on lung cancer death

Jessie K Edwards et al. Am J Epidemiol. .

Abstract

In studies of the health effects of asbestos, lung cancer death is subject to misclassification. We used modified maximum likelihood to explore the effects of outcome misclassification on the rate ratio of lung cancer death per 100 fiber-years per milliliter of cumulative asbestos exposure in a cohort study of textile workers in Charleston, South Carolina, followed from 1940 to 2001. The standard covariate-adjusted estimate of the rate ratio was 1.94 (95% confidence interval: 1.55, 2.44), and modified maximum likelihood produced similar results when we assumed that the specificity of outcome classification was 0.98. With sensitivity assumed to be 0.80 and specificity assumed to be 0.95, estimated rate ratios were further from the null and less precise (rate ratio = 2.17; 95% confidence interval: 1.59, 2.98). In the present context, standard estimates for the effect of asbestos on lung cancer death were similar to estimates accounting for the limited misclassification. However, sensitivity analysis using modified maximum likelihood was needed to verify the robustness of standard estimates, and this approach will provide unbiased estimates in settings with more misclassification.

Keywords: asbestos; bias; sensitivity and specificity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Dement JM, Harris RL, Symons MJ, et al. Exposures and mortality among chrysotile asbestos workers. Part I: exposure estimates. Am J Ind Med. 1983;4(3):399–419. - PubMed
    1. Dement JM, Harris RL, Symons MJ, et al. Exposures and mortality among chrysotile asbestos workers. Part II: mortality. Am J Ind Med. 1983;4(3):421–433. - PubMed
    1. Hein MJ, Stayner LT, Lehman E, et al. Follow-up study of chrysotile textile workers: cohort mortality and exposure-response. Occup Environ Med. 2007;64(9):616–625. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bang KM, Mazurek JM, Storey E, et al. Malignant mesothelioma mortality—United States, 1999–2005. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58(15):393–396. - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Current Intelligence Bulletin 62: Asbestos Fibers and Other Elongate Mineral Particles: State of the Science and Roadmap for Research. Cincinnati, OH: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health); 2011.