Short-term PM2.5 and cardiovascular admissions in NY State: assessing sensitivity to exposure model choice

• Main Authors: Mike Z. He (Author), Vivian Do (Author), Siliang Liu (Author), Patrick L. Kinney (Author), Arlene M. Fiore (Author), Xiaomeng Jin (Author), Nicholas DeFelice (Author), Jianzhao Bi (Author), Yang Liu (Author), Tabassum Z. Insaf (Author), Marianthi-Anna Kioumourtzoglou (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: BMC, 2021-08-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/s12940-021-00782-3; 1476-069X
• Keywords: Particulate matter; Exposure assessment; Cardiovascular morbidity; Industrial medicine. Industrial hygiene; RC963-969; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Environmental Health, Vol 20, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2021)

Abstract Background Air pollution health studies have been increasingly using prediction models for exposure assessment even in areas without monitoring stations. To date, most studies have assumed that a single exposure model is correct, but estimated effects may be sensitive to the choice of exposure model. Methods We obtained county-level daily cardiovascular (CVD) admissions from the New York (NY) Statewide Planning and Resources Cooperative System (SPARCS) and four sets of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) spatio-temporal predictions (2002-2012). We employed overdispersed Poisson models to investigate the relationship between daily PM2.5 and CVD, adjusting for potential confounders, separately for each state-wide PM2.5 dataset. Results For all PM2.5 datasets, we observed positive associations between PM2.5 and CVD. Across the modeled exposure estimates, effect estimates ranged from 0.23% (95%CI: -0.06, 0.53%) to 0.88% (95%CI: 0.68, 1.08%) per 10 µg/m3 increase in daily PM2.5. We observed the highest estimates using monitored concentrations 0.96% (95%CI: 0.62, 1.30%) for the subset of counties where these data were available. Conclusions Effect estimates varied by a factor of almost four across methods to model exposures, likely due to varying degrees of exposure measurement error. Nonetheless, we observed a consistently harmful association between PM2.5 and CVD admissions, regardless of model choice.