Yesterday 05:04 PM
https://publichealth.realclearjournals.o...sis-fluke/
ABSTRACT: There are many published studies claiming air quality causes adverse health effects, including mortality. But a sticky question remains – does air quality cause adverse health effects, or is the effect an artifact of selective analysis methods and choice of data? The heart of the problem is the analysis of large, complex observational data sets. Analysis flexibility allows researchers to declare statistical significance by how they do the analysis. A chance, positive effect can lead to publication. Epidemiology studies showing that air quality is associated with mortality seem a fluke, given the many possible ways in which the analysis can be done, and unaccounted confounding. The existence of negative studies argues against real effects. Other claims in epidemiology literature may fit this situation. (MORE - details, no ads)
ABSTRACT: There are many published studies claiming air quality causes adverse health effects, including mortality. But a sticky question remains – does air quality cause adverse health effects, or is the effect an artifact of selective analysis methods and choice of data? The heart of the problem is the analysis of large, complex observational data sets. Analysis flexibility allows researchers to declare statistical significance by how they do the analysis. A chance, positive effect can lead to publication. Epidemiology studies showing that air quality is associated with mortality seem a fluke, given the many possible ways in which the analysis can be done, and unaccounted confounding. The existence of negative studies argues against real effects. Other claims in epidemiology literature may fit this situation. (MORE - details, no ads)