ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2020
A Bayesian hierarchical approach to account for left-censored and missing radiation doses prone to classical measurement error when analyzing lung cancer mortality due to γ-ray exposure in the French cohort of uranium miners.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidemiological data on cohorts of occupationally exposed uranium miners are currently used to assess health risks associated with chronic exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation. Nevertheless, exposure uncertainty is ubiquitous and questions the validity of statistical inference in these cohorts. This paper highlights the flexibility and relevance of the Bayesian hierarchical approach to account for both missing and left-censored (i.e. only known to be lower than a fixed detection limit) radiation doses that are prone to measurement error, when estimating radiation-related risks. Up to the authors' knowledge, this is the first time these three sources of uncertainty are dealt with simultaneously in radiation epidemiology. To illustrate the issue, this paper focuses on the specific problem of accounting for these three sources of uncertainty when estimating the association between occupational exposure to low levels of γ-radiation and lung cancer mortality in the post-55 sub-cohort of French uranium miners. The impact of these three sources of dose uncertainty is of marginal importance when estimating the risk of death by lung cancer among French uranium miners. The corrected excess hazard ratio (EHR) is 0.81 per 100 mSv (95% credible interval: [0.28; 1.75]). Interestingly, even if the 95% credible interval of the corrected EHR is wider than the uncorrected one, a statistically significant positive association remains between γ-ray exposure and the risk of death by lung cancer, after accounting for dose uncertainty. Sensitivity analyses show that the results obtained are robust to different assumptions. Because of its flexible and modular nature, the Bayesian hierarchical models proposed in this work could be easily extended to account for high proportions of missing and left-censored dose values or exposure data, prone to more complex patterns of measurement error.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.