Impact of residential mobility on estimated environmental exposures in a prospective cohort of older women.

Longitudinal studies of environmental hazards often rely on exposure estimated at the participant's enrollment residence. This could lead to exposure misclassification if participants move over time.

methodsWe evaluated residential mobility in the Iowa Women's Health Study (age 55-69 years) over 19 years of follow-up (1986-2004). We assessed several environmental exposures of varying spatial scales at enrollment and follow-up addresses. Exposures included average nitrate concentrations in public water supplies, percent of agricultural land (row crops and pasture/hay) within 750 m, and the presence of concentrated animal feeding operations within 5 km. In comparison to gold standard duration-based exposures averaged across all residences, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of exposure metrics and attenuation bias for a hypothetical nested case-control study of cancer, which assumed participants did not move from their enrollment residence.

resultsAmong 41,650 participants, 32% moved at least once during follow-up. Mobility was predicted by working outside the home, being a former/current smoker, having a higher education level, using a public drinking water supply, and town size of previous residence. Compared with duration-based exposures, the sensitivity and specificity of exposures at enrollment ranged from 94% to 99% and 97% to 99%, respectively. A hypothetical true odds ratio of 2.0 was attenuated 8% for nitrate, 9%-10% for agricultural land, and 6% for concentrated animal feeding operation exposures.

conclusionsOverall, we found low rates of mobility and mobility-related exposure misclassification in the Iowa Women's Health Study. Misclassification and attenuation of hypothetical risk estimates differed by spatial variability and exposure prevalence.