Abstract
The health effects of environmental hazards are often examined using time series of the association between a daily response variable (e.g., death) and a daily level of exposure (e.g., temperature). Exposures are usually the average from a network of stations. This gives each station equal importance, and negates the opportunity for some stations to be better measures of exposure. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model that weighted stations using random variables between zero and one. We compared the weighted estimates to the standard model using data on health outcomes (deaths and hospital admissions) and exposures (air pollution and temperature) in Brisbane, Australia. The improvements in model fit were relatively small, and the estimated health effects of pollution were similar using either the standard or weighted estimates. Spatial weighted exposures would be probably more worthwhile when there is either greater spatial detail in the health outcome, or a greater spatial variation in exposure.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.