Relative‐risk‐estimate bias and loss of power in the mantel test for trend resulting from the use of magnetic‐field point‐in‐time (“spot”) measurements in epidemiological studies based on an ordinal exposure scale

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
We assessed the merits of various point‐in‐time (“spot”) measurement protocols in case‐control studies based on an ordinal exposure scale. After classifying a number of houses on the basis of prolonged monitoring of the ambient, extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field, we determined the probability of misclassification for each “spot” measurement protocol. We calculated the effect of this misclassification on the relative risk estimates and on the Mantel test for trend. We found that classification based on a small group of point‐in‐time measurements allows an adequate estimate of the relative risk, although the statistical significance of the dose‐response gradient may be seriously underestimated. However, the use of automated ambient‐field monitors, which results in loss of information on spatial variability, can lead to similar consequences. Therefore, manually collected point‐in‐time measurements remain a viable option for exposure assessment. 1992 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.