When Studies Collide
Meta‐analysis and Rules of Evidence for Environmental Health Policy—Applications to Benzene, Dioxins, and Formaldehyde
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6327895 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rae Zimmerman (0000-0001-5825-3383, New York University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1995 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 123-140 |
| Publication date | 1995-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Policy Studies Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0190-292X • E-ISSN: 1541-0072 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1541-0072.1995.tb00512.x |
| OpenAlex | W2117802717 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 22 |
Environmental epidemiology increasingly is being used as a foundation for environmental health policy. Since environmental epidemiologic studies have increased dramatically in number, approaches are needed to interpret them. Two approaches used in epidemiology are rules of evidence and meta‐analysis. Rules of evidence pertain to the consistency, strength, uniqueness, and medical basis of the relationship between disease and risk factors such as chemicals. Meta‐analysis is a systematic and rigorous approach to comparing studies and understanding their heterogeneity. Dioxins, benzene, and formaldehyde are three chemicals that are at the forefront of health policy debates. These chemicals illustrate some of the conditions under which researchers are drawn or are not drawn to approaches to compare studies. A meta‐analysis was not conducted for dioxins or benzene, but was conducted for formaldehyde. Rather than addressing study comparisons, epidemiologic studies of dioxins are focusing on expanding the number of health effects studied and obtaining greater specificity for exposures, whereas studies of benzene are focusing on effects at low dose exposures. In the case of formaldehyde, meta‐analysis has strengthened the evidence for some health effects beyond what individual studies could provide. Thus, whether rules of evidence and meta‐analysis approaches to synthesizing information are used can depend upon where the debates are focused
Consistency (knowledge bases · Environmental health · Meta-analysis · Pathology · Risk analysis (engineering · Air Quality and Health Impacts · Computer Science · Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure · Medicine · Smoking Behavior and Cessation · Epidemiology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |