Aggregating Disparate Epidemiological Evidence: Comparing Two Seminal EMF Reviews

Michael J. O'Carroll and Denis L. Henshaw

Risk Analysis, 2008, vol. 28, issue 1, 225-234

Abstract: Two seminal reviews (IARC, 2002; CDHS, 2002) of possible health effects from power‐frequency EMFs reached partly different conclusions from similar epidemiological evidence. These differences have an impact on precautionary policy. We examine the statistical aggregation of results from individual disparate studies. Without consistent exposure metrics, the advantage of meta‐analysis to estimate magnitude of effect is lost. However, counting positive and statistically significant results yields important information. This is not a substitute for meta‐analysis, but a fall‐back when meaningful meta‐analysis is not available. Representative results from 33 independent adult leukemia studies tabled by IARC yielded 23.5 positives (p≈ 0.01) and 9 significant‐positives (p

Date: 2008
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01009.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:1:p:225-234

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().