Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
3121908
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
Study sensitivity: Evaluating the ability to detect effects in systematic reviews of chemical exposures
Author(s)
Cooper, GS; Lunn, RM; Ågerstrand, M; Glenn, BS; Kraft, AD; Luke, AM; Ratcliffe, JM
Year
2016
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Environment International
ISSN:
0160-4120
EISSN:
1873-6750
Volume
92-93
Page Numbers
605-610
Language
English
PMID
27156196
DOI
10.1016/j.envint.2016.03.017
Web of Science Id
WOS:000378951700067
Abstract
A critical step in systematic reviews of potential health hazards is the structured evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the included studies; risk of bias is a term often used to represent this process, specifically with respect to the evaluation of systematic errors that can lead to inaccurate (biased) results (i.e. focusing on internal validity). Systematic review methods developed in the clinical medicine arena have been adapted for use in evaluating environmental health hazards; this expansion raises questions about the scope of risk of bias tools and the extent to which they capture the elements that can affect the interpretation of results from environmental and occupational epidemiology studies and in vivo animal toxicology studies, (the studies typically available for assessment of risk of chemicals). One such element, described here as “sensitivity”, is a measure of the ability of a study to detect a true effect or hazard. This concept is similar to the concept of the sensitivity of an assay; an insensitive study may fail to show a difference that truly exists, leading to a false conclusion of no effect. Factors relating to study sensitivity should be evaluated in a systematic manner with the same rigor as the evaluation of other elements within a risk of bias framework. We discuss the importance of this component for the interpretation of individual studies, examine approaches proposed or in use to address it, and describe how it relates to other evaluation components. The evaluation domains contained within a risk of bias tool can include, or can be modified to include, some features relating to study sensitivity; the explicit inclusion of these sensitivity criteria with the same rigor and at the same stage of study evaluation as other bias-related criteria can improve the evaluation process. In some cases, these and other features may be better addressed through a separate sensitivity domain. The combined evaluation of risk of bias and sensitivity can be used to identify the most informative studies, to evaluate the confidence of the findings from individual studies and to identify those study elements that may help to explain heterogeneity across the body of literature.
Keywords
Systematic review; Validity; Bias; Environmental health; Chemical hazard assessment; Study sensitivity
Tags
IRIS
•
Arsenic (Inorganic)
Cited in Volume 1
•
Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD)
•
Phthalates – Targeted Search for Epidemiological Studies
NAAQS
•
ISA - Lead (2024 Final Project Page)
Included in External Review Draft
Appendix 3 (Nervous System Effects)
Integrated Synthesis
Included in Final Draft
Appendix 3 (Nervous System Effects)
Integrated Synthesis
OPPT REs
•
OPPT_Cyclic Aliphatic Bromine Cluster (HBCD)_C. Engineering
Data screening total
Screening: Excluded
•
OPPT_Cyclic Aliphatic Bromine Cluster (HBCD)_D. Exposure
Total – title/abstract screening
Off topic
•
OPPT_Cyclic Aliphatic Bromine Cluster (HBCD)_E. Fate
Total – title/abstract screening
Off topic
•
OPPT_Cyclic Aliphatic Bromine Cluster (HBCD)_F. Human Health
Total – title/abstract screening
Off topic
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity