AJCN Tufts Nutrition Symposium, Boston & Online Sept 2009
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, J. R
Right arrow Articles by Chen, Z.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, J. R
Right arrow Articles by Chen, Z.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, J. R
Right arrow Articles by Chen, Z.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 69, No. 6, 1351S-1356S, June 1999
© 1999 American Society for Clinical Nutrition


Supplements

Diet and health risk: risk patterns and disease-specific associations 1 ,2

James R Marshall and Zhao Chen

Whether such epidemiologic descriptors as relative risk, dose response, and threshold points convey meaningful information is often the subject of debate. Thus, using these descriptors to juxtapose the many disease-specific effects of nutritional exposures becomes problematic. In this article it is argued that epidemiologic patterns of disease-exposure associations must be interpreted in light of the profound imprecision of exposure assessment that characterizes nutritional epidemiology. In general, this imprecision leads to substantial attenuation of disease-exposure associations, such that relative risk, dose response, and the extent to which there are thresholds in disease-exposure associations can be seriously underestimated. Linking disease-specific relative risks, especially when derived from different studies with different methods of assessing exposure, is made increasingly difficult. The most critical tasks for lessening bias in these epidemiologic descriptors are first, to lessen imprecision in measuring exposures, and second, to adjust association estimates for attenuation due to measurement imprecision.

Key Words: Epidemiology • relative risk • attributable risk • measurement error • reliability • validity • disease • exposure




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
T. Byers, B. Lyle, and W. Participants
Summary statement
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, June 1, 1999; 69 (6): 1365S - 1367S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Nutrition