Skip to main content

Triangulation in Environmental Epidemiology for EPA Human Health Assessments Proceedings of a Workshop (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

6 Final Thoughts and the Future of Triangulation
Pages 32-36

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 32...
... Moreover, many participants concurred that the practice of ranking in study quality evaluation should not be used for future environmental health study evaluations, or synthesis. Next, planning committee member Laura Beane Freeman of the National Cancer Institute summarized the session on health authority approaches to evidence synthesis.
Read the entire page →
From page 33...
... Chartres noted that, among key takeaways from this session, rigorous systematic reviews address many of the issues that triangulation strives to address, also cited by Bero, Woodruff, and Taylor with parallels in earlier presentations by Nachman and Lunn. Assessments are currently being done by looking at different study designs and different populations, accounting for different potential confounders as well as considering non-differential exposure misclassification and by applying metaanalytic techniques.
Read the entire page →
From page 34...
... Faustman concurred, urging sufficient metadata to support such analysis, given the global emphasis to save data in a reusable manner. Planning committee member Chirag Patel from Harvard Medical School encouraged development of standards and tools to make the data provided by study authors more amenable to computational approaches and facilitate systematic reviews, which are resource intensive.
Read the entire page →
From page 35...
... " He identified pooled data sets and the required resources for such studies as "his central wish." He also urged shared observation of how the variation in study designs, assumptions and inclusion criteria can funnel into a single summary statistic that eventually makes it into systematic reviews -- and that, at a minimum, the assumption of using pooled versus not pooled data are tested. Faustman added that pooling data is a topic that may warrant further discussion, specifically regarding exposures across cohorts and internationally.
Read the entire page →
From page 36...
... Important considerations are the different types of data streams that can be integrated, including differing exposure information (e.g., traffic-based air pollution, radiation) and mechanistic data.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • systematic reviews
  • study designs
  • dickerson noted
  • mechanistic data
  • evidence streams

  • individual studies
  • negative control
  • key questions
  • planning committee
  • key sources

  • evidence integration
  • study quality
  • data streams
  • evidence synthesis
  • pooling data

  • study evaluations
  • individual study
  • pooled data
  • selection bias
  • control outcome

  • bias assessments
  • instrumental variable
  • measurement error
  • valid negative
  • faustman added

  • sufficient similarity
  • freeman reflected
  • risk assessments
  • valid instrumental
  • context provides


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.