Re: Another (partial) literature review (radon)

["Bjorn Cedervall" <bcradsafers@HOTMAIL.COM>]

Thank you! A better way to stratify the data may be to randomize the 

intervals and use some average to get away from this kind of bias. The same 

problem seems to be true for some power line/leukemia studies.



Bjorn Cedervall    bcradsafers@hotmail.com

------------------------------------------

>The radon action levels in most of Europe is 200 Bq/m^3 for new 

>construction and 400 Bq/m^3 for old houses. The authors stratified the data 

>for (values in Bq/m^3) <50, 50-100, 101-200, 201-400, >400. But their data

analysis used grouping of (values in Bq/m^3): <50, 50-80, 80-140, and >140, 

which coincides with the U.S. EPA levels. I found this change curious.

The authors report a RR of 1.55 for >140 Bq/m^3.



The European classification is still positive, but the number of cases is 

low enough to change the results significantly with a single addition or 

deletion of a case in any group above 200 Bq/m^3.

RR (measured results) for 101-200: 1.15, 201-400: 1.15, >400: 1.20





_________________________________________________________________

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/