TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating meteorological data from weather stations, and from satellites and global models for a multi-site epidemiological study
AU - The MAL-ED Network
AU - Colston, Josh M.
AU - Ahmed, Tahmeed
AU - Mahopo, Cloupas
AU - Kang, Gagandeep
AU - Kosek, Margaret
AU - de Sousa Junior, Francisco
AU - Shrestha, Prakash Sunder
AU - Svensen, Erling
AU - Turab, Ali
AU - Zaitchik, Benjamin
N1 - Funding Information:
The Etiology, Risk Factors, and Interactions of Enteric Infections and Malnutrition and the Consequences for Child Health and Development Project (MAL-ED) is carried out as a collaborative project supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ( 47075 ), the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health , and the National Institutes of Health, Fogarty International Center (NCT02441426). Additional support for MAL-ED was obtained from the Sherrilyn and Ken Fisher Center for Environmental Infectious Diseases of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. The research presented in this article was supported by NASA's Group on Earth Observations Work Programme ( 16-GEO16-0047 ). The funders played no role in the design and implementation of the study or the analysis and interpretation of the data.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Authors
PY - 2018/8
Y1 - 2018/8
N2 - Background: Longitudinal and time series analyses are needed to characterize the associations between hydrometeorological parameters and health outcomes. Earth Observation (EO) climate data products derived from satellites and global model-based reanalysis have the potential to be used as surrogates in situations and locations where weather-station based observations are inadequate or incomplete. However, these products often lack direct evaluation at specific sites of epidemiological interest. Methods: Standard evaluation metrics of correlation, agreement, bias and error were applied to a set of ten hydrometeorological variables extracted from two quasi-global, commonly used climate data products – the Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) and Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Stations (CHIRPS) - to evaluate their performance relative to weather-station derived estimates at the specific geographic locations of the eight sites in a multi-site cohort study. These metrics were calculated for both daily estimates and 7-day averages and for a rotavirus-peak-season subset. Then the variables from the two sources were each used as predictors in longitudinal regression models to test their association with rotavirus infection in the cohort after adjusting for covariates. Results: The availability and completeness of station-based validation data varied depending on the variable and study site. The performance of the two gridded climate models varied considerably within the same location and for the same variable across locations, according to different evaluation criteria and for the peak-season compared to the full dataset in ways that showed no obvious pattern. They also differed in the statistical significance of their association with the rotavirus outcome. For some variables, the station-based records showed a strong association while the EO-derived estimates showed none, while for others, the opposite was true. Conclusion: Researchers wishing to utilize publicly available climate data – whether EO-derived or station based - are advised to recognize their specific limitations both in the analysis and the interpretation of the results. Epidemiologists engaged in prospective research into environmentally driven diseases should install their own weather monitoring stations at their study sites whenever possible, in order to circumvent the constraints of choosing between distant or incomplete station data or unverified EO estimates.
AB - Background: Longitudinal and time series analyses are needed to characterize the associations between hydrometeorological parameters and health outcomes. Earth Observation (EO) climate data products derived from satellites and global model-based reanalysis have the potential to be used as surrogates in situations and locations where weather-station based observations are inadequate or incomplete. However, these products often lack direct evaluation at specific sites of epidemiological interest. Methods: Standard evaluation metrics of correlation, agreement, bias and error were applied to a set of ten hydrometeorological variables extracted from two quasi-global, commonly used climate data products – the Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) and Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Stations (CHIRPS) - to evaluate their performance relative to weather-station derived estimates at the specific geographic locations of the eight sites in a multi-site cohort study. These metrics were calculated for both daily estimates and 7-day averages and for a rotavirus-peak-season subset. Then the variables from the two sources were each used as predictors in longitudinal regression models to test their association with rotavirus infection in the cohort after adjusting for covariates. Results: The availability and completeness of station-based validation data varied depending on the variable and study site. The performance of the two gridded climate models varied considerably within the same location and for the same variable across locations, according to different evaluation criteria and for the peak-season compared to the full dataset in ways that showed no obvious pattern. They also differed in the statistical significance of their association with the rotavirus outcome. For some variables, the station-based records showed a strong association while the EO-derived estimates showed none, while for others, the opposite was true. Conclusion: Researchers wishing to utilize publicly available climate data – whether EO-derived or station based - are advised to recognize their specific limitations both in the analysis and the interpretation of the results. Epidemiologists engaged in prospective research into environmentally driven diseases should install their own weather monitoring stations at their study sites whenever possible, in order to circumvent the constraints of choosing between distant or incomplete station data or unverified EO estimates.
KW - Climate
KW - Earth Observation data
KW - Environmental epidemiology
KW - Meteorological data
KW - Rotavirus
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045768516&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045768516&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.envres.2018.02.027
DO - 10.1016/j.envres.2018.02.027
M3 - Article
C2 - 29684739
AN - SCOPUS:85045768516
SN - 0013-9351
VL - 165
SP - 91
EP - 109
JO - Environmental research
JF - Environmental research
ER -