Testing the Dose–Response Specification in Epidemiology: Public Health and Policy Consequences for Lead

Statistical evaluation of the dose–response function in lead epidemiology is rarely attempted. Economic evaluation of health benefits of lead reduction usually assumes a linear dose–response function, regardless of the outcome measure used. We reanalyzed a previously published study, an international pooled data set combining data from seven prospective lead studies examining contemporaneous blood lead effect on IQ (intelligence quotient) of 7-year-old children (n = 1,333). We constructed alternative linear multiple regression models with linear blood lead terms (linear–linear dose response) and natural-log–transformed blood lead terms (log-linear dose response). We tested the two lead specifications for nonlinearity in the models, compared the two lead specifications for significantly better fit to the data, and examined the effects of possible residual confounding on the functional form of the dose–response relationship. We found that a log-linear lead–IQ relationship was a significantly better fit than was a linear–linear relationship for IQ (p = 0.009), with little evidence of residual confounding of included model variables. We substituted the log-linear lead–IQ effect in a previously published health benefits model and found that the economic savings due to U.S. population lead decrease between 1976 and 1999 (from 17.1 μg/dL to 2.0 μg/dL) was 2.2 times ($319 billion) that calculated using a linear–linear dose–response function ($149 billion). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention action limit of 10 μg/dL for children fails to protect against most damage and economic cost attributable to lead exposure.