Author:
Tsuda Toshihide,Miyano Yumiko,Yamamoto Eiji
Abstract
AbstractIt is well known that science can be misused to hinder the resolution (i.e., the elimination and/or control) of a health problem. To recognize distorted and misapplied epidemiological science, a 33-item “Toolkit for detecting misused epidemiological methods” (hereinafter, the Toolkit) was published in 2021. Applying the Toolkit, we critically evaluated a review paper entitled, “Lessons learned from Chernobyl and Fukushima on thyroid cancer screening and recommendations in the case of a future nuclear accident” in Environment International in 2021, published by the SHAMISEN (Nuclear Emergency Situations - Improvement of Medical and Health Surveillance) international expert consortium. The article highlighted the claim that overdiagnosis of childhood thyroid cancers greatly increased the number of cases detected in ultrasound thyroid screening following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident. However, the reasons cited in the SHAMISEN review paper for overdiagnosis in mass screening lacked important information about the high incidence of thyroid cancers after the accident. The SHAMISEN review paper ignored published studies of screening results in unexposed areas, and included an invalid comparison of screenings among children with screenings among adults. The review omitted the actual state of screening in Fukushima after the nuclear accident, in which only nodules > 5 mm in diameter were examined. The growth rate of thyroid cancers was not slow, as emphasized in the SHAMISEN review paper; evidence shows that cancers detected in second-round screening grew to more than 5 mm in diameter over a 2-year period. The SHAMISEN consortium used an unfounded overdiagnosis hypothesis and misguided evidence to refute that the excess incidence of thyroid cancer was attributable to the nuclear accident, despite the findings of ongoing ultrasound screening for thyroid cancer in Fukushima and around Chernobyl. By our evaluation, the SHAMISEN review paper includes 20 of the 33 items in the Toolkit that demonstrate the misuse of epidemiology. The International Agency for Research on Cancer meeting in 2017 and its publication cited in the SHAMISEN review paper includes 12 of the 33 items in the Toolkit. Finally, we recommend a few enhancements to the Toolkit to increase its utility.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference118 articles.
1. Etzel RA, Grandjean P, Ozonoff DM. Environmental epidemiology in a crossfire. Environ Health. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00776-1 Accessed 20 June 2022.
2. Michaels D. Doubt is their product: how industry’s assault on science threatens your health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
3. Soskolne CL, Caldwell JC, London L, Bero L, Gochfeld M, Cranor CF, et al. International Network for Epidemiology in Policy (INEP) Position Statement Series: Conflict-of-Interest and Disclosure in Epidemiology. 2020; https://epidemiologyinpolicy.org/coi-d-position-statement. Accessed 20 June 2022.
4. Soskolne CL, Kramer S, Ramos-Bonilla JP, Mandrioli D, Sass J, Gochfeld M, et al. Toolkit for detecting misused epidemiological methods. Environ Health. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00771-6 Accessed 20 June 2022.
5. Clero E, Ostroumova E, Demoury C, Grosche B, Kesminiene A, Liutsko L, et al. Lessons learned from Chernobyl and Fukushima on thyroid cancer screening and recommendations in case of a future nuclear accident. Environ Int. 2021;146:106230 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412020321851?via%3Dihub Accessed 25 June 2022.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献