American Journal of Epidemiology

Biddle, Lori E

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac167pmid: 36171684

Accepted manuscripts Accepted manuscripts are PDF versions of the author’s final manuscript, as accepted for publication by the journal but prior to copyediting or typesetting. They can be cited using the author(s), article title, journal title, year of online publication, and DOI. They will be replaced by the final typeset articles, which may therefore contain changes. The DOI will remain the same throughout. Article PDF first page preview Close This content is only available as a PDF. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected] This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model) © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected]

Nathanson, Neal

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac081pmid: 35552366

In this brief Commentary, Neal Nathanson recounts his memories of the metamorphosis of the American Journal of Hygiene into the American Journal of Epidemiology, and his subsequent service as the Editor-in-Chief from 1964 to 1979.

Szklo, Moyses

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac135pmid: 35896832

In this article, I present a brief summary of landmark events in the American Journal of Epidemiology, including its founding, the first few decades, the change in name, the increasing focus on nontransmissible disease, and selected key manuscripts. A list of developments that will likely result in new papers submitted to epidemiology journals are also described, and they include themes such as consequential epidemiology and the use of artificial intelligence methods in epidemiologic data analyses.

Klebanoff, Mark A

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab203pmid: 35146499

Throughout the second half of the 20th century, clinicians noted that although African-American neonates were more likely than White neonates to weigh less than 2,500 g at birth (low birth weight), among low–birth-weight infants African Americans were more likely than Whites to survive. However, when born at normal weight, African-American infants were substantially less likely to survive. The observation generated much physiological speculation, and several clever mathematical manipulations were devised to “uncross the mortality curves.” With the development and dissemination of directed acyclic graphs in the early 2000s, methodologists focusing on perinatal epidemiology showed graphically, in an early use of directed acyclic graphs, that birth weight was a “collider” and that controlling for birth weight, whether by regression, stratification, or restriction, introduced confounding of the race-mortality association by all unmeasured common causes of birth weight and mortality. These investigations showed that the crossing curves could be explained as an artifact of a conceptually flawed analysis. These results have applicability beyond perinatal epidemiology, including applicability to the “obesity paradox.”

McCullough, Lauren E; Byrd, Doratha A

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac071pmid: 35419586

In 1986, Willett and Stampfer (Am J Epidemiol. 1986;124(1):17–27) propelled the nutritional epidemiology field forward by publishing a commentary emphasizing the importance of analyzing diet in relation to total energy intake in epidemiologic analyses of diet and disease, detailing the value of accounting for body size, physical activity, and metabolic efficiency in diet-disease analyses via energy intake adjustment. Their publication has since been cited over 2,886 times and has inarguably advanced methodology for studying diet-disease associations, with most nutritional epidemiology studies standardly including some form of energy adjustment. However, there remains debate regarding the best scenarios and methods for energy adjustment. The goals of this commentary are to provide an updated review on factors that account for interindividual differences in energy intake, provide a balanced discussion regarding the considerations for or against adjustment for energy intake, and provide an updated examination of the commonly employed methods for the analysis of nutrient-disease associations. The principles of energy adjustment continue to be relevant nearly 25 years later, as it remains a critical method to account for potentially confounding interindividual variations in body size and physical activity.

Palmer, Julie R; Cozier, Yvette C; Rosenberg, Lynn

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac022pmid: 35136921

The American Journal of Epidemiology has been a platform for findings from the Black Women’s Health Study (BWHS) that are relevant to health disparities. Topics addressed have included methods of follow-up of a large cohort of Black women, disparities in health-care delivery, modifiable risk factors for health conditions that disproportionately affect Black women, associations with exposures that are highly prevalent in Black women, and methods for genetic research. BWHS papers have also highlighted the importance of considering social context, including perceived experiences of racism, in understanding health disparities. In the future, BWHS investigators will contribute to documentation of the role that structural racism plays in health disparities.

Ritz, Beate R

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac031pmid: 35166328

This commentary focuses on research that has long been at the core of environmental epidemiology: studies of the health effects of air pollution. It highlights publications in the American Journal of Epidemiology going back more than 50 years that have contributed to the debate about the validity of this research and its meaning for public policy. Technological advances have greatly expanded the toolbox of environmental epidemiologists in terms of measuring and analyzing complex exposures in large populations. Yet, discussions about biases in estimating air pollution health effects have always been and remain intense. Epidemiologists have brought new methodologies and concepts to this research, alleviating some but not all concerns. Here, the focus is on seminal epidemiologic work that established valid links between air pollution exposures and health outcomes and generated data for environmental policies and prevention. With this commentary, I hope to inspire epidemiologists to address many more of the burning environmental health questions—wildfires included—with a similar scientific doggedness. The rapidly changing conditions of our planet are challenging us to innovate and offer solutions, albeit perhaps a little bit faster this time around.

Foxman, Betsy; Mehta, Shruti

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac064pmid: 35362021

Technological developments in laboratory and epidemiologic methods, combined with increasing computing power, have synergistically increased our understanding of the epidemiology of infectious disease. Using historical examples from the first 100 years of the American Journal of Epidemiology, we illustrate how these developments provided the foundation for the rapid detection of the agent causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), from its transmission efficiency and modalities, risk factors, and natural history to the evaluation of new vaccines and treatments to control its spread and impact. Comparisons with timelines for elucidation of the epidemiology, natural history, and control of other infectious diseases, including viral hepatitis, humbly remind us of how much past discoveries have paved the way for more rapid discovery of and response to new pathogens. We close with some comments on a potential future role of the Journal in infectious disease epidemiology.

Borrell, Luisa N; Crawford, Natalie D

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac069pmid: 35380604

The perverseness of racial and ethnic inequities in the United States continues to implore the investigation of their causes. While there have been improvements in the health of the US population, these improvements have not been equally distributed. To commemorate the 100th anniversary of the American Journal of Epidemiology, in this commentary, we aim to highlight the Journal’s contributions to: 1) the definition and use of race and ethnicity in research, and 2) understanding racial and ethnic inequities, both empirically and methodologically, over the past decade. We commend the Journal for its contributions and for spearheading many of the challenges related to measuring and interpreting racial and ethnic data for the past 20 years. We identify 3 additional areas in which the Journal could make further impact to address racial and ethnic inequities: 1) devote a section in every issue of the Journal to scientific papers that make substantive epidemiologic or methodological contributions to racial and ethnic inequities in health; 2) update the Journal’s guidelines for authors to include justifying the use of race and ethnicity; and 3) diversify the field of epidemiology by bringing a new cadre of scholars from minoritized racial and ethnic groups who represent the most affected communities into the research process.

Berkman, Lisa F; Avendano, Mauricio; Courtin, Emilie

doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac142pmid: 35943205

In this commentary, invited for the 100th anniversary of the Journal, we discuss the addition of randomized experiments, along with natural experiments that emulate randomized trials using observational data, as designs in the social epidemiologist’s toolbox. These approaches transform the way we define and ask questions about social exposures. They compel us to ask questions about how well-defined interventions change a social exposure that might lead to changes in health. As such, experiments are of unique public health and policy significance. We argue that they are a powerful approach to advance our understanding of how well-defined changes in social exposures impact health, and how credible social policy reforms may be instrumental to address health inequalities. We focus on two research designs. The first is a “pure” randomized controlled trial (RCT) in which the investigator defines and randomly assigns the intervention. The second is a natural experiment, which exploits the fact that policies or interventions in the real world often involve an element of random assignment, emulating an RCT. To give the reader our bottom line: While acknowledging their limits, we continue to be very excited about the promise of RCTs and natural experiments to advance social epidemiology.