Comparison of Trihalomethane exposure assessment metrics in epidemiologic analyses of reproductive and developmental outcomes

Background Researchers have developed exposure assessment metrics for disinfection by-products (DBPs) utilizing drinking water monitoring data and accounting for spatial and temporal variability, water consumption, and showering and bathing time with an expectation of decreasing exposure misclassification compared to the use of measured concentrations at public water supply (PWS) monitoring locations alone. Objective We used exposure data collected for a previous study of DBPs to evaluate how different sources of information impact trihalomethane (THM) exposure estimates. Methods We compared gestational exposure estimates to THMs based on water utility monitoring data alone, statistical imputation of daily concentrations to incorporate temporal variability, and personal water consumption and use (bathing and showering). We used Spearman correlation coefficients and ranked kappa statistics to compare exposure classifications. Results Exposure estimates based on measured or imputed daily THM concentrations, self-reported consumption, or bathing and showering differed substantially from estimates based solely on concentrations from PWS quarterly monitoring reports. Ranked exposure classifications, high to low quartiles or deciles, were generally consistent across each exposure metric (i.e., a subject with “high” exposure based on measured or imputed THM concentrations generally remained in the “high” category across exposure metrics.) The measured concentrations and imputed daily (i.e., spline regression) concentrations were highly correlated ( r = 0.98). The weighted kappa statistics comparing exposure estimates using different exposure metrics ranged from 0.27 to 0.89, with the highest values for the ingestion + bathing/showering metrics compared to metrics for bathing/showering only (0.76 and 0.89). Bathing and showering contributed the most to “total” THM exposure estimates. Impact Statement We compare exposure metrics capturing temporal variability and multiple estimates of personal THM exposure with THM concentrations from PWS monitoring data. Our results show exposure estimates based on imputed daily concentrations accounting for temporal variability were very similar to the measured THM concentrations. We observed low agreement between imputed daily concentrations and ingestion-based estimates. Considering additional routes of exposure (e.g., inhalation and dermal) slightly increased agreement with the measured PWS exposure estimate in this population. Overall, the comparison of exposure assessment metrics allows researchers to understand the added value of additional data collection for future epidemiologic analyses of DBPs.