Back

Accounting for Human Movement to Improve Exposure-Health Models

Tahir, H.; Smart, S.; Cai, S.; Ng, A.; Vande Hey, J.; Lucas, T. C.

2026-06-17 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.06.15.26355663 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background. Current exposure-health models rely on averaged, residential-based environmental exposures, failing to account for human movement. This aggregation can lead to exposure misclassification and biased exposure-response estimates, potentially distorting our understanding of the true health effects of environmental conditions. We developed exposure disaggregation regression models that explicitly account for human movement when linking environmental exposures to health outcomes. Methods. By weighting pixel-level exposures according to distance from home as a simple proxy for human movement, our model linked disaggregated environmental exposures to individual-level health outcomes. Weights were either fixed a priori or derived from a latent distance-decay power parameter learned from the data. We additionally evaluated model performance under a nonlinear exposure-response relationship. Model performance was assessed across multiple sample sizes (N = 1,114; 50,000; and 100,000). A simulation study examined parameter recovery using bias, empirical standard error (EmpSE), and credible interval coverage. As a case study, Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data from Albania were used to link acute respiratory infection (ARI) outcomes among children under five to pixel-level NDVI within a 3 km buffer around DHS cluster centroids, and the proposed models were applied to these data. Results. Across all models (fixed-weight, learned-weight, and restricted cubic spline models), parameter recovery improved with increasing sample size. At N = 1,114, estimates were biased and imprecise, with incorrect effect direction for exposure-response parameters (e.g., learned-weight {beta}1 bias = - 0.79; EmpSE = 2.61; coverage = 0.88). In contrast, the models accurately recovered parameters at larger sample sizes, including the latent distance-decay parameter (bias = - 0.02; EmpSE = 0.15; coverage = 0.95 at N = 100,000), demonstrating their ability to reliably learn movement-based exposure weights when sufficient data were available. Conclusion. Instead of relying on arbitrarily-sized buffers, this statistical framework provides a novel method for studying environmental exposure-health relationships whilst accounting for human movement. With sufficiently large sample sizes, it can accurately estimate the influence of disaggregated environmental exposures on individual-level health and help address exposure misclassification arising from residential-only metrics. This methodological framework remains scalable, interpretable, and adaptable to other exposures and outcomes, offering a foundation for future work that integrates richer mobility-informed exposure-health research.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.0%
2
Environment International
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
3
Environmental Health Perspectives
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.6%
4
Spatial and Spatio-temporal Epidemiology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
5
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.0%
7
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
8
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.7%
9
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
10
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.8%
11
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
12
Environmental Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
13
GeoHealth
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
14
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.5%
15
Environmental Pollution
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
16
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
17
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
18
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
19
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.8%
20
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 61%
0.8%
22
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
24
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
25
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%