Table 5.
Quality criteria for the evaluation of design and data analysis in epidemiologic studies of arsenic and albuminuria and proteinuria outcomes
| Criteria | Hong et al. | Nordberg Hong et al. | Chen et al. | Kong et al. | Zheng et al. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arsenic exposure assessed at individual level | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Arsenic exposure assessed using a biomarker | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Internal comparison within study participants | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| Authors controlled for relevant confounding factors (in addition to age, sex, BMI) | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Response rate at least 70 % | NR | NR | Yes | No | No |
| Same exclusion criteria applied to all participants | NR | NR | Yes | NR | Yes |
| Standardized definition of kidney disease/eGFR (if applicable) | No | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Interviewer was blinded with respect to case or exposure status | NR | NR | NR | NR | Yes |
| Data collected in a similar manner for all participants | NR | NR | Yes | NR | Yes |
| Noncases would have been cases if they had developed kidney disease (CC only) | - | - | - | Yes | - |
| Authors controlled for healthy worker survivor effect (Occupational only) | NR | - | - | - | - |
| Same time period over which cases/controls and exposed/unexposed interviewed | - | - | - | NR | Yes |
| Loss to follow-up independent of exposure | - | - | NR | - | - |