EPIDEMIOLOGY AND HUMAN INTERACTIONS: EMERGING METAPHORS, MODELS, AND METHODS

to be presented by James S. Koopman MD MPH of the University of Michigan to the Colombian Association of Epidemiology on October 8, 1997.

The focus and assumptions of current epidemiologic methods:

The focus of epidemiology on populations is said to distinguish it from individual oriented medical care. Most epidemiological methods, however, are designed to assess the effects of risk factors in individuals, not populations. In its search for contol causes of disease, epidemiology uses methods which fix its view on the individual and causes it to ignore the population. The uses to which standard epidemiological parameters are put assume that causes of disease act ultimately within or upon individuals. This holds for risk differences, odds ratios, regression coefficients, and all other measures of association between exposure and disease. Epidemiologic methods estimating these parameters assume that populations are nothing more than collections of individuals and that patterns of disease are not affected by the nature or arrangement of interactions between individuals. That assumption is so deeply ingrained that many epidemiologists are unaware that their analyses depend upon it. When that assumption does not hold, the theoretical basis for standard epidemiological methods crumbles.

Why pursue alternative methods?

Despite the theoretical weakness of of individual based risk factor assessment, it continues to prove effective in discovering controllable causes of disease. For that reason, some epidemiologists argue that inconsistencies in the theoretical base of standard risk factor assessment is no reason to abandon it for more theoretically based methods whose foundations depend upon skills and traditions with which most epidemiologists are unfamiliar. As more controversy develops about specific conclusions of traditional methods, however, the need for methods based on more comprehensive theory becomes evident. When the benefit of identifying a risk factor like smoking or unprotected anal sex is clear, there is no reason to be concerned about the theoretical underpinnings for the identification. When great costs are associated with taking either a positive or a negative stand on a risk factor whose action is supported by some studies and not supported by others, a situation which is ever more frequent, the need for more comprehensive theoretical underpinnings becomes more evident.

The resolution of controversies generated by traditional methods is not, however, the major reason why more theoretically sound methods are needed. The biggest need is to expand the horizons of epidemiological inquiry. Epidemiology needs methods to get it beyond the reductionist assumption that a population can be understood by characterizing its individuals. New methods are needed to discover and evaluate the controllable causes of disease that lie precisely in the areas which traditional epidemiological methods must ignore to preserve their validity - namely the nature and arrangement of interactions between individuals. To illuminate the path for these new developments, Mervyn Susser suggests a metaphor of multilevel system interactions which he calls "Chinese Boxes". Various social epidemiologists have suggested complementary metaphors. I will discuss here the specifics of four approaches toward these new horizons: 1) ecological studies, 2) discrete individual systems analysis, 3) compartmental systems analysis, and 4) social network analysis.

"Ecological Studies"

A new view of "ecological" studies can expand the horizons of epidemiolgy. Instead of viewing ecological studies as fallacy ridden compromises to be used for the detection of individual risk factor effects, they can be viewed as approaches to capturing effects that are missed by individual level analyses. These include the arrangement of interactions between individuals in the population. This approach is consistent with the observational inference traditions in epidemiology. Like traditional epidemiology methods, it does not require the elaboration of complex theories about how things works. It mainly requires the comparison of diverse populations in which the interactions between individuals are assessed. This approach is illustrated by a study of malnutrition in Cali, Colombia which demonstrated that conformation of neighborhoods is a much stronger determinant of malnutrion than food availability at the family level. It is also illustrated by a study in Chicago, USA where the nature of interactions between individuals within neighborhoods was found to be a stronger determinant of the level of violence than the average social status, education, or wealth of individuals in the neighborhoods.

"Developing Theory about How Human Interactions Affect Population Patterns of Disease"

Just like observations on individuals, the interpretation of observations on ecological units will require a strong theoretical base regarding how risk factors, human interactions, and population processes generate patterns of disease in populations. Such theory can and should be developed independently of observational methods so that it drives the development of such methods rather than being constrained by methods. If this is to happen, epidemiology needs to develop new traditions of theory development. I propose that "systems analysis" and "social network analysis" provide valuable tools for that development. Most epidemiologists are unfamiliar with these tools and their mathematical and theoretical underpinnings. New software and new texts, however, are beginning to make these more accessible to epidemiologists.

"Discrete Systems Analysis"

Systems analysis in epidemiology can use discrete individual simulation approaches as well as continuous population segment approaches such as compartmental models. These two approaches have complementary abilities and deficiencies. Tools for the discrete individual approach have been developed by the "National Micropopulation Simulation Resource" at the University of Minnesota and are available on the web at http://www.nmsr.labmed.umn.edu/nmsr/NMSR.html. We are using these tools extensively in our work but unfortunately it takes an experienced C++ programmer to apply them. The advantage of these tools is that they can address many things which compartmental models cannot and that they can interdigitate with social network analysis approaches. The disadvantage is that the basis for using these tools to advance fundamental theory is not well developed outside of operations engineering and the publications in the operations engineering literature are quite often not comprehensible to epidemiologists. We are using these tools to make more evident where the deficiencies of risk factor analyses lie and to explore approaches to overcome those deficiencies. For example we have shown that the erroneous assumption of no interaction effects in standard epidemiological analysis is very likely causing a serious misperception of the effects of oral sex on HIV infection levels. We have constructed discrete individual simulations where 30% of all HIV transmission occurs during oral sex but where the standard methods show oral sex to have no risk at all or to be protective. We have also used discrete individual simulations to explore designs for HIV vaccine trials which are based on couples or populations rather than individuals. The system dynamics of HIV infection suggests that vaccine induced immune responses will not protect individuals from infection but they will dramatically reduce the contagiousness of individuals during the early stages of HIV infection. Our analysis suggests that such effects could quite readily bring HIV transmission to a halt. Based on discrete individual simulations we have developed a vaccine trial design which can efficiently detect these effects which would be completely missed by a standard trial.

Compartmental Systems Analysis:

The compartmental model approach to systems analysis is likely to be more accessible to epidemiologists. This approach has been a cornerstone for theory development in infectious disease which pursues the patterns of interactions between individuals which determine levels of infection in populations. A major text illustrating some basic advances in this area is "Infectious Diseases of Humans" by Roy Anderson and Robert May. This approach should be just as valuable to address social determinants of chronic diseases and I think it will be essential for the development of an epidemiology of violence. User friendly software for this approach has been developed which mainly requires pointing and clicking and filling in a few formulas. I have developed a course and am writing a text on how to pursue this approach. The text is being made available on the web at http://www.sph.umich.edu/~jkoopman/802Web/Course.htm. It outlines how to use Stella to construct compartmental models that serve to help develop population level theory in epidemiology. Stella is available from High Performance Systems at http://www.hps-inc.com/. We have recently used this approach to demonstrate that HIV treatment programs are likely to have significant effects upon HIV transmission. Our analysis shows, however, that those effects will depend upon how individuals are interacting and not just on the risk factors and responses to treatment of individuals or the level of infection in the population.

Social Network Analysis:

Social Network Analysis also provides a cornerstone for the pursuit of new epidemiological theory and methods. An excelent introduction to this discipline is provided by the text "Social Network Analysis" written by Stanley Wasserman and Katherine Faust. This approache is particularly valuable because it provides a vision of how epidemiological data sets should be organized to address interactions between individuals rather than assumming them away as the standard data structures do. The individual risk factor approaches of epidemiology organize data on individuals in different rows with data on variables relevant to those individuals arranged in columns. The arrangement of individuals in the rows is assummed not to affect the analytic results. That means that how different classes of individuals relate to each other is assummed not to affect the analysis. Social network analysis, in contrast, completely focuses on the interactions between individuals. Each individual or class of individuals is represented in both the rows and columns of a social network analysis data structure. Individual level variables must be specified as to how they are affected by contact with different types of individuals. While the development of analytic tools for epidemiology based upon such data structures is in its infancy, the vision provided by the data structure provides a guiding light for the development of new theory and methods.