1. Radon Pilot Project Phase 2 Developing a National Database of Radon Test Data
Michele M. Monti, MS, MPH
Environmental Health Tracking Branch
NEHA Radon Data Webinar
September 29, 2016
National Center for Environmental Health
Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects

2. Overview Introduction Methods Results Discussion Background Objective
Pilot Testing
Results
Data Intentions
Data Validation
Discussion
Lessons Learned
Recommendations

3. Radon Background Natural breakdown of uranium in soil seeps into homes
Leading cause of lung cancer after smoking*
21,000 lung cancer deaths per year*
Radon found all over the U.S.*
Healthy People 2020
Federal Radon Action Plan *

4. Radon Background Radon testing devices Short Term Test Kit
Long Term Test Kits
Professional testing device
Electret
Alpha Track

5. Objective: Radon Pilot Phase 1
Conduct a pilot to standardize previously non-systemized data sources into a nationally consistent radon information resource.
Currently: No national standards
Is it feasible to build a nationally consistent radon test data repository?
Answer the question by conducting a pilot test.
Pilot is first step toward creating a new national database of radon test data.
Implement a pilot project with a small group to develop capability for receiving standardized radon test data
Possible future scale up after this “test run” works out the process
Through a pilot we can assess any data issues and formulate recommendations
 Is it feasible to standardize radon test data? Yes!
 Is the pilot scalable to a national level? Yes?
Future: National Map of Radon Test Results

6. Objective: Radon Pilot Phase 2
Create a national database of radon (in air) test data
Determine the feasibility of having radon data submitted directly by laboratories.
Engage additional tracking states and public health labs in the Phase 2 Pilot to meet objectives 1 and 2.

7. Methods

8. Pilot Phase 2 Review and build on past work Expand work group
Receive and validate data
Create data validation protocol
Create data dictionary/prepare schema
Re-examine data elements
Expand work group
Review and build on past work

9. Expanded Work Group Pilot Work Group – Stakeholders CDC EPA
National Environment Health Association (NEHA)
EPHTN Grantees – AK, CO, FL, KS, ME, MN, NJ, UT, WA
Association of Public Health
Laboratories (APHL)

10. Data Elements Started with 49 unique data elements
Created 6 additional data elements*
Data dictionary
Required (13):
State FIPS Code – in the header of the schema
Address Identifier*
Test Result Identifier
Test Start / Stop Date**
Test Start / Stop Time**
Test Report Date*
Data Source Name (e.g., AIRCHEK, ALPHA)
Measure Value
Measure Unit Name
Test Method Type Code (pre or post mitigation)
Building Purpose Code

11. Data Elements Optional Data Elements (13) including:
Data identifier (lab batch id)
Reason For Test
Zip Code
Latitude / Longitude
Building Type/ Foundation Type
Device Type
Mitigation information

12. Data Validation Fall data call – optional for Radon
Metadata – actual metadata control numbers (MCN) created for Phase 2
Key attributes about the data
Unique records identified by:
State FIPS code, Test Result Identifier, Radon Data Source Name
Automated data validation: DIVE Tool
Manual data validation
Data within expected parameters, CDC works with Battelle to create a validation protocol

13. Results

14. Data Intentions Alaska* Colorado Florida Kansas Minnesota* Utah
2009 – 2015 (7 yrs)
Alaska*
(5 yrs)
Colorado
1993 – (23 yrs)
Florida
(1 yr)
Kansas
2000 – (15 yrs)
Minnesota*
2014 – 2015 (2 yrs)
Utah
53 years of new or revised data
* new states submitting data in 2016

15. Discussion

16. Lessons Learned Data Elements
Preserving address-level data created an issue for labs
Work effort
IT requirements
Required data elements are appropriate but allowances made for states that could not meet all requirements
Pilot Phase 2 established standards for unique records that can be used to create indicators and measures for the national portal
Data dictionary, How-To Guide & new
schema prepared for Pilot Phase 2

17. Lessons Learned Data Transfer
Data transport through regular Tracking process was non-problematic
Manual download of data from EPA Exchange Network created challenges during Pilot Phase 1, revised schema created for Phase 2 put Exchange Network participants on hold

18. Lessons Learned Data Validation
The schema was revised to restrict for acceptable values
DIVE tool was used to improve data quality prior to submission
Changes in required data elements were made to ensure submission of unique data records
Additional data element: Address Identifier, was included to preserve ability to decipher test result locations

19. Lessons Learned Data Requirements
Pilot Phase 2 replaced the requirement for aggregate data (in Phase 1) with a request for all data
If multiple tests per home, this should be evident in the data submission by repeated Address Identifiers with unique Test Result Identifiers (i.e., multiple tests per address); allows for determination of range (min and max), mean, median, geometric mean, maximum per address
Availability of pre-mitigation or post-mitigation indicator was under-estimated; most states had this information and it was submitted.
Data limitations exist for creating some NCDM

20. Conclusion
Pilot did not successfully demonstrate transfer of radon data from laboratories.
Preservation of address-level data important for epidemiological purposes.
Effort involved in de-identifying address-level data and ensuring submission of unique data records not feasible if both state tracking grantee and labs submit radon data.
If labs can transfer data to state health department, duplicate test results can be minimized or eliminated.

21. Next Steps
Continue work with Radon Work Group to achieve consensus on optional indicators and measures for inclusion in the national portal of the Tracking Program.
Work with Tracking grantees that submit radon data to the Exchange Network to solve data transport issues.
Plan for Fall 2017 data call to enable additional states to share radon data for the national portal

22. Acknowledgments Environmental Health Tracking Branch
Radon Pilot Work Group – AK, CO, FL, KS, ME, MN, UT, WA
EPA – Peggy Bagnoli
APHL – Megan Latshaw
For more info:
Michele M. Monti
National Center for Environmental Health
Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects