Mortality of Veteran Participants in the CROSSROADS Nuclear Test (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix E: Verification of Completeness and Accuracy of the participant Roster
Appendix E: Verification of Completeness and Accuracy of the participant Roster
Pages 114-127
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 114... ...
contained classification errors: approximately 15,000 nonparticipants were included as participants, while 28,000 actual participants were not included in the roster. These classification errors were discovered by NTPR in the process of updating its participant database after consolidating the individual service database into a single database in 1987.
|
From page 115... ...
METHODOLOGY Comparison to Previous Versions of the Participant Roster By comparing the current participant data set to the 1986 version and seeking verification of participation for sampled individuals, we were able to estimate a crude false positive rate and better understand changes that have occurred in the participant cohort over time. We drew a sample of 50 participants from each ofthe following categories: Participants who were found in both the 1986 participant list and in the current, 1994, participant list ( |
From page 116... ...
We have accepted the NAAV database as it was presented to us, editing only as necessary to ensure consistency of format in fields such as data of birth and to eliminate obvious duplicate records. The NAAV benchmark represents a highly selective population, since it is based upon health surveys that were intended to determine potentially radiogenic mortality and morbidity among the atomic veterans.
|
From page 117... ...
· "Probable participants" included those who provided sufficient documentation (orders, "participation cards," narrative that indicated participation in the test, etc.~. O "Not-CROSSROADS" included individuals who mentioned the CROSSROADS study in their correspondence, but provided documentation of participation that definitely placed them at a different time and place-most often in another atomic test in the Pacific such as CASTLE (1954~.
|
From page 118... ...
Participants Found Only in the Current Data Set New-Only's Among the sample of 50 new-only participants whose names were found in the present study, but could not be found in the 1986 data, 45 were confimned as new participants. For one, documentation found during the validation process indicated that the individual left active duty with the Navy in November 1945 and would not have been at CROSSROADS.
|
From page 119... ...
NTPR estimated that there should have been only 100 participants eliminated from the study between 1986 and 1994. Hence, NTPR was justifiably concemed that we found 667 individuals in the old data set who could not be matched, with certainty, to the current one.
|
From page 120... ...
Some veterans provided detailed documentation of their participation, including both official government documents and their own narrative description of events they witnessed. Others provided only their name and a statement that they were present at CROSSROADS.
|
From page 121... ...
Follow-Up on Putative Participants of Uncertain Status Of the 107:individuals we sent to DNA for individual verification of status, l was found to be a duplicate and 3 were found on both the NAAV and write-in lists. Of the 103 unique records, DNA provided participation information summarized in Table E-3.
|
From page 122... ...
He therefore qualifies as a participant. Newly identified Navy participant assigned to Naval Air Station, Kwajalein.
|
From page 123... ...
. Matched to participant file Newly identified CROSSROADS participants Civilians in CROSSROADS but not in the study Post-CROSSROADS participant On MFUA study roster but found ineligible Not in CROSSROADSa Unknownb Total Count 10 2 57 15 _ 89 .
|
From page 124... ...
respectively. The remaining 0.2 percent is accounted for by erroneous deletions and by individuals for whom insufficient information exists to make a definitive determination of participant status.
|
From page 125... ...
by comparing the NTPR participant list to individuals on the write-in list compiled from publication advertisements and to those on the NAAV Medical Survey list. Because many of the write-in veterans provided detailed data in response to our solicitation, the process of matching them to the participant roster may have been somewhat more reliable than it was for the NAAV Medical Survey.
|
From page 126... ...
The estimate from the NAAV Medical Survey list (counting all nonmatches as missing participants) suggested a 7 percent missing participant rate.
|
From page 127... ...
In summary, the additional follow-up by DNA-NTPR suggests that the participant capture rate may be toward the high end of the 93-99 percent range. CONCLUSION We estimate that fewer than 2 - percent of the current participants included in the NTPR data set may not actually be CROSSROADS participants (i.e., they are false positives)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.