Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23514318›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of public health2013

Causal inference considerations for endocrine disruptor research in children's health.

Stephanie M Engel, Mary S Wolff

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Stephanie M EngelDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, USA. Stephanie.Engel@unc.edu
Mary S Wolff

Funding

Center for Environment and Mammary Gland DevelopmentU01ES012771 · NIEHS · FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER · PI RUSSO, JOSE · 2003 to 2009
$11.1M
Environmental and Genetic Determinants of PubertyU01ES019454 · NIEHS · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI WOLFF, MARY S · 2010 to 2016
$5.8M
NIEHS NIH HHS U01 ES012771NIEHS NIH HHS U01 ES019454NIEHS NIH HHS U01ES019454
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Substantial population exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals, combined with available biomarkers and public concern, has resulted in an explosion of human health effects research. At the same time, remarkable shifts in the regulations governing the composition of some consumer products that contain endocrine disruptors (EDs) has occurred. However, important questions remain as to the weight of evidence linking EDs to human health end points. In this review, we critically examine the literature linking ED exposures to child neurodevelopment, focusing in particular on two model exposures to demonstrate issues related to bioaccumulative [e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)] and rapidly metabolized (e.g., phthalates) compounds, respectively. Issues of study design, confounding, and exposure measurement are considered. Given widespread exposure to these compounds, the potential public health consequences of even small effects on human health are substantial. Therefore, advancing our understanding of any impact calls for careful attention to the principles of causal inference.

Indexed as

CausalityChild WelfareBiomedical ResearchChildChild DevelopmentEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental ExposureHumansEndocrine Disruptors

Identifiers

PMID23514318
PMCPMC4041588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.