Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28709428›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2017

A systematic comparison of statistical methods to detect interactions in exposome-health associations.

Jose Barrera-Gómez, Lydiane Agier, Lützen Portengen, Marc Chadeau-Hyam, Lise Giorgis-Allemand, Valérie Siroux, Oliver Robinson, Jelle Vlaanderen, Juan R González, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Relevance and challenges of exposome studies for environmental health research.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Chemical Safety and the Exposome.Emerging contaminants · 2023
    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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Jose Barrera-GómezISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain.
Lydiane AgierTeam of Environmental Epidemiology applied to Reproduction and Respiratory Health, Inserm and University Grenoble Alpes, U823 Joint Research Center, Grenoble, France.
Lützen PortengenInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Marc Chadeau-HyamDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, W2 1PG London, UK.
Lise Giorgis-AllemandTeam of Environmental Epidemiology applied to Reproduction and Respiratory Health, Inserm and University Grenoble Alpes, U823 Joint Research Center, Grenoble, France.
Valérie SirouxTeam of Environmental Epidemiology applied to Reproduction and Respiratory Health, Inserm and University Grenoble Alpes, U823 Joint Research Center, Grenoble, France.
Oliver RobinsonISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain.
Jelle VlaanderenInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Juan R GonzálezISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain.
Mark NieuwenhuijsenISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain.
Paolo VineisMRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Martine VrijheidISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain.
Roel VermeulenInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Rémy SlamaTeam of Environmental Epidemiology applied to Reproduction and Respiratory Health, Inserm and University Grenoble Alpes, U823 Joint Research Center, Grenoble, France.
Xavier BasagañaISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Dr. Aiguader, 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain. xavier.basagana@isglobal.org.ORCID 0000-0002-8457-1489
Universitat Pompeu Fabra · ESCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUtrecht University · NLMRC Centre for Environment and Health

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing interest in examining the simultaneous effects of multiple exposures and, more generally, the effects of mixtures of exposures, as part of the exposome concept (being defined as the totality of human environmental exposures from conception onwards). Uncovering such combined effects is challenging owing to the large number of exposures, several of them being highly correlated. We performed a simulation study in an exposome context to compare the performance of several statistical methods that have been proposed to detect statistical interactions.

methodsSimulations were based on an exposome including 237 exposures with a realistic correlation structure. We considered several statistical regression-based methods, including two-step Environment-Wide Association Study (EWAS

resultsGLINTERNET and DSA had better overall performance than the other methods, with GLINTERNET having better properties in terms of selecting the true predictors (sensitivity) and of predictive ability, while DSA had a lower number of false positives. In terms of ability to capture interaction terms, GLINTERNET and DSA had again the best performances, with the same trade-off between sensitivity and false discovery proportion. When GLINTERNET and DSA failed to select an exposure truly associated with the outcome, they tended to select a highly correlated one. When interactions were not present in the data, using variable selection methods that allowed for interactions had only slight costs in performance compared to methods that only searched for main effects.

conclusionsGLINTERNET and DSA provided better performance in detecting two-way interactions, compared to other existing methods.

Indexed as

Environmental ExposureModels, StatisticalEnvironmental HealthEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsHumansEnvironmental PollutantsExposomeInteractionsVariable selection

Identifiers

PMID28709428
PMCPMC5513197
OpenAlexW2735609371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.