ArticlePloS one2018
Early-life environmental exposures and childhood growth: A comparison of statistical methods.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Environmental exposures and adverse pregnancy outcomes in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Environmental Phenols and Growth in Infancy: The Infant Feeding and Early Development Study.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity in childhood body mass trajectories in relation to prenatal phthalate exposure.Environmental research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a growing literature that suggests environmental exposure during key developmental periods could have harmful impacts on growth and development of humans. Understanding and estimating the relationship between early-life exposure and human growth is vital to studying the adverse health impacts of environmental exposure. We compare two statistical tools, mixed-effects models with interaction terms and growth mixture models, used to measure the association between exposure and change over time within the context of non-linear growth and non-monotonic relationships between exposure and growth. We illustrate their strengths and weaknesses through a real data example and simulation study. The data example, which focuses on the relationship between phthalates and the body mass index growth of children, indicates that the conclusions from the two models can differ. The simulation study provides a broader understanding of the robustness of these models in detecting the relationships between any exposure and growth that could be observed. Data-driven growth mixture models are more robust to non-monotonic growth and stochastic relationships but at the expense of interpretability. We offer concrete modeling strategies to estimate complex relationships with growth patterns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.