Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30633715›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of public health2019

Causal Modeling in Environmental Health.

Marie-Abèle Bind

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Prenatal exposure to persistent organic pollutants and childhood obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human studies.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Wildfire smoke PMScience advances · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Methods for Estimating the Exposure-Response Curve to Inform the New Safety Standards for Fine Particulate Matter.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

1 author.

Marie-Abèle BindDepartment of Statistics, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA; email: ma.bind@mail.harvard.edu.

Funding

Transporting established insights from classical experimental design to address causal questions in environmental epidemiology including the understanding of biological mediating mechanismsDP5OD021412 · OD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BIND, MARIE-ABELE CATHERINE · 2016 to 2020
$2.1M
NIH HHS DP5 OD021412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of environmental health has been dominated by modeling associations, especially by regressing an observed outcome on a linear or nonlinear function of observed covariates. Readers interested in advances in policies for improving environmental health are, however, expecting to be informed about health effects resulting from, or more explicitly caused by, environmental exposures. The quantification of health impacts resulting from the removal of environmental exposures involves causal statements. Therefore, when possible, causal inference frameworks should be considered for analyzing the effects of environmental exposures on health outcomes.

Indexed as

CausalityEpidemiologic StudiesEnvironmental HealthHumansModels, Theoreticalair pollutioncausal inferenceepidemiologypublic healthstatistical methods

Identifiers

PMID30633715
PMCPMC6445691

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.