Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30720337›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2019

Statistical Methodology in Studies of Prenatal Exposure to Mixtures of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: A Review of Existing Approaches and New Alternatives.

Nina Lazarevic, Adrian G Barnett, Peter D Sly, Luke D Knibbs

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 180 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Workflow for Statistical Analysis of Environmental Mixtures.Environmental health perspectives · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mixtures ofToxics · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Environmental Mixtures Analysis (E-MIX) Workflow and Methods Repository.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nina LazarevicSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Adrian G BarnettSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Peter D SlyChild Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Luke D KnibbsSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AUQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrenatal exposures to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) during critical developmental windows have been implicated in the etiologies of a wide array of adverse perinatal and pediatric outcomes. Epidemiological studies have concentrated on the health effects of individual chemicals, despite the understanding that EDCs act together via common mechanisms, that pregnant women are exposed to multiple EDCs simultaneously, and that substantial toxicological evidence of adverse developmental effects has been documented. There is a move toward multipollutant models in environmental epidemiology; however, there is no current consensus on appropriate statistical methods.

objectivesWe aimed to review the statistical methods used in these studies, to identify additional applicable methods, and to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each method for addressing the salient statistical and epidemiological challenges.

methodsWe searched Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science for epidemiological studies of endocrine-sensitive outcomes in the children of mothers exposed to EDC mixtures during pregnancy and identified alternative statistical methods from the wider literature. DISCUSSION: We identified 74 studies and analyzed the methods used to estimate mixture health effects, identify important mixture components, account for nonmonotonicity in exposure–response relationships, assess interactions, and identify windows of exposure susceptibility. We identified both frequentist and Bayesian methods that are robust to multicollinearity, performing shrinkage, variable selection, dimension reduction, statistical learning, or smoothing, including methods that were not used by the studies included in our review.

conclusionsCompelling motivation exists for analyzing EDCs as mixtures, yet many studies make simplifying assumptions about EDC additivity, relative potency, and linearity, or overlook the potential for bias due to asymmetries in chemical persistence. We discuss the potential impacts of these choices and suggest alternative methods to improve analyses of prenatal exposure to EDC mixtures. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP2207.

Indexed as

ChildChild, PreschoolEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornModels, StatisticalPregnancyPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID30720337
PMCPMC6752940
OpenAlexW2914955705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.