ReviewEnvironmental research2020
Implications of nonlinearity, confounding, and interactions for estimating exposure concentration-response functions in quantitative risk analysis.
Review in Environmental research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk prediction models for anti-tuberculosis drug-induced liver injury in East Asian populations.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Dose-Response Meta-Analysis: A Quantitative Perspective on Rheumatic Diseases.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Article
- Environmental metal exposure and autism spectrum disorder: spatial analysis of exposure patterns and associated risk among children in Alabama.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026Article
- Associations of fine particulate matter pollution components with overall, prostate cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality in men with prostate cancer: A cohort study.Environmental research · 2026Article
- Expert perspectives on exposure-response functions for urban health policy: Lessons from a UBDPolicy workshop.Environmental research · 2026Review
- Evidence gap in predicting intracranial haemorrhage risk in people with glioma on anticoagulants: a scoping review.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- General framework of nonlinear factor interactions using bayesian networks for risk analysis applied to road safety and public health.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emissions from conventional and electronic waterpipes relative to cigarettes and a heated tobacco product.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multilayer perceptron neural network-genetic algorithm for modeling Nicotiana tabacum leaf quality.PloS one · 2025Article
- Toward practical causal epidemiology.Global epidemiology · 2021Article
- Commentary: Using potential outcomes causal methods to assess whether reductions in PMGlobal epidemiology · 2021Article
- Should air pollution health effects assumptions be tested? Fine particulate matter and COVID-19 mortality as an example.Global epidemiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in understanding of biological mechanisms and adverse outcome pathways for many exposure-related diseases show that certain common mechanisms involve thresholds and nonlinearities in biological exposure concentration-response (C-R) functions. These range from ultrasensitive molecular switches in signaling pathways, to assembly and activation of inflammasomes, to rupture of lysosomes and pyroptosis of cells. Realistic dose-response modeling and risk analysis must confront the reality of nonlinear C-R functions. This paper reviews several challenges for traditional statistical regression modeling of C-R functions with thresholds and nonlinearities, together with methods for overcoming them. Statistically significantly positive exposure-response regression coefficients can arise from many non-causal sources such as model specification errors, incompletely controlled confounding, exposure estimation errors, attribution of interactions to factors, associations among explanatory variables, or coincident historical trends. If so, the unadjusted regression coefficients do not necessarily predict how or whether reducing exposure would reduce risk. We discuss statistical options for controlling for such threats, and advocate causal Bayesian networks and dynamic simulation models as potentially valuable complements to nonparametric regression modeling for assessing causally interpretable nonlinear C-R functions and understanding how time patterns of exposures affect risk. We conclude that these approaches are promising for extending the great advances made in statistical C-R modeling methods in recent decades to clarify how to design regulations that are more causally effective in protecting human health.
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.