Keil et al. Respond to "Causal Inference for Environmental Mixtures".

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. Everything All at Once: On Choosing an Estimand for Multi-component Environmental Exposures.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
   Article
2. Invited Perspective: Risk of Bias Assessments, Target Trials, and the Strengths of Environmental Epidemiology.Environmental health perspectives · 2023
   Article
3. Estimating Causal Effects of Interventions on Early-life Environmental Exposures Using Observational Data.Current environmental health reports · 2023
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Bayesian G-Computation for Estimating Impacts of Interventions on Exposure Mixtures: Demonstration With Metals From Coal-Fired Power Plants and Birth Weight.2021
• Comment on
  Invited Commentary: The Promise and Pitfalls of Causal Inference With Multivariate Environmental Exposures.2021

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as