Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38013683›Full record

ArticleEpidemiologic methods2023

Outliers in nutrient intake data for U.S. adults: national health and nutrition examination survey 2017-2018.

Sara Burcham, Yuki Liu, Ashley L Merianos, Angelico Mendy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiologic methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Residential Proximity, Duration, and Health-Related Quality of Life: Insights from the Fernald Cohort.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Living Near Contamination: The Impacts on Personal Well-Being.Applied research in quality of life · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sara BurchamDivision of Epidemiology, Department of Environmental and Public Health Sciences, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0976-8425
Yuki LiuIntuitive Surgical, Inc., Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
Ashley L MerianosSchool of Human Services, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5640-7227
Angelico MendyDivision of Epidemiology, Department of Environmental and Public Health Sciences, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8227-6830
University of Cincinnati Medical Center · USIntuitive Surgical (United States) · USUniversity of Cincinnati · US

Funding

REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICOLOGY RESEARCHP30ES006096 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI PINNEY, SUSAN MENGEL · 1992 to 2022
$35.4M
Reducing Secondhand Smoke Exposure Among Pediatric Patients in the Emergency Department SettingK01DA044313 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI MERIANOS, ASHLEY L · 2017 to 2021
$727k
Distinguishing Exposure to Secondhand and Thirdhand Tobacco Smoke and Electronic Cigarettes among U.S. Children based on Multiple Biomarker ProfilesR21ES032161 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI MERIANOS, ASHLEY L · 2020 to 2021
$467k
NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA044313NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES006096NIEHS NIH HHS R21 ES032161
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: An important step in preparing data for statistical analysis is outlier detection and removal, yet no gold standard exists in current literature. The objective of this study is to identify the ideal decision test using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2017-2018 dietary data. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of NHANES 24-h dietary recalls, considering the survey's multi-stage cluster design. Six outlier detection and removal strategies were assessed by evaluating the decision tests' impact on the Pearson's correlation coefficient among macronutrients. Furthermore, we assessed changes in the effect size estimates based on pre-defined sample sizes. The data were collected as part of the 2017-2018 24-h dietary recall among adult participants (N=4,893). Results: Effect estimate changes for macronutrients varied from 6.5 % for protein to 39.3 % for alcohol across all decision tests. The largest proportion of outliers removed was 4.0 % in the large sample size, for the decision test, >2 standard deviations from the mean. The smallest sample size, particularly for alcohol analysis, was most affected by the six decision tests when compared to no decision test. Conclusions: This study, the first to use 2017-2018 NHANES dietary data for outlier evaluation, emphasizes the importance of selecting an appropriate decision test considering factors such as statistical power, sample size, normality assumptions, the proportion of data removed, effect estimate changes, and the consistency of estimates across sample sizes. We recommend the use of non-parametric tests for non-normally distributed variables of interest.

Indexed as

CDCdietary intakemacronutrientNHANESoutlier

Identifiers

PMID38013683
PMCPMC10637781
OpenAlexW4388563717

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.