ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
A comparison and evaluation of statistical methods for mediation analysis with mixtures of environmental exposures.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From toxicogenomics to predictive toxicology and exposomics: defining the next decade of gene-environment research.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnvironmental studies often evaluate how exposures influence health outcomes through intermediate biological processes. In practice, researchers are often interested in complex exposure mixtures rather than single agents, creating challenges for mediation analysis due to strong correlations among exposures, sparsity of active exposures, and possible nonlinear and interactive effects. This study compares and evaluates approaches for mediation analysis when exposures involve complex mixtures.
methodsWe review four strategies: (1) single-exposure mediation analysis that analyzes each exposure separately; (2) principal component-based mediation analysis that summarizes correlated exposures into orthogonal components; (3) environmental risk score-based mediation analysis that constructs a supervised prediction score for the exposure set and treats the score as the exposure; and (4) Bayesian kernel machine regression causal mediation analysis that flexibly models nonlinear and interactive mixture effects. For each approach, we clarify the target estimand and the assumptions required for causal interpretation. We conduct a simulation study to systematically evaluate the operating characteristics of these four methods to estimate global indirect effects and to identify individual exposures contributing to the global mediation under varying sample sizes and effect sizes. We then illustrate an application of these approaches in an observational birth cohort.
resultsIn the simulation study, the single-exposure mediation analysis approach often produced highly biased estimates when not adjusting for co-exposures, and this bias was substantially reduced after co-exposure adjustment. For the mediation analysis methods designed to address the correlation and complexity in exposure mixtures, the performance often depended on a number of method-specific analytic choices, such as the number of principal components retained or the variable selection approach used in the Bayesian kernel machine regression method. In the data application, all methods found limited evidence of non-null global indirect effects and had broad agreement in which individual exposures were identified as potentially active, despite differences in their assumptions and causal estimands.
conclusionMultiple strategies are available for mediation analysis with exposure mixtures, each with distinct strengths. The study provides guidance on selecting and applying methods according to study aims and data features.
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.