Statistical methods for chemical mixtures: a roadmap for practitioners
Hao, W.; Cathey, A.; Aung, M. T.; Boss, J.; Meeker, J.; Mukherjee, B.
Show abstract
Quantitative characterization of the health impacts associated with exposure to chemical mixtures has received considerable attention in current environmental and epidemiological studies. With many existing statistical methods and emerging approaches, it is important for practitioners to understand when each method is best suited for their inferential goals. In this study, we conduct a review and comparison of 11 analytical methods available for use in mixtures research, through extensive simulation studies for continuous and binary outcomes. These methods fall in three different classes: identifying important components of a mixture, identifying interactions and creating a summary score for risk stratification and prediction. We carry out an illustrative data analysis in the PROTECT birth cohort from Puerto Rico. Most importantly we develop an integrated package "CompMix" that provides a platform for mixtures analysis where the practitioner can implement a pipeline for several types of mixtures analysis. Our simulation results suggest that the choice of methods depends on the goal of analysis and there is no clear winner across the board. For selection of important toxicants in the mixture and for identifying interactions, Elastic net by Zou et al. (Enet), Lasso for Hierarchical Interactions by Bien et al (HierNet), Selection of nonlinear interactions by a forward stepwise algorithm by Narisetty et al. (SNIF) have the most stable performance across simulation settings. Additionally, the predictive performance of the Super Learner ensembling method by Van de Laan et al. and HierNet are found to be superior to the rest of the methods. For overall summary or a cumulative measure, we find that using the Super Learner to combine multiple Environmental Risk Scores can lead to improved risk stratification properties. We have developed an R package "CompMix: A comprehensive toolkit for environmental mixtures analysis", allowing users to implement a variety of tasks under different settings and compare the findings. In summary, our study offers guidelines for selecting appropriate statistical methods for addressing specific scientific questions related to mixtures research. We identify critical gaps where new and better methods are needed.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Prenatal Exposure of Pesticide Mixtures and the Placental Transcriptome: Insights from Trimester-specific, Sex-Specific and Metabolite-Scaled Analyses in the SAWASDEE Cohort 92%
- Toxicants Associated with Spontaneous Abortion in the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD) 92%
- Using low-cost sensors and GPS to assess spatiotemporal variations in personal exposure to PM2.5 in the Washington State Twin Registry 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Re-expressing coefficients from regression models for inclusion in a meta-analysis 95%
- Quantitative bias analysis in practice: Review of software for regression with unmeasured confounding 91%
- A Flexible Framework for Local-Level Estimation of the Effective Reproductive Number in Geographic Regions with Sparse Data 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Enabling Transparent Toxicokinetic Modeling for Public Health Risk Assessment 94%
- Potential Health Benefits of Eliminating Traffic Emissions in Urban Areas 93%
- Rationale and study protocol of the MAMELI Cohort study (MApping the Methylation of repetitive elements to track the Exposome effects on health: the city of Legnano as a LIving lab) 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Recommendations to address uncertainties in environmental risk assessment using toxicokinetics-toxicodynamics models 94%
- Gaussian graphical modeling of the serum exposome and metabolome reveals interactions between environmental chemicals and endogenous metabolites involved in critical metabolic processes 92%
- Stochastic LASSO for extremely high-dimensional genomic data 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.