Buckley Jessie P, Doherty Brett T, Keil Alexander P, Engel Stephanie M
Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Environ Health Perspect. 2017 Jun 23;125(6):067013. doi: 10.1289/EHP334.
When a biologic mechanism of interest is anticipated to operate differentially according to sex, as is often the case in endocrine disruptors research, investigators routinely estimate sex-specific associations. Less attention has been given to potential sexual heterogeneity of confounder associations with outcomes. When relationships of covariates with outcomes differ according to sex, commonly applied statistical approaches for estimating sex-specific endocrine disruptor effects may produce divergent estimates.
We discuss underlying assumptions and evaluate the performance of two traditional approaches for estimating sex-specific effects, stratification and product terms, and introduce a simple modeling alternative: an augmented product term approach.
We describe the impact of assumptions regarding sexual heterogeneity of confounder relationships on estimates of sex-specific effects of the exposure of interest for three approaches: stratification, traditional product terms, and augmented product terms. Using simulated and applied examples, we demonstrate properties of each approach under a range of scenarios.
In simulations, sex-specific exposure effects estimated using the traditional product term approach were biased when confounders had sex-dependent associations with the outcome. Sex-specific estimates from stratification and the augmented product term approach were unbiased but less precise. In the applied example, the three approaches yielded similar estimates, but resulted in some meaningful differences in conclusions based on statistical significance.
Investigators should consider sexual heterogeneity of confounder associations when choosing an analytic approach to estimate sex-specific effects of endocrine disruptors on health. In the presence of sex-dependent confounding, our augmented product term approach may be advantageous over stratification when there is prior knowledge available to fit reduced models or when investigators seek an automated test for effect measure modification. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP334.
当预期某种感兴趣的生物学机制会因性别而产生不同作用时,内分泌干扰物研究中经常会出现这种情况,研究人员通常会估计性别特异性关联。但对于混杂因素与结局之间潜在的性别异质性关注较少。当协变量与结局的关系因性别而异时,常用的估计性别特异性内分泌干扰物效应的统计方法可能会产生不同的估计结果。
我们讨论了潜在假设,并评估了两种估计性别特异性效应的传统方法(分层法和乘积项法)的性能,并介绍了一种简单的建模替代方法:增强乘积项法。
我们描述了关于混杂因素关系性别异质性的假设对三种方法(分层法、传统乘积项法和增强乘积项法)中感兴趣暴露的性别特异性效应估计的影响。通过模拟和实际应用示例,我们展示了每种方法在一系列场景下的特性。
在模拟中,当混杂因素与结局存在性别依赖性关联时,使用传统乘积项法估计的性别特异性暴露效应存在偏差。分层法和增强乘积项法得出的性别特异性估计无偏差,但精度较低。在实际应用示例中,三种方法得出的估计结果相似,但基于统计学显著性得出的结论存在一些有意义的差异。
在选择分析方法来估计内分泌干扰物对健康的性别特异性效应时,研究人员应考虑混杂因素关联的性别异质性。在存在性别依赖性混杂的情况下,当有先验知识可用于拟合简化模型或研究人员寻求效应测量修正的自动检验时,我们的增强乘积项法可能比分层法更具优势。https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP334