Abstract
In environmental epidemiology, analysis of environmental mixture in association to health effects is gaining popularity. Such models mostly focus on inferences of hypotheses or summarizing strength of association through regression coefficients and corresponding estimates of precision. Nonetheless, when a decision is made against alternative hypothesis, it becomes increasingly difficult to tease apart whether the decision is influenced by sample size or represents genuine absence of association and whether the result warrants further investigation. Similarly, in case of a decision made in favour of alternative hypothesis, a significant association may indicate influence of large sample and not a strong effect. Moreover, the disparate type 1 and type 2 errors, might render these inferences unreliable. Using Cohen’s f2 to evaluate the strength of explanatory associations in a more fundamental way, we herein propose a new concept, optimal impact, to quantify the maximum explanatory association solely contributed by an environmental-mixture after controlling for confounders and covariates such that the type 2 error remains at its minimum. optimal impact is built upon a novel hypothesis testing procedure in which the rejection region is determined in a way that type 1 and type 2 errors are balanced. Even when an association does not achieve statistical significance, its optimal impact might deem it meaningful and strong enough for further investigation. This idea was naturally extended to estimate sample size in designing studies by striking a balance between explanatory precision and utility. The properties of this framework are carefully studied and detailed results are established. A straightforward application of this procedure is illustrated using an exposure-mixture analysis of per-and-poly-fluoroalkyl substances and metals with serum cholesterols using data from 2017–2018 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by - National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS): P30ES023515
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced are available online at US NHANES(2017 and 2018)
https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/continuousnhanes/default.aspx?BeginYear=2017