Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 66 references

A Spectral Confounder Adjustment for Spatial Regression with Multiple Exposures and Outcomes

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Under the assumption that unmeasured confounders act only at broad spatial scales, the paper's spectral tensor model estimates causal exposure effects on multiple outcomes by reading the regression coefficient at the most local scale.

desk verdict The multivariate tensor extension is a real contribution, but the paper's central theoretical claim that confounding bias vanishes at local scales rests on an algebraic error in Eq. (7), so the causal argument as written does not hold. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.09325 v2 pith:ZKSYSTG6 submitted 2025-06-11 stat.ME

Shih-Ni Prim , Yawen Guan , Shu Yang , Ana G Rappold , K. Lloyd Hill , Wei-Lun Tsai , Corinna Keeler , Brian J Reich This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.ME MSC 62M3062F1562J05
keywords spatialconfoundingcausalinferenceexposuremixturesunmeasuredconfoundertensordecompositionspectraladjustmentCARmodellocalunconfoundedness
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to answer when an observational spatial study can say something causal about the effect of an exposure. The standard requirement is that every confounder is measured, which is rarely true in environmental health. The authors replace it with 'local unconfoundedness': unmeasured confounding may exist, but it acts at broad, global spatial scales, so that differences between nearby regions are unconfounded. Projecting the data onto the eigenvectors of the spatial adjacency precision matrix splits it into independent scales, and under the assumption the coefficient at the most local scale equals the true causal effect. This allows one multivariate regression over exposures, outcomes, and scales — built as a three-way tensor with low-rank decomposition — and the Southern U.S. application links lack of economic resilience to higher chronic kidney disease and diabetes incidence and lower hyperlipidemia incidence.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the graph Fourier transform of the Conditional Autoregressive (CAR) precision matrix $Q=\Gamma W\Gamma^\top$, which converts correlated spatial observations into independent coordinates, each attached to an eigenvalue $w_i$: small eigenvalues carry global trends and large eigenvalues carry local differences. On these coordinates the model regresses every outcome on every exposure at every scale, letting the spatial random effect $\theta^*_{ir}$ correlate with the exposure $X^*_{ie}$ through the scale-specific bias $\alpha_{ier}$. The scale dimension is smoothed by B-spline basis functions, and the resulting $S\times E\times R$ coefficient tensor is compressed by a canonical polyadic (CP) decomposition — a sum of low-rank factor products across the three dimensions — with horseshoe shrinkage priors that pull small coefficients toward zero, so the scale, exposure, and outcome dimensions borrow strength from one another. The object doing the work is the decomposition $\tilde{\beta}_{ier}=\beta_{er}+\alpha_{ier}$ of each coefficient into a scale-invariant causal part and a scale-dependent bias part; local unconfoundedness is exactly the claim that the bias part dies out as $w_i$ grows.

What would settle it

Run the Section 6.1 simulation without the kernel smoothing matrix $G$ and with the confounder CAR parameter no larger than the exposure's ($\lambda_U\le\lambda_X$); if the estimate at the largest eigenvalue $w_1$ is biased away from the true $\beta$ across datasets, the central causal claim fails. A cheaper calculation settles the same point: take the limit of equation (7) as $w_i\to\infty$ and check whether the limiting bias matrix is zero whenever $B_2^\top B_1\neq 0$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that confounding bias is scale-specific and disappears at the finest spatial scales, so the causal effect can be read off the largest-eigenvalue coefficient. Writing the multiscale coefficient as $\tilde{\beta}_{ier}=\beta_{er}+\alpha_{ier}$, where $\alpha_{ier}$ is the confounding bias for exposure $e$ on outcome $r$ at eigenvalue $w_i$, the model assumes $\alpha_{ier}\to 0$ as $w_i\to\infty$; then the estimate $\hat{\beta}_{1er}$ at the largest eigenvalue $w_1$ captures the true effect $\beta_{er}$. The multiscale coefficients form an $S\times E\times R$ tensor for scale, exposure, and outcome, modeled with B-spline basis functions across scale and a rank-$K$ canonical polyadic decomposition with horseshoe shrinkage priors so that exposures and outcomes share information. In the paper's generative example the bias matrix has the closed form $\alpha_i = B_2^\top B_1\left(B_1^\top B_1 + \frac{1-\lambda_U+\lambda_U w_i}{1-\lambda_X+\lambda_X w_i}S_1\right)^{-1}$, and the paper concludes it vanishes at large eigenvalues precisely when the unmeasured confounders are spatially smoother than the exposures ($\lambda_U>\lambda_X$).

Load-bearing premise

The entire causal interpretation rests on the assumption that unmeasured confounding vanishes at the finest spatial scales — that the difference between nearby regions is unconfounded — a condition the paper itself calls unverifiable and its Section 4.2 analysis ties to unmeasured confounders being spatially smoother than the exposures.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If local unconfoundedness holds, researchers can report causal exposure effects from spatial observational data without measuring every confounder, because the most-local-scale coefficient $\hat{\beta}_{1er}$ is the estimand.
  • Comparing the most global and most local estimates doubles as a diagnostic for spatial confounding: in the data analysis most exposure–outcome pairs show large discrepancies, while the housing/transportation theme, which has no global trend, shows the smallest.
  • The multivariate tensor structure is more efficient than fitting outcomes separately: in the simulations the multivariate spectral model has lower mean squared error and posterior standard deviation than its univariate counterpart by sharing latent structure across outcomes.
  • The paper's data analysis concludes that ZCTAs lacking economic resilience (Theme 1) have higher incident rates of chronic kidney disease and diabetes and lower hyperlipidemia rates, with 95% credible intervals at the most local scale, and that housing/transportation vulnerability (Theme 4) tracks higher chronic heart failure rates.
  • The causal guarantee is conditional: the paper's Section 4.2 derivation ties vanishing bias to $\lambda_U>\lambda_X$, so the method is trustworthy exactly when unmeasured confounders are spatially smoother than the exposures.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A practical check: fit the model at the two or three largest eigenvalues and look for a plateau — if estimates agree across those scales, local unconfoundedness is consistent with the data, and if they diverge, the finest scale may still be confounded; the paper currently reports only the single most local coefficient.
  • Because eigenvalues are defined by the study's adjacency graph, the 'most local scale' changes with spatial resolution; a re-analysis of the same SVI and outcome data at county or tract level would test whether the documented effects persist or shift, and the paper's own discussion expects unit choice to matter.
  • The paper admits that unmeasured local confounding is unverifiable; a formal sensitivity analysis that injects a residual local-scale bias and traces how much the estimated effects move would quantify how much the conclusions lean on the assumption.
  • Mathematically, equation (7) converges to $B_2^\top B_1\left(B_1^\top B_1+(\lambda_U/\lambda_X)S_1\right)^{-1}$ as $w_i\to\infty$, which is non-zero whenever $B_2^\top B_1\neq 0$; so in that generative model the vanishing-bias conclusion appears to depend on the specific construction used in the simulations, including the kernel smoothing that the derivation itself omits.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Bayesian multivariate spectral regression model for areal data with multiple exposures and multiple outcomes. The model projects the spatial data onto eigenvectors of the CAR precision matrix, represents the scale-specific exposure effects as a three-way tensor, and uses a CP decomposition with horseshoe priors. The central identifying idea is 'local unconfoundedness': the confounding bias α_{ier} vanishes as the spatial scale becomes local (w_i → ∞), so the coefficient at the largest eigenvalue can be interpreted as the causal exposure effect. The authors support this with a limiting-bias derivation in Section 4.2, an identifiability discussion in Section 5, a simulation study in Section 6, and an application to social vulnerability indices and chronic disease incidence in the southern United States.

Significance. If the theoretical foundation were sound, the paper would be a useful extension of spectral adjustment for spatial confounding to multivariate settings, and the tensor formulation is a natural way to share information across exposures, outcomes, and scales. The simulation study is extensive and the applied example is relevant. However, the central theoretical claim is not established: the limit calculation in Section 4.2 is algebraically incorrect, and the simulation uses an additional smoothing mechanism that is absent from the theoretical derivation. Because the causal interpretation of the headline regression coefficients rests on this missing support, the current manuscript does not meet the bar for publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eq. (7)] The claimed limit is incorrect. Writing r_i = (1−λ_U+λ_U w_i)/(1−λ_X+λ_X w_i), for λ_X>0 we have r_i → λ_U/λ_X as w_i→∞, not r_i→∞. Therefore α_i = B_2^T B_1 (B_1^T B_1 + r_i S_1)^{-1} converges to the generically nonzero matrix B_2^T B_1 (B_1^T B_1 + (λ_U/λ_X) S_1)^{-1}. The statement that 'α_i→0 as w_i→∞ if and only if λ_U>λ_X' is false; the bias vanishes only in degenerate cases such as B_2^T B_1=0 (no confounding) or λ_X=0 (spatially independent exposures). Since Section 3.2 uses α_{ier}→0 to define the causal estimate β-hat_{1er}, and Section 5.2 uses the same limit for identifiability, the central causal claim is not supported.
  2. [Section 6.1] The simulation generates confounding through U=β_XZ G V, where G is a kernel-smoothing matrix whose bandwidth ϕ controls the rate at which correlation decays with eigenvalue (Figure 4). The theoretical derivation in Section 4.2 and in supplemental materials C.3 does not include this smoothing matrix. Thus the simulation validates the method under a different data-generating mechanism than the mechanism analyzed in the theory. The simulation therefore cannot supply the missing decay argument needed to justify local unconfoundedness for the model in Section 4.2.
  3. [Section 5.2, Eq. (8)] The likelihood in Eq. (8) identifies only the sum 1_S β_r + α_r at each scale. The paper argues that β_r is identified 'when α_r→0 in local scales,' but that limit is precisely what Section 4.2 fails to establish; indeed, for the generative model with λ_X>0 and λ_U>λ_X, the limit is a nonzero constant. Consequently, identifiability of the causal parameter β_r is not shown for spatially dependent exposures with unmeasured global confounders. The causal wording in the abstract, Section 7, and Section 8 is therefore stronger than the analysis supports.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 7, paragraph after Table 1] The sentence 'higher scores (less resilience) for theme 1 ... are associated with higher incident rates of chronic kidney disease, chronic heart failure, and diabetes but lower rates of diabetes' appears to contain a typo: the final phrase should presumably read 'lower rates of hyperlipidemia,' consistent with Table 1 and the Discussion.
  2. [Eq. (8)] The expression X∗(1Sβr+αr) is ambiguous: the column structure of X∗ and the intended multiplication should be defined explicitly, since X∗ is not scalar and the bracketed term mixes a vector with a matrix product.
  3. [Acknowledgements] The Acknowledgements refer to 'S.E.C.' in the appointment statement, but no author with those initials appears in the author list; this appears to be a leftover from an earlier draft.
  4. [Section 2] There is a spacing/typographical issue in 'about15%of all beneficiaries' and similar places; this is a LaTeX artifact but should be corrected.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the causal 'prediction' is the local-unconfoundedness assumption restated, and the paper's only independent derivation of that assumption (Section 4.2) fails algebraically.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.2, 'Model in the spectral domain']
    "We further assume the strength of correlation diminishes at local scales, i.e. α ier ↓ 0 for large w i. Thus ˆβ1er, the estimate for the multiscale coefficient ˜β1er, can capture the true β er at eigenvalue w 1, where the correlation between X ∗ ie and θ ∗ ir goes to zero and ˜β1er = β er."

    The causal estimate is defined as the multiscale coefficient at the largest eigenvalue, and the equality β-tilde_{1er} = β_er is exactly the local-unconfoundedness assumption α_{1er} = 0. The tensor and spline machinery does not estimate or verify α; the 'prediction' and the assumption are the same statement. The paper is transparent that this is an assumption, so this is a definitional rather than a hidden circularity, but the claimed causal interpretation does reduce by construction to the assumption.

  2. other [Section 4.2, 'Confounding in a linear, multivariate Gaussian model', Eq. (7) and following sentence]
    "If B ⊤ 2 B1 ̸= 0 and there is confounding, then α i → 0 as w i → ∞ if and only if λ U > λ X. That is, the local confounding assumption is satisfied if the missing confounders have stronger spatial dependence than the covariates, which agrees with Paciorek (2010) and others."

    This is the paper's claimed first-principles support for the identifying assumption. But substituting the definitions into Eq. (7), the ratio (1−λ_U+λ_U w_i)/(1−λ_X+λ_X w_i) tends to the finite constant λ_U/λ_X, so α_i tends to the generically nonzero matrix B_2^T B_1 (B_1^T B_1 + (λ_U/λ_X)S_1)^{-1}. The claimed decay does not follow from the stated model. The simulation's decay instead comes from the extra kernel matrix G in U=β_XZ G V (Section 6.1), which Supplement C.3 explicitly excludes from the derivation. Thus the causal 'prediction' rests on the local-unconfoundedness assumption itself rather than on an independent derivation.

1 more flagged steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Section 1, Introduction]
    "we use spectral methods and relax the no-unmeasured-confounder assumption to allow for global-scale confounding, which, as demonstrated in Guan et al. (2023), implies that confounding dissipates in large eigenvalues of the precision matrix in the Conditional Autoregressive (CAR) model."

    The load-bearing premise that confounding dissipates at large CAR eigenvalues is attributed to Guan et al. (2023), whose author list overlaps the present paper (Guan, Yang, and Reich). The present paper's own Section 4.2 derivation of this premise is algebraically inconsistent with Eq. (7), so within this manuscript the premise is not independently re-established; the causal interpretation therefore leans on a self-citation rather than on the derivation supplied here. This is not a criticism of the cited work itself, but it makes the self-citation load-bearing for the central causal claim.

full rationale

The core statistical contribution—spectral-domain tensor regression for multiple exposures and outcomes—is not circular: it is a genuine modeling and computational proposal, and the simulations and data analysis do not simply rename the inputs. However, the paper's strongest claim, causal interpretation of the exposure effects, is explicitly and unavoidably tied to local unconfoundedness. Section 3.2 states this as an assumption and then defines the estimate at the most local scale as the true effect; Section 4.2 attempts to justify the assumption from a generative model, but the algebra in Eq. (7) does not support the claimed decay, because the spectral variance ratio converges to a finite constant rather than diverging. The simulation study hides this gap by introducing a kernel-smoothing matrix G that is absent from the Section 4.2 derivation, so the favorable simulation results are generated under a different and more favorable mechanism than the one analyzed in the theory. The paper does acknowledge in Section 8 that 'unmeasured local confounding is unverifiable,' which mitigates the circularity by making the assumption explicit. Nevertheless, because the causal prediction and the identifying assumption are the same statement, and because the only attempted independent derivation fails, a moderate circularity score is appropriate. The independent value of the tensor methodology and the transparent treatment of the assumption prevent a higher score.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new physical entities, but its causal claim rests on the local unconfoundedness axiom and on a linear confounding structure. The paper's theoretical attempt to justify local unconfoundedness (Section 4.2) is mathematically flawed, and the simulation validates the method under an extra smoothing mechanism rather than the stated derivation. The tuning parameters L and K are selected by the analyst and materially affect inference.

free parameters (4)
  • L (number of B-spline basis functions) = 10 in simulations and application
    Selected by the authors after checking trace plots and sensitivity; performance depends on the choice (Section 3.3, supplemental E).
  • K (tensor CP rank) = 5 in simulations, 10 in application
    Chosen by the authors to balance convergence and fit (Section 3.3, Section 7, supplemental E).
  • Q (number of latent spatial factors in LMC) = Not explicitly specified for the application
    The LMC in equation (2) requires choosing Q ≤ R; identifiability restrictions are imposed on the loading matrix A.
  • Choice of the most local eigenvalue as the causal scale = w_1 (largest eigenvalue)
    The estimator beta-hat_{1er} uses the largest eigenvalue; if confounding does not fully vanish at that scale, residual bias remains.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Spatial random effects follow a CAR model with Leroux parameterization
    Used throughout Section 3 and in the spectral transformation to define the scales.
  • domain assumption Multivariate spatial random effects follow a linear model of coregionalization (LMC)
    Equation (2); needed for the covariance structure of theta and for the confounding model.
  • ad hoc to paper Local unconfoundedness: alpha_{ier} → 0 as w_i → ∞
    Stated in Section 3.2; this is the central assumption that makes the beta-hat at the most local scale unbiased.
  • domain assumption The confounding relationship is linear: theta*_{ir} | X*_{ie} = alpha_{ier} X*_{ie} + xi_{ir}
    Section 3.2; used to derive the bias formula and the likelihood.
  • domain assumption The true exposure effect beta_er is constant across spatial scales
    The model allows the observed coefficient beta-tilde to vary by scale but attributes all variation to confounding; the target beta is scale-invariant.
  • standard math The graph Laplacian eigenvectors diagonalize the CAR process exactly as specified
    Section 3.2 uses Q = Gamma W Gamma^T and the independence of the spectral coefficients; standard for CAR models.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Spectral Confounder Adjustment for Spatial Regression with Multiple Exposures and Outcomes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZKSYSTG6

@misc{pith2026250609325,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Spectral Confounder Adjustment for Spatial Regression with Multiple Exposures and Outcomes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZKSYSTG6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.09325}
}
read the original abstract

Characterizing social vulnerability is fundamental to disaster response planning. Numerous vulnerability indicators have been developed, but they are typically not validated for their predictive power over the outcomes of interest. As with many environmental health studies where interventions are impractical or unethical, validation of social vulnerability against public health outcomes is observational and relies on spatially-dependent data. Observational studies are susceptible to bias induced by unmeasured confounders. This problem is exacerbated in spatial studies with multiple health outcomes and environmental exposure variables, as the source and magnitude of confounding bias may differ by spatial scale and across exposure/outcome pairs. We propose to mitigate confounding effects in multivariate spatial studies using a tensor-regression model that allows exposure effects to vary by exposure, outcome, and spatial scale. By extracting exposure effects that correspond to local spatial scales, we replace the strict causal assumption of no unmeasured confounders with a more realistic assumption of local unconfoundedness i.e., differences between nearby regions are unconfounded, allowing for causal interpretation. Our study of the Southern United States shows that economic resilience (Theme 1) demonstrates the strongest positive effect on diabetes and negative effect on hyperlipidemia. Our analysis reveals a concise representation of the effects of social vulnerability indices on an array of chronic health outcomes, offering interpretable epidemiological insights that adjust for multivariate spatial confounding.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.09325 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Maps at ZCTA level for exposures and covariates: Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management themes 1-4 in southern states are in (a)-(d), rural/urban determination in (e), and population size (number of people) in (f). (a) Theme 1 (b) Theme 2 (c) Theme 3 (d) Theme 4 (e) Urbanicity (f) Population size (log scale) 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Simulation results: MSM is our multivariate spectral model, USM is the univariate spectral model, and the naive model does not allow coefficients to vary by scales. Based on Ur￾dangarin et al. (2024), Spatial+ models retain 80% and 40% of the eigenvectors for Spatial+80 and Spatial+40, respectively. Settings 1-4 set the hyperparameters in the data-generation process (ϕ, βXZ) to be (1, 1),(1, 2),(2, 1),(2, 2), respec… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Maps for health outcomes (log scale): Five chronic health outcomes in southern states are in (a)-(e). The raw percentages are between 0.003 and 0.55. (a) Hypertension (b) Chronic kidney disease (c) Hyperlipidemia (d) Chronic heart failure (e) Diabetes 45 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_9.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S., Schnell, P

    Adin, A., Goicoa, T., Hodges, J. S., Schnell, P. M. and Ugarte, M. D. (2023) Alleviating confounding in spatio-temporal areal models with an application on crimes against women in India . Statistical Modelling, 23, 9--30

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Banerjee, S., Carlin, B. P. and Gelfand, A. E. (2014) Hierarchical Modeling and Analysis for Spatial Data . CRC Press

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    F., Valeri, L., Claus Henn, B., Christiani, D

    Bobb, J. F., Valeri, L., Claus Henn, B., Christiani, D. C., Wright, R. O., Mazumdar, M., Godleski, J. J. and Coull, B. A. (2015) Bayesian kernel machine regression for estimating the health effects of multi-pollutant mixtures . Biostatistics, 16, 493--508

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Carrico, C., Gennings, C., Wheeler, D. C. and Factor-Litvak, P. (2015) Characterization of weighted quantile sum regression for highly correlated data in a risk analysis setting . Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 20, 100--120

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/data\_documentation\_download.html

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program (2018) CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index 2018 Database U.S. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/data\_documentation\_download.html

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Y., Li, H., Argos, M., Persky, V

    Chen, H. Y., Li, H., Argos, M., Persky, V. W. and Turyk, M. E. (2022) Statistical methods for assessing the explained variation of a health outcome by a mixture of exposures . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 2693

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    L., Bobb, J

    Devick, K. L., Bobb, J. F., Mazumdar, M., Claus Henn, B., Bellinger, D. C., Christiani, D. C., Wright, R. O., Williams, P. L., Coull, B. A. and Valeri, L. (2022) Bayesian kernel machine regression-causal mediation analysis . Statistics in Medicine, 41, 860--876

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    and Kneib, T

    Dupont, E., Marques, I. and Kneib, T. (2024) Demystifying Spatial Confounding . arXiv:2309.16861

    arXiv 2024

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    Dupont, E., Wood, S. N. and Augustin, N. H. (2022) Spatial+: A novel approach to spatial confounding . Biometrics, 78, 1279–1290

    2022

  2. [10]

    and Dunson, D

    Ferrari, F. and Dunson, D. B. (2020) Identifying main effects and interactions among exposures using Gaussian processes . The Annals of Applied Statistics, 14, 1743--1758

    2020

  3. [11]

    E., Gregory, E

    Flanagan, B. E., Gregory, E. W., Hallisey, E. J., Heitgerd, J. L. and Lewis, B. (2011) A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management . Journal of homeland security and emergency management, 8

    2011

  4. [12]

    and Banerjee, S

    Gelfand, A. and Banerjee, S. (2010) Multivariate Spatial Process Models . In Handbook of Spatial Statistics (eds. A. Gelfand, P. Diggle, M. Fuentes and P. Guttorp), 495--515. CRC Press

    2010

  5. [13]

    E., Banerjee, S

    Gelfand, A. E., Banerjee, S. and Gamerman, D. (2005) Spatial process modelling for univariate and multivariate dynamic spatial data . Environmetrics, 16, 465--479

    2005

  6. [14]

    and Bornehag, C.-G

    Gennings, C., Svensson, K., Wolk, A., Lindh, C., Kiviranta, H. and Bornehag, C.-G. (2022) Using metrics of a mixture effect and nutrition from an observational study for consideration towards causal inference . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,...

    2022

  7. [15]

    A., Rowland, S

    Gibson, E. A., Rowland, S. T., Goldsmith, J., Paisley, J., Herbstman, J. B. and Kiourmourtzoglou, M.-A. (2021) Bayesian non-parametric non-negative matrix factorization for pattern identification in environmental mixtures . arXiv:2109.12164

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gilbert, B., Datta, A., Casey, J. A. and Ogburn, E. L. (2024) A causal inference framework for spatial confounding . arXiv:2112.14946

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    and Torrisi, G

    Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M. and Torrisi, G. (2019) On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness . Social Indicators Research, 141, 61--94

    2019

  10. [18]

    L., Reich, B

    Guan, Y., Page, G. L., Reich, B. J., Ventrucci, M. and Yang, S. (2023) Spectral adjustment for spatial confounding . Biometrika, 110, 699--719

    2023

  11. [19]

    and Dunson, D

    Guhaniyogi, R., Qamar, S. and Dunson, D. B. (2017) Bayesian tensor regression . The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 18, 2733--2763

    2017

  12. [20]

    and Pejić, S

    van den Heuvel, J. and Pejić, S. (2001) Using Laplacian Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors in the Analysis of Frequency Assignment Problems . Annals of Operations Research, 107, 349--368

    2001

  13. [21]

    and Haran, M

    Hughes, J. and Haran, M. (2012) Dimension reduction and alleviation of confounding for spatial generalized linear mixed models . Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 75, 139--159

    2012

  14. [22]

    R., Kioumourtzoglou, M.-A., Chamberlain, T., Chen, H

    Joubert, B. R., Kioumourtzoglou, M.-A., Chamberlain, T., Chen, H. Y., Gennings, C., Turyk, M. E., Miranda, M. L., Webster, T. F., Ensor, K. B., Dunson, D. B. and Coull, B. A. (2022) Powering research through innovative methods for mixtures in epidemiology (PRIME) program: nove...

    2022

  15. [23]

    and Antonelli, J

    Kang, S., Franks, A. and Antonelli, J. (2023) Sensitivity analysis with multiple treatments and multiple outcomes with applications to air pollution mixtures . arXiv:2311.12252

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    P., Buckley, J

    Keil, A. P., Buckley, J. P., O'Brien, K. M., Ferguson, K. K., Zhao, S. and White, A. J. (2020) A Quantile-Based g-Computation Approach to Addressing the Effects of Exposure Mixtures . Environmental Health Perspectives, 128, 47004

    2020

  17. [25]

    and Calder, C

    Khan, K. and Calder, C. A. (2022) Restricted Spatial Regression Methods: Implications for Inference . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 117, 482--494

    2022

  18. [26]

    Kolda, T. G. and Bader, B. W. (2009) Tensor Decompositions and Applications . SIAM Review, 51, 455--500

    2009

  19. [27]

    R., Bravo, M., Leong, H., Bui, A., Griffin, R

    Kowal, D. R., Bravo, M., Leong, H., Bui, A., Griffin, R. J., Ensor, K. B. and Miranda, M. L. (2021) Bayesian variable selection for understanding mixtures in environmental exposures . Statistics in Medicine, 40, 4850--4871

    2021

  20. [28]

    G., Lei, X

    Leroux, B. G., Lei, X. and Breslow, N. (2000) Estimation of Disease Rates in Small Areas: A new Mixed Model for Spatial Dependence . In Statistical Models in Epidemiology, the Environment, and Clinical Trials (eds. M. E. Halloran and D. Berry), 179--191. New York, NY: Springer...

    2000

  21. [29]

    and Wells, M

    Li, J., Bien, J. and Wells, M. T. (2018) rTensor : An R package for multidimensional array (tensor) unfolding, multiplication, and decomposition. Journal of Statistical Software, 87, 1--31

    2018

  22. [30]

    and Maitra, R

    Llosa-Vite, C. and Maitra, R. (2023) Reduced-Rank Tensor-on-Tensor Regression and Tensor-Variate Analysis of Variance . IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45, 2282--2296

    2023

  23. [31]

    and Deng, K

    Mai, Q., Zhang, X., Pan, Y. and Deng, K. (2021) A Doubly Enhanced EM Algorithm for Model-Based Tensor Clustering . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 117, 2120--2134

    2021

  24. [32]

    and Schmidt, D

    Makalic, E. and Schmidt, D. F. (2016) A Simple Sampler for the Horseshoe Estimator . IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 23, 179--182

    2016

  25. [33]

    V., Knowles, K., Kugler, T., Roberts, F

    Manson, S., Schroeder, J., Riper, D. V., Knowles, K., Kugler, T., Roberts, F. and Ruggles, S. (2024) IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 19.0 [dataset] . Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS

    2024

  26. [34]

    and Klein, N

    Marques, I., Kneib, T. and Klein, N. (2022) Mitigating spatial confounding by explicitly correlating Gaussian random fields . Environmetrics, 33, e2727

    2022

  27. [35]

    C., Jagai, J

    Messer, L. C., Jagai, J. S., Rappazzo, K. M. and Lobdell, D. T. (2014) Construction of an environmental quality index for public health research . Environmental Health, 13

    2014

  28. [36]

    C., Laraia, B

    Messer, L. C., Laraia, B. A., Kaufman, J. S., Eyster, J., Holzman, C., Culhane, J., Elo, I., Burke, J. G. and O’Campo, P. (2006) The development of a standardized neighborhood deprivation index . Journal of Urban Health, 83, 1041--1062

    2006

  29. [37]

    Miao, W., Hu, W., Ogburn, E. L. and Zhou, X.-H. (2023) Identifying Effects of Multiple Treatments in the Presence of Unmeasured Confounding . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 118, 1953--1967

    2023

  30. [38]

    Paciorek, C. J. (2010) The Importance of Scale for Spatial-Confounding Bias and Precision of Spatial Regression Estimators . Statistical Science, 25, 107--125

    2010

  31. [39]

    L., Liu, Y., He, Z

    Page, G. L., Liu, Y., He, Z. and Sun, D. (2017) Estimation and Prediction in the Presence of Spatial Confounding for Spatial Linear Models . Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 44, 780--797

    2017

  32. [40]

    and Prathibha, M

    Rabikka, V., Asir, T. and Prathibha, M. E. (2022) Spectrum of Graphs over Rings: A Survey . In Algebra and Related Topics with Applications (eds. M. Ashraf, A. Ali and V. De Filippis), 427--449. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore

    2022

  33. [41]

    (2018) What is in an index? Construction method, data metric, and weighting scheme determine the outcome of composite social vulnerability indices in New York City

    Reckien, D. (2018) What is in an index? Construction method, data metric, and weighting scheme determine the outcome of composite social vulnerability indices in New York City . Regional Environmental Change, 18, 1439--1451

    2018

  34. [42]

    J., Guan, Y., Fourches, D., Warren, J

    Reich, B. J., Guan, Y., Fourches, D., Warren, J. L., Sarnat, S. E. and Chang, H. H. (2020) Integrative Statistical Methods for Exposure Mixtures and Health . The Annals of Applied Statistics, 14, 1945--1963

    2020

  35. [43]

    J., Hodges, J

    Reich, B. J., Hodges, J. S. and Zadnik, V. (2006) Effects of Residual Smoothing on the Posterior of the Fixed Effects in Disease-Mapping Models . Biometrics, 62, 1197--1206

    2006

  36. [44]

    J., Yang, S., Guan, Y., Giffin, A

    Reich, B. J., Yang, S., Guan, Y., Giffin, A. B., Miller, M. J. and Rappold, A. (2021) A Review of Spatial Causal Inference Methods for Environmental and Epidemiological Applications . International Statistical Review, 89, 605--634

    2021

  37. [45]

    Roy, A., Lavine, I., Herring, A. H. and Dunson, D. B. (2021) Perturbed factor analysis: Accounting for group differences in exposure profiles . The Annals of Applied Statistics, 15, 1386--1404

    2021

  38. [46]

    Rubin, D. B. (1974) Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies . Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688--701

    1974

  39. [47]

    Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 591--593

    --- (1980) Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test Comment . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 591--593

    1980

  40. [48]

    Schmidt, A. M. and Gelfand, A. E. (2003) A Bayesian coregionalization approach for multivariate pollutant data . Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 108

    2003

  41. [49]

    and Papadogeorgou, G

    Schnell, P. and Papadogeorgou, G. (2020) Mitigating Unobserved Spatial Confounding when Estimating the Effect of Supermarket Access on Cardiovascular Disease Deaths . arXiv:1907.12150

    2020 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Short, P. F. and Weaver, F. (2008) Transitioning to Medicare before age sixty-five . Helath Affairs, 27

    2008

  43. [51]

    and Kneib, T

    Thaden, H. and Kneib, T. (2018) Structural Equation Models for Dealing With Spatial Confounding . The American Statistician, 72, 239--252

    2018

  44. [52]

    and Ugarte, M

    Urdangarin, A., Goicoa, T., Kneib, T. and Ugarte, M. D. (2024) A simplified spatial+ approach to mitigate spatial confounding in multivariate spatial areal models . Spatial Statistics, 59, 100804

    2024

  45. [53]

    https://www.census.gov/data/developers/data-sets/acs-5year.html

    US Bureau of the Census (2023) American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2009-2021) . https://www.census.gov/data/developers/data-sets/acs-5year.html

    2023

  46. [54]

    https://www2.ccwdata.org/web/guest/condition-categories-chronic/

    US Department of Health and Human Services (2023) Chronic conditions data warehouse . https://www2.ccwdata.org/web/guest/condition-categories-chronic/

    2023

  47. [55]

    (2003) Multivariate Geostatistics

    Wackernagel, H. (2003) Multivariate Geostatistics . Springer Berlin, Heidelberg

    2003

  48. [56]

    and Blei, D

    Wang, Y. and Blei, D. M. (2019) The Blessings of Multiple Causes . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 114, 1574--1596

    2019

  49. [57]

    J., Hoppin, J

    Wei, R., Reich, B. J., Hoppin, J. A. and Ghosal, S. (2020) Sparse Bayesian additive nonparametric regression with application to health effects of pesticides mixtures . Statistica Sinica, 30, 55--79

    2020

  50. [58]

    and Reich, B

    Wiecha, N. and Reich, B. J. (2024) Two-stage Spatial Regression Models for Spatial Confounding . arXiv:2404.09358

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    and Bilal, U

    Xu, H., Li, R. and Bilal, U. (2025) findSVI: Calculate Social Vulnerability Index for Communities . R package version 0.2.0

    2025

  52. [60]

    and Han, R

    Zhang, A. and Han, R. (2019) Optimal Sparse Singular Value Decomposition for High-Dimensional High-Order Data . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 114, 1708--1725

    2019

  53. [61]

    and Xia, D

    Zhang, A. and Xia, D. (2018) Tensor SVD : Statistical and Computational Limits . IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 64, 7311--7338

    2018

  54. [62]

    and Aeron, S

    Zhang, Z. and Aeron, S. (2017) Exact Tensor Completion Using t- SVD . IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 65, 1511--1526

    2017

  55. [63]

    and Franks, A

    Zheng, J., Wu, J., D’Amour, A. and Franks, A. (2023) Sensitivity to Unobserved Confounding in Studies with Factor-Structured Outcomes . Journal of the American Statistical Association, 119, 2026--2037

    2023

  56. [64]

    Zigler, C. M. (2021) Invited commentary: the promise and pitfalls of causal inference with multivariate environmental exposures . American Journal of Epidemiology, 190, 2658--2661

    2021

  57. [65]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.senten...

  58. [66]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.