'Compositional data analysis' by Barabesi and Sartorelli: Authors' response

Our plain-English summary of 'Compositional data analysis' by Barabesi and Sartorelli: Authors' response, by R. Kaarteenaho, E. Keskitalo (Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2020).

The study

• Authors: R. Kaarteenaho, E. Keskitalo
• Journal: Occupational and Environmental Medicine
• Published: 2020;77(5):351
• Type of article: Letter, Comment
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This item is a published letter, not a research study. It reports no new data. Two authors replied to a letter from Dr Barabesi and Dr Sartorelli about the authors' 2019 article, which concerned bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) cell counts and the number of asbestos bodies in relation to survival in patients with asbestosis. The critics had claimed that the use of Cox regression analysis might lead to biased results. In reply, the authors noted that the example of a compositional Cox regression model the critics cited involved 1196 individuals, while their own study had 91 patients. They explained that they had dichotomised their predictor variables based on American Thoracic Society guidelines on BAL cellular analysis in interstitial lung disease. They also noted that earlier studies on BAL cell counts in the prognosis of interstitial lung diseases had used Cox regression. The authors stated that their investigation was not a methodological study on statistics. The authors concluded that they believed their results were not biased to any significant extent, and said they would consider whether the new method is appropriate in future studies.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Letter (authors' response to correspondence about their earlier article); no new data
• Who was studied: No new population. The letter refers to the authors' earlier study of 91 patients with asbestosis.
• Exposure: No exposure was studied in this letter. The earlier article under discussion concerned BAL cell differential counts and the number of asbestos bodies in patients with asbestosis.
• Main results:
  • The letter being answered (by Barabesi and Sartorelli) had claimed that using Cox regression analysis may lead to biased results.
  • The authors' reply pointed out that the cited example of compositional Cox regression (McGregor et al) used 1196 individuals, compared with 91 patients in their own study.
  • The authors' reply stated that the predictor variables had been dichotomised based on American Thoracic Society guidelines and review on BAL cellular analysis in interstitial lung disease.
  • The authors' reply noted that earlier studies of BAL differential cell counts in the prognosis of interstitial lung diseases had used Cox regression.
  • The authors' reply emphasised that their investigation was not a methodological study on statistics.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors believed their results were not biased to any significant extent, and said they would see whether the new statistical method is appropriate for their future studies.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Asbestosis.

Related studies

• Compositional data analysis — L. Barabesi, P. Sartorelli (2020)
• Dose-time response association between occupational asbestos exposure and pleural mesothelioma: authors' response — A. Lacourt, E. Leveque, et al. (2018)
• Authors' response: Mezei et al's "Comments on a recent case-control study of malignant mesothelioma of the pericardium and the tunica vaginalis testis" — A. Marinaccio, D. Consonni, et al. (2021)
• Authors's response: Pleural mesothelioma and occupational and non-occupational asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment — D. Ferrante, D. Mirabelli, et al. (2016)
• Authors' Response to "Evidence Does Not Support Exposure to Cosmetic Talc as a Cause of Malignant Mesothelioma" — J. Moline, K. Bevilacqua, et al. (2020)
• Author reply: 'Response to: Pleural abnormalities in the Framingham Heart Study: prevalence and CT image features' by Araki et al — T. Araki, G.M. Hunninghake, et al. (2018)

Browse more research in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, or return to medical research.