| name | tooluniverse-epidemiological-analysis |
| description | End-to-end observational epidemiology analysis — from research question (PECO Population/Exposure/Comparator/Outcome) to publication-ready statistical report. Covers cohort/case-control/cross-sectional design, regression with confounders, propensity scoring, sensitivity analysis. Writes Python code for every step. Use for epidemiology study analysis, NHANES/UK-Biobank-style analyses. |
Epidemiological Data Analysis
Complete workflow for observational epidemiology — from research question to publication-ready report. Write and run Python code for every step. Never describe what you "would do" — do it.
Step 1: Formulate the Research Question (PECO Framework)
Define Population, Exposure, Comparator, Outcome before touching data.
- Population: Who? (e.g., adults aged 20-79, cancer patients stage III+, ICU admissions)
- Exposure: What factor? (e.g., nutrient intake, drug treatment, gene mutation, environmental pollutant)
- Comparator: Vs. what? (e.g., lowest tertile, unexposed, wild-type, placebo)
- Outcome: What health event? (e.g., disease incidence, survival time, biomarker level, mortality)
Study design check: Does the question require temporality?
- Cross-sectional: prevalence, associations at one time point
- Longitudinal/cohort: incidence, causal inference, temporal relationships
- Case-control: rare outcomes, odds ratios (nested within cohort)
- Clinical trial: intervention effects with randomized controls
If the question implies causation ("does X cause Y?") but only cross-sectional data is available, state the limitation explicitly and proceed with association language.
Step 2: Find and Evaluate Data
Use ToolUniverse to discover datasets and find what prior studies used:
find_tools("dataset search")
find_tools("your domain keywords")
execute_tool("PubMed_search_articles", {"query": "[exposure] [outcome] [study design]", "max_results": 5})
execute_tool("EuropePMC_search_articles", {"query": "[exposure] [outcome] cohort", "limit": 5})
Evaluate dataset fitness: Does it have the exposure variable? The outcome? Key confounders (age, sex, plus domain-specific)? Adequate sample size?
Power analysis (run before committing to a dataset):
from scipy.stats import norm
import numpy as np
def sample_size_logistic(p0, OR, alpha=0.05, power=0.80):
"""Minimum N for logistic regression detecting OR at given power."""
p1 = (p0 * OR) / (1 - p0 + p0 * OR)
z_a, z_b = norm.ppf(1 - alpha/2), norm.ppf(power)
n = ((z_a + z_b)**2 * (1/(p0*(1-p0)) + 1/(p1*(1-p1)))) / (np.log(OR))**2
return int(np.ceil(n))
print(f"Need N={sample_size_logistic(0.10, 1.5)} for OR=1.5 with 10% baseline prevalence")
Step 3: Download and Prepare Data
Download data programmatically. Adapt the loading code to your data source's format.
import pandas as pd
import requests, io
def download_and_parse(url, fmt="csv"):
r = requests.get(url, timeout=120)
content = io.BytesIO(r.content)
if fmt == "xpt":
return pd.read_sas(content, format="xport")
elif fmt == "csv":
return pd.read_csv(content)
elif fmt == "tsv":
return pd.read_csv(content, sep="\t")
elif fmt == "stata":
return pd.read_stata(content)
elif fmt == "json":
return pd.read_json(content)
else:
return pd.read_csv(content)
df1 = download_and_parse(url1, fmt="xpt")
df2 = download_and_parse(url2, fmt="xpt")
df = df1.merge(df2, on="id_col", how="inner")
df = df[(df['age'] >= 20) & (df['age'] < 80)]
missing_pct = df.isnull().mean() * 100
print("Missing % per variable:\n", missing_pct[missing_pct > 0].sort_values(ascending=))
df[] = pd.cut(df[], bins=[,,,], labels=[,,])
df[] = (df[] >= threshold).astype()
Survey weights: Some surveys (NHANES, BRFSS, MEPS) require sampling weights for valid inference. Check the survey documentation. For weighted regression, use statsmodels.stats.weightstats or linearmodels.
REST API data: For sources like GDC (TCGA), ClinicalTrials.gov, or OpenTargets, paginate through the API:
all_records = []
offset = 0
while True:
resp = requests.get(f"{api_url}?offset={offset}&limit=500", timeout=30)
batch = resp.json().get("data", [])
if not batch:
break
all_records.extend(batch)
offset += len(batch)
df = pd.DataFrame(all_records)
Step 4: Descriptive Statistics (Table 1)
continuous_vars = ['age', 'bmi']
for var in continuous_vars:
print(df.groupby('exposure_group')[var].agg(['mean', 'std', 'count']))
categorical_vars = ['sex', 'race']
for var in categorical_vars:
print(pd.crosstab(df['exposure_group'], df[var], normalize='index') * 100)
Check distributions: df[var].skew(), scipy.stats.shapiro(), histograms for outliers.
Step 5: Regression Analysis
Sequential adjustment strategy (build evidence for confounding):
import statsmodels.formula.api as smf
import numpy as np
m1 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure', data=df).fit(disp=0)
m2 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + sex + race', data=df).fit(disp=0)
m3 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + sex + race + bmi + smoking + alcohol', data=df).fit(disp=0)
for name, model in [('Unadjusted', m1), ('Demographics', m2), ('Fully adjusted', m3)]:
or_val = np.exp(model.params['exposure'])
ci = np.exp(model.conf_int().loc['exposure'])
print(f"{name}: OR={or_val:.2f} (95% CI: {ci[0]:.2f}-{ci[1]:.2f}), p={model.pvalues['exposure']:.4f}")
Model selection by outcome type:
- Continuous outcome:
smf.ols()
- Binary outcome:
smf.logit()
- Ordered categories:
OrderedModel from statsmodels
- Time-to-event:
CoxPHFitter from lifelines
- Count data:
smf.poisson() or smf.negativebinomial()
Assumption checks:
from statsmodels.stats.outliers_influence import variance_inflation_factor
X = df[['age', 'bmi', 'exposure']].dropna()
for i, col in enumerate(X.columns):
print(f"VIF {col}: {variance_inflation_factor(X.values, i):.1f}")
Step 6: Sensitivity Analyses
for stratum_var in ['sex', 'age_group', 'race']:
print(f"\n--- Stratified by {stratum_var} ---")
for level, sub in df.groupby(stratum_var):
if len(sub) < 50: continue
try:
m = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + bmi', data=sub).fit(disp=0)
or_val = np.exp(m.params['exposure'])
ci = np.exp(m.conf_int().loc['exposure'])
print(f" {level}: OR={or_val:.2f} ({ci[0]:.2f}-{ci[1]:.2f}), p={m.pvalues['exposure']:.3f}, N={len(sub)}")
except: print(f" {level}: model failed (N={len(sub)})")
df_no_outliers = df[np.abs(stats.zscore(df['exposure'].dropna())) < 3]
m_robust = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + sex + bmi', data=df_no_outliers).fit(disp=0)
adj_model = smf.ols(, data=df).fit()
df[] = adj_model.resid
n_tests =
bonferroni_threshold = / n_tests
Step 7: Biological Interpretation (ToolUniverse Advantage)
This is where ToolUniverse adds value beyond any statistics package. After finding a statistical association, investigate the biological plausibility. Use find_tools to discover the right tools for your domain.
execute_tool("PubMed_search_articles", {"query": "[exposure] [outcome] mechanism", "max_results": 5})
execute_tool("EuropePMC_search_articles", {"query": "[exposure] [outcome] mouse model in vivo", "limit": 5})
find_tools("[exposure type] pathway")
find_tools("[outcome type] gene disease")
find_tools("gene disease association")
find_tools("variant functional annotation")
find_tools("drug mechanism target")
find_tools("chemical gene interaction")
The pattern: Exposure X → (what molecular pathway?) → (what biological process?) → Outcome Y. Use ToolUniverse tools to fill in the middle steps. This converts a statistical association into a biologically plausible hypothesis.
Step 8: Visualization
Key plots to produce (use matplotlib):
- Forest plot: stratified ORs with 95% CI, vertical reference line at OR=1, log scale x-axis
- Dose-response curve: exposure quartile medians on x-axis vs outcome prevalence/mean on y-axis
- DAG: directed acyclic graph showing assumed causal structure (exposure, confounders, outcome)
- Scatter + regression line: for continuous outcomes with
sns.regplot()
Step 9: Report Structure
Write the final report in this order:
- Background: What is known, what gap this analysis addresses (cite PubMed searches from Step 7)
- Methods: PECO, data source, inclusion/exclusion, variable definitions, statistical approach, sensitivity analyses
- Results: Table 1, unadjusted and adjusted ORs/HRs, stratified results, dose-response, sensitivity checks
- Discussion: Compare to prior literature (PubMed), biological plausibility (ToolUniverse pathway/mechanism findings), clinical significance of effect size
- Limitations: Study design constraints, unmeasured confounding, selection bias, measurement error, generalizability
Key limitations to always state:
- Cross-sectional design cannot establish temporality (if applicable)
- Residual confounding from unmeasured variables
- Self-reported exposure data may have recall bias
- Survey weights may not fully account for non-response bias
Completeness Checklist
Before finalizing any epidemiological analysis: