CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-epidemiological-analysis

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.

77

Quality

96%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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:

# Search for relevant datasets — use find_tools to discover what's available
find_tools("dataset search")
find_tools("your domain keywords")  # e.g., "cancer genomics", "clinical trial", "survey health"

# Search literature for study precedents — papers cite their data sources
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

# Generic download helper — adapt URL and format to your source
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)  # default fallback

# Load and merge multiple files on shared ID column
df1 = download_and_parse(url1, fmt="xpt")
df2 = download_and_parse(url2, fmt="xpt")
df = df1.merge(df2, on="id_col", how="inner")

# Filter population (inclusion/exclusion criteria)
df = df[(df['age'] >= 20) & (df['age'] < 80)]

# Handle missing data
missing_pct = df.isnull().mean() * 100
print("Missing % per variable:\n", missing_pct[missing_pct > 0].sort_values(ascending=False))
# Decision: complete case if <5% missing; multiple imputation if 5-20%; drop variable if >20%

# Variable coding (adapt to your data)
df['age_group'] = pd.cut(df['age'], bins=[20,40,60,80], labels=['20-39','40-59','60-79'])
df['outcome_binary'] = (df['outcome_continuous'] >= threshold).astype(int)

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)

# Table 1: mean +/- SD for continuous, N(%) for categorical, by exposure group
continuous_vars = ['age', 'bmi']  # adapt to your variables
for var in continuous_vars:
    print(df.groupby('exposure_group')[var].agg(['mean', 'std', 'count']))

categorical_vars = ['sex', 'race']  # adapt to your variables
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

# Model 1: Unadjusted
m1 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure', data=df).fit(disp=0)

# Model 2: + demographics
m2 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + sex + race', data=df).fit(disp=0)

# Model 3: + clinical factors
m3 = smf.logit('outcome ~ exposure + age + sex + race + bmi + smoking + alcohol', data=df).fit(disp=0)

# Report ORs with 95% CI
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

# Multicollinearity (VIF > 5 is concerning, > 10 is severe)
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

# Stratified analysis (effect modification)
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)})")

# Exclude outliers (+/- 3 SD) and re-run
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)

# Confounder-adjusted exposure (residual method, e.g., energy-adjusted nutrient intake)
# Use when exposure correlates strongly with a confounder (total calories, body size, etc.)
adj_model = smf.ols('exposure ~ confounder', data=df).fit()
df['exposure_adj'] = adj_model.resid

# Multiple comparisons note
n_tests = 5  # number of exposure-outcome pairs tested
bonferroni_threshold = 0.05 / 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.

# 1. Literature evidence — search for mechanism connecting exposure to outcome
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})

# 2. Pathway/molecular context — discover tools for your exposure type
find_tools("[exposure type] pathway")       # e.g., "nutrient pathway", "drug target", "chemical toxicology"
find_tools("[outcome type] gene disease")   # e.g., "diabetes gene", "cancer survival", "cardiac risk"

# 3. Gene-disease evidence (if a gene/variant is involved)
find_tools("gene disease association")
find_tools("variant functional annotation")

# 4. Drug/chemical mechanisms (if a drug or chemical is the exposure)
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:

  1. Background: What is known, what gap this analysis addresses (cite PubMed searches from Step 7)
  2. Methods: PECO, data source, inclusion/exclusion, variable definitions, statistical approach, sensitivity analyses
  3. Results: Table 1, unadjusted and adjusted ORs/HRs, stratified results, dose-response, sensitivity checks
  4. Discussion: Compare to prior literature (PubMed), biological plausibility (ToolUniverse pathway/mechanism findings), clinical significance of effect size
  5. 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:

  • PECO defined and documented
  • Study design matches the research question
  • Sample size adequate (power analysis done)
  • Missing data reported and handled
  • Table 1 produced
  • Unadjusted AND adjusted models reported
  • Confounders justified (not just statistically selected)
  • Assumptions checked (VIF, linearity, model fit)
  • At least one sensitivity analysis performed
  • Biological plausibility investigated via ToolUniverse
  • Effect size interpreted in clinical context (not just p-value)
  • Limitations explicitly stated
Repository
mims-harvard/ToolUniverse
Last updated
First committed

Also appears in

mims-harvard/ToolUniverse
In sync

since Jul 28, 2026

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.