Bounds on direct effects in the presence of confounded intermediate variables

Biometrics

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 695-701

  Cai, Zhihong ^a   Kuroki, Manabu ^b   Pearl, Judea ^c   Tian, Jin ^d  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Japan)

^b OSAKA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c University of California   (United States)

^d Iowa State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Causal effect; Midpoint estimator; Potential response type; Stratified analysis

Indexed keywords

BIOMETRICS;

CAUSAL EFFECT; CONFOUNDER; LINEAR-PROGRAMMING; MIDPOINT ESTIMATOR; NUMERICAL DATA; POTENTIAL RESPONSE; POTENTIAL RESPONSE TYPE; PROGRAMMING SOFTWARE; STRATIFIED ANALYSIS; TOTAL EFFECT;

LINEAR PROGRAMMING;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; LINEAR PROGRAMING; SOFTWARE;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; AVERAGE CONTROLLED DIRECT EFFECT; MODEL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 49749118623     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: 15410420     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00949.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Balke, A. (1995). Probabilistic counterfactuals: Semantics, computation, and applications. Technical Report (R-242), UCLA Cognitive Systems Laboratory (Ph.D. Thesis).
2. Balke, A. and Pearl, J. (1997). Bounds on treatment effects from studies with imperfect compliance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 92, 1171 1176.
3. Buyse, M. and Molenberghs, G. (1998). Criteria for the validation of surrogate endpoints in randomized experiments. Biometrics 54, 1014 1029.
4. Freedman, L. S., Graubard, B. I., and Schatzkin, A. (1992). Statistical validation of intermediate endpoints for chronic diseases. Statistics in Medicine 11, 167 178.
5. Greenland, S. and Robins, J. M. (1986). Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding. International Journal of Epidemiology 15, 413 419.
6. Kang, C. and Tian, J. (2006). Inequality constraints in causal models with hidden variables. In Proceedings of the Twenty Second Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 411 420. Boston : UAI Press.
7. Kaufman, S. and Kaufman, J. S. (2006). Personal Communication.
8. Kaufman, S., Kaufman, J. S., MacLenose, R. F., Greenland, S., and Poole, C. (2005). Improved estimation of controlled direct effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding of intermediate variables. Statistics in Medicine 24, 1683 1702. Correction, 25, 3228.
9. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial Results 1984). I. Reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease. Journal of the American Medical Association 251, 351 364.
10. Neyman, J. (1923). Justification of applications of the calculus of probabilities to the solutions of certain questions in agricultural experimentation. Excerpts English translation (1990). Statistical Science 5, 463 472.
11. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Pearl, J. (2001). Direct and indirect effects. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 411 420. San Francisco : Morgan Kaufmann.
13. Petersen, M. L., Sinisi, S. E., and van der Laan, M. J. (2006). Estimation of direct causal effects. Epidemiology 17, 276 284.
14. Robins, J. M. and Greenland, S. (1992). Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 3, 143 155.
15. Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66, 688 701.
16. Rubin, D. B. (2004). Direct and indirect causal effects via potential outcomes. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 31, 161 170.
17. Taylor, J. M. G., Wang, Y., and Thiebaut, R. (2005). Counterfactual links to the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker. Biometrics 61, 1102 1111.
18. Wang, Y. and Taylor, J. M. G. (2002). A measure of the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker. Biometrics 58, 803 812.