Effect decomposition in the presence of an exposure-induced mediator-outcome confounder

Epidemiology

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 300-306

  Vanderweele, Tyler J ^a   Vansteelandt, Stijn ^b   Robins, James M ^a  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CAUSALITY; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EFFECT MODIFIER, EPIDEMIOLOGIC; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PREGNANCY; PREMATURE BIRTH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84894182193     PISSN: 10443983     EISSN: 15315487     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000034     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. R obins JM, Greenland S. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 1992;3:143-155
2. Pearl J. Direct and indirect effects. In: Breese O, Koller D, eds. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2001:411-420
3. A vin C, Shpitser I, Pearl J. Identifiability of path-specific effects. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence. 2005;357-363
4. Vander Weele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat Interface. 2009;2:457-468
5. Vander Weele TJ. Concerning the consistency assumption in causal inference. Epidemiology. 2009;20:880-883
6. Pearl J. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009
7. R obins JM. Semantics of causal DAG models and the identification of direct and indirect effects. In: Green P, Hjort NL, Richardson S, eds. Highly Structured Stochastic Systems. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003:70-81
8. R obins JM, Richardson TS. Alternative graphical causal models and the identification of direct effects. In: Shrout P, ed. Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and Their Cures. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2010:427-437
9. R obins JM. A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with sustained exposure period-Application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect. Math Model. 1986;7:1393-1512
10. Vander Weele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172:1339-1348
11. I mai K, Keele L, Tingley D. A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol Methods. 2010;15:309-334
12. Valeri L, Vander Weele TJ. Mediation analysis allowing for exposuremediator interactions and causal interpretation: Theoretical assumptions and implementation with SAS and SPSS macros. Psychol Methods. 2013;18:137-150
13. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51:1173-1182
14. MacKinnon DP. An Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008
15. Van Der Laan MJ, Petersen ML. Direct effect models. Int J Biostat. 2008;4:Article 23
16. R obins JM. Testing and estimation of direct effects by reparameterizing directed acyclic graphs with structural nested models. In: Glymour C, Cooper GF, eds. Computation, Causation, and Discovery. Menlo Park, CA, Cambridge, MA: AAI Press/The MIT Press; 1999:349-405
17. G oetgeluk S, Vansteelandt S, Goetghebeur E. Estimation of controlled direct effects. J Royal Stat Soc. 2008;70:1049-1066
18. Vander Weele TJ. Marginal structural models for the estimation of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 2009;20:18-26
19. Vansteelandt S. Estimating direct effects in cohort and case-control studies. Epidemiology. 2009;20:851-860
20. Didelez V, Dawid AP, Geneletti S. Direct and indirect effects of sequential treatments. In: Dechter R, Richardson TS, eds. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. Arlington, VA: AUAI Press; 2006:138-146
21. G eneletti S. Identifying direct and indirect effects in a non-counterfactual framework. J Royal Stat Soc. 2007;69:199-216
22. Kotelchuck M. An evaluation of the Kessner Adequacy of Prenatal Care Index and a proposed Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:1414-1420
23. Vander Weele TJ, Lantos JD, Siddique J, Lauderdale DS. A comparison of four prenatal care indices in birth outcome models: Comparable results for predicting small-for-gestational-Age outcome but different results for preterm birth or infant mortality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:438-445
24. Politis, DN, Romano JP. Large sample confidence regions based on subsamples under minimal assumptions. Ann Stat. 1994;22:2031-2050
25. Vander Weele TJ. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 2010;21:540-551
26. I mai K, Yamamoto T. Identification and sensitivity analysis for multiple causal mechanisms: Revisiting evidence from framing experiments. Political Anal. 2012;21:141-171
27. T chetgen Tchetgen EJ, Shpitser I. Semiparametric theory for causal mediation analysis: Efficiency bounds, multiple robustness and sensitivity analysis. Ann Stat. 2012;40:1816-1845
28. Vander Weele TJ, Chiba, Y. Sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects in the presence of an mediator-outcome confounders that may be affected by exposure. Epidemiol Biostat Public Health. In press
29. Vansteelandt S, Vander Weele TJ. Natural direct and indirect effects on the exposed: Effect decomposition under weaker assumptions. Biometrics. 2012;68:1019-1027