A principal stratification approach for evaluating natural direct and indirect effects in the presence of treatment-induced intermediate confounding

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 131-144

  Taguri, Masataka ^a   Chiba, Yasutaka ^b  

^a YOKOHAMA CITY UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KINKI UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Mediation analysis; Natural direct and indirect effects; Principal stratification; Treatment induced intermediate confounding, sensitivity analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFOUNDING VARIABLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; NATURAL DIRECT EFFECT; NATURAL INDIRECT EFFECT; NONPARAMETRIC STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS MODEL; PRINCIPAL STRATIFICATION FRAMEWORK; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TREATMENT INDUCED INTERMEDIATE CONFOUNDING; CAUSALITY; CHILD DEATH; EPIDEMIOLOGY; INFANT; INFANT MORTALITY; LIVE BIRTH; MATERNAL AGE; MEDICAL RECORD; MORTALITY; MOTHER; NEWBORN; PREMATURE BIRTH; PRENATAL CARE; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EFFECT MODIFIER, EPIDEMIOLOGIC; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT DEATH; INFANT MORTALITY; INFANT, NEWBORN; LIVE BIRTH; MATERNAL AGE; MEDICAL RECORD LINKAGE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOTHERS; PREMATURE BIRTH; PRENATAL CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84915775760     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6329     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. VanderWeele TJ. Marginal structural models for the estimation of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 2009; 20:18-26.
2. Robins JM, Greenland S. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 1992; 3:143-155.
3. Pearl J. Direct and indirect effects. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufman: San Francisco, 2001; 411-420.
4. Hafeman DM, Schwartz S. Opening the black box: a motivation for the assessment of mediation. International Journal of Epidemiology 2009; 38:838-845.
5. Hafeman DM, VanderWeele TJ. Alternative assumptions for the identification of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 2011; 22:753-764.
6. Pearl J. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press: New York, 2009.
7. Robins JM, Richardson TS. Alternative graphical causal models and the identification of direct effects. In Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and Their Cures, Shrout P (ed) Oxford University Press: New York, NY, 2010; 427-437.
8. Avin C, Shpitser I, Pearl J. Identifiability of path-specific effects. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, 2005; 357-363.
9. Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ, VanderWeele TJ. Identification of natural direct effects when a confounder of the mediator is directly affected by exposure. Epidemiology 2014; 25:282-291.
10. Imai K, Yamamoto T. Identification and sensitivity analysis for multiple causal mechanisms: revisiting evidence from framing experiments. Political Analysis 2013; 21:141-171.
11. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB. Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 2002; 58:21-29.
12. Gilbert PB, Bosch RJ, Hudgens MG. Sensitivity analysis for the assessment of causal vaccine effects on viral load in HIV vaccine trials. Biometrics 2003; 59:531-541.
13. Hayden D, Pauler DK, Schoenfeld D. An estimator for treatment comparisons amongst survivors in randomized trials. Biometrics 2005; 61:305-310.
14. Egleston BL, Scharfstein DO, Freeman EE, West SK. Causal inference for non-mortality outcomes in the presence of death. Biostatistics 2007; 8:526-545.
15. Gallop R, Small DS, Lin JY, Elliott MR, Joffe M, Ten Have TR. Mediation analysis with principal stratification. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:1108-1130.
16. Sjölander A, Humphreys K, Vansteelandt S, Bellocco R, Palmgren J. Sensitivity analysis for principal stratum direct effects, with an application to a study of physical activity and coronary heart disease. Biometrics 2009; 65:514-520.
17. Chiba Y. Marginal structural models for estimating principal stratum direct effects under the monotonicity assumption. Biometrical Journal 2011; 53:1025-1034.
18. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 1974; 66:688-701.
19. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Statistics and Its Interface 2009; 2:457-468.
20. Robins JM. Semantics of causal DAG models and the identification of direct and indirect effects. In Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, Green P, Hjort NL, Richardson N (eds). Oxford University Press: New York, 2003; 70-81.
21. Suzuki E, Yamamoto E, Tsuda T. Identification of operating mediation and mechanism in the sufficient-component cause framework. European Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 26:347-357.
22. VanderWeele TJ. Principal stratification: Uses and limitations. International Journal of Biostatistics 2011; 7:1-14. Article 28.
23. Joffe MM, Greene T. Related causal frameworks for surrogate outcomes. Biometrics 2009; 65:530-538.
24. Robins JM. A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with sustained exposure period-application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect. Mathematical Modeling 1986; 7:1393-1512.
25. Vansteelandt S, VanderWeele TJ. Natural direct and indirect effects on the exposed: effect decomposition under weaker assumptions. Biometrics 2012; 68:1019-1027.
26. Imai K, Keele L, Yamamoto T. Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science 2010; 25:51-71.
27. Petersen M, Sinisi S, van der Laan M. Estimation of direct causal effects. Epidemiology 2006; 17:276-284.
28. Sjölander A. Bounds on natural effects in the presence of confounded intermediate variables. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:558-571.
29. Kaufman S, Kaufman JS, MacLehose RF. Analytic bounds on causal risk differences in directed acyclic graphs involving three observed binary variables. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2009; 139;3473-3487.
30. Chiba Y, Taguri M. Alternative monotonicity assumptions for improving bounds on natural direct effects. International Journal of Biostatistics 2013; 9:235-249.
31. Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ, Phiri K. Bounds to evaluate the pure/natural direct effect without cross-world counterfactual independence (March 2014). Harvard University Biostatistics Working Paper Series. Working Paper 171.
32. Kotelchuck M. The Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index: its US distribution and association with low birthweight. American Journal of Public Health 1994; 84:1486-1489.
33. Pearl J. Principal stratification - a goal or a tool? International Journal of Biostatistics 2011. 7:1-13. Article 20.
34. Ten Have TR, Joffe MM. A review of causal estimation of effects in mediation analyses. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2012; 21:77-107.
35. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. American Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 172:1339-1348.