A note on formulae for causal mediation analysis in an odds ratio context

Epidemiologic Methods

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 21-31

  Tchetgen, Eric Tchetgen ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Mediation analysis; Natural direct effect; Odds ratio; Risk ratio

Indexed keywords

EID: 84936777179     PISSN: 21949263     EISSN: 2161962X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/em-2012-0005     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Breslow, N. E. (1974). Covariance analysis of censored survival data. Biometrics, 30:89-99.
2. Chu, H., and Cole, S. (2010). Estimation of risk ratios in cohort studies with common outcomes: a Bayesian approach. Epidemiology, 21(6):855-62.
3. Greenland, S. (2004). Model-based estimation of relative risks and other epidemiologic measures in studies of common outcomes and in case-control studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 160:301-305.
4. Imai, K., Keele, L., and Yamamoto, T. (2010). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science, 25:51-71.
5. van der Laan, M., and Petersen, M. (2005). Direct effect models. U. C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series. Paper 187. Available at http://www.bepress.com/ucbbiostat/paper187.
6. Lee, J. (1994). Odds ratio or relative risk for cross-sectional data? International Journal of Epidemiology, 23(1):201-203. doi:10.1093/ije/23.1.20.
7. Pearl, J. (2001). Direct and indirect effects. In: Proceedings of the seventeenth conference on uncertainty and artificial intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, 411-420.
8. Pearl, J. (2011). The mediation formula: a guide to the assessment of causal pathways in nonlinear models. To appear in Causality: Statistical Perspectives and Applications, C. Berzuini, P. Dawid, and L. Bernardinelli (Eds.), 151-179. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Forthcoming, 2011.
9. Robins, J. M., and Greenland, S. (1992). Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology, 3:143-155.
10. Skov, T., Deddens, J., Petersen, M. R., and Endahl, L. (1998). Prevalence proportion ratios: estimation and hypothesis testing. International Journal of Epidemiology, 27:91-95.
11. Spiegelman, D., and Hertzmark, E. (2005). Easy SAS calculations for risk or prevalence ratios and differences. American Journal of Epidemiology, 162:199-200.
12. Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J. (2011). On causal mediation analysis with a survival outcome. The International Journal of Biostatistics, 7(1): Article 33, 1-38.
13. Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J. (2012). Estimation of risk ratios in cohort studies with a common outcome: a simple and efficient twostage approach. The International Journal of Biostatistics, 1-13.
14. Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J., and Shpitser, I. (2011). Semiparametric estimation of models for natural direct and indirect effects. Submitted. Available at http://www.bepress.com/harvardbiostat/paper129.
15. Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J., and Shpitser, I. (2012). Semiparametric theory for causal mediation analysis: efficiency bounds, multiple robustness and sensitivity analysis. Annals of Statistics, 40(3):1816-1845.
16. VanderWeele, T. J., and Vansteelandt, S. (2010). Odds ratios for mediation analysis with a dichotomous outcome. American Journal of Epidemiology, 172:1339-1348.
17. Wacholder, S. (1986). Binomial regression in GLIM: estimating risk ratios and risk differences. American Journal of Epidemiology, 123:174-184.
18. Wang, Z., and Louis, T. (2003). Matching conditional and marginal shapes in binary random intercept models using a bridge distribution function. Biometrika, 90(4):765-775.
19. Zeng, W., and van der Laan, M. (2012). Targeted maximum likelihood estimation of natural direct effects. The International Journal of Biostatistics, 8(1):1-40.
20. Zou, G. Y. (2004). A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. American Journal of Epidemiology, 159:702-706.