Evaluation and validation of social and psychological markers in randomised trials of complex interventions in mental health: A methodological research programme

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 19, Issue 93, 2015, Pages 1-116

  Dunn, Graham ^a,b   Emsley, Richard ^a,b   Liu, Hanhua ^a   Landau, Sabine ^c   Green, Jonathan ^a   White, Ian ^d   Pickles, Andrew ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b Belfast and North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research   (United Kingdom)

^c KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL STUDY; CONFOUNDING VARIABLE; CONTROL GROUP; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA SYNTHESIS; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MENTAL HEALTH; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PROGNOSIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOTHERAPY; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOCIAL ASPECT; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STUDY DESIGN; THERAPY EFFECT; VALIDATION STUDY; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; EVALUATION STUDY; MENTAL DISORDERS; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BIOMARKERS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MENTAL DISORDERS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84947219178     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: 20464924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta19930     Document Type: Article

References (109)

1. MRC. Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions: New Guidance. 2008. URL: www.mrc. ac.uk/complexinterventionsguidance (accessed 3 June 2015).
2. Buyse M. Towards validation of statistically reliable biomarkers. Eur J Cancer 2007;5:89-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6349(07)70028-9
3. Joffe MM, Greene T. Related causal frameworks for surrogate outcomes. Biometrics 2009;65:530-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2008.01106.x
4. Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961;4:561-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004
5. Pearl J. Causality. 2nd edn. New York, NY; Cambridge University Press; 2009. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1017/CBO9780511803161
6. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects of treatment in randomized and non-randomized studies. J Educ Psychol 1974;66:688-701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037350
7. Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc 1996;91:444-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1996.10476902
8. Barnard J, Frangakis CE, Hill JL, Rubin DB. Principal stratification approach to broken randomized experiments: a case study of school choice vouchers in New York City. J Am Stat Assoc 2003;98:299-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/016214503000071
9. Manski CF. Nonparametric bounds on treatment effects. Am Econ Rev 1990;80:319-23.
10. Balke A, Pearl J. Bounds on treatment effects from studies with imperfect compliance. J Am Stat Assoc 1997;92:1172-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1997.10474074
11. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB. Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 2002;58:21-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2002.00021.x
12. Freeman D, Dunn G, Startup H, Kingdon D. The effects of reducing worry in patients with persecutory delusions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2012;13:223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-13-223
13. Dunn G, Fowler D, Rollinson R, Freeman D, Kuipers E, Smith B, et al. Effective elements of cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis: results of a novel type of subgroup analysis based on principal stratification. Psychol Med 2012;42:1057-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0033291711001954
14. Dunn G, Bentall R. Modelling treatment-effect heterogeneity in randomized controlled trials of complex interventions (psychological treatments). Stat Med 2007;26:4719-45. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/sim.2891
15. Simon R. Clinical trials for predictive medicine: new challenges and paradigms. Clin Trials 2010;7:516-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774510366454
16. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986;51:1173-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
17. Kraemer HC, Fairburn CG, Agras WS. Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002;59:877-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/ archpsyc.59.10.877
18. Judd CM, Kenny DA. Process analysis-estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Eval Rev 1981;5:602-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0193841X8100500502
19. MacKinnon DP. Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group; 2008.
20. Birchwood M, Peters E, Tarrier N, Dunn G, Lewis S, Wykes T, et al. A multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of cognitive therapy to prevent harmful compliance with command hallucinations. BMC Psychiatry 2011;11:155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-11-155
21. Barrowclough C, Haddock G, Wykes T, Beardmore R, Conrod P, Craig T, et al. Integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis and comorbid substance misuse: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010;341:c6325. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1136/bmj.c6325
22. Gallop R, Small DS, Lin JY, Elliot MR, Joffe MM, Ten Have TR. Mediation analysis with principal stratification. Stat Med 2009;28:1108-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3533
23. Green J, Charman T, McConachie H, Aldred C, Slonims V, Howlin H, et al. Parent-mediated communication-focused treatment in children with autism (PACT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010;375:2152-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60587-9
24. Bruce ML, Ten Have TR, Reynolds CF, Katz II, Schulberg HC, Mulsant BH, et al. Reducing suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms in depressed older primary care patients-a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;291:1081-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.9.1081
25. Ten Have TR, Joffe MM, Lynch KG, Brown GK, Maisto SA, Beck AT. Causal mediation analysis with rank preserving models. Biometrics 2007;63:926-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1541-0420.2007.00766.x
26. Bellamy SL, Lin JY, Ten Have TR. An introduction to causal modelling in clinical trials. Clin Trials 2007;4:58-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774506075549
27. Lynch K, Cary M, Gallop R, Ten Have TR. Causal mediation analyses for randomized trials. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2008;8:57-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10742-008-0028-9
28. Lord C, Risi S, Lambrecht L, Cook EH Jr, Leventhal BL, DiLavore PC, et al. The autism diagnostic observation schedule-generic: a standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. J Autism Dev Disord 2000;30:205-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/ A:1005592401947
29. MacKinnon DP, Dwyer JH. Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Eval Rev 1993;17:144-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9301700202
30. Emsley R, Dunn G, White IR. Mediation and moderation of treatment effects in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. Stat Methods Med Res 2010;19:237-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0962280209105014
31. Emsley R, Dunn G. Evaluation of Potential Mediators in Randomized Trials of Complex Interventions (Psychotherapies). In Berzuini C, Dawid P, Bernardinelli L, editors. Causality: Statistical Perspectives and Applications. Chichester: Wiley; 2012. pp. 290-309. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/9781119945710.ch20
32. Robins JM, Greenland S. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 1992;3:143-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001648-199203000-00013
33. Pearl J. Direct and Indirect Effects. In Breese J, Koller D, editors. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2011. pp. 411-20.
34. Cai ZH, Kuroki M, Pearl J, Tian J. Bounds on direct effects in the presence of confounded intermediate variables. Biometrics 2008;64:695-701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007. 00949.x
35. Wooldridge JM. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2002.
36. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat Interface 2009;2:457-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.4310/SII.2009.v2.n4.a7
37. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172:1339-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq332
38. Emsley R, Liu H, Dunn G, Valeri L, VanderWeele TJ. Paramed: a command to perform causal mediation analysis using parametric models. 2015; in preparation.
39. Herting JR. Evaluating and rejecting true mediation models: a cautionary note. Prevent Sci 2002;3:285-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1020828709115
40. Holland PW. Causal inference, path analysis and recursive structural equation models (with discussion). Sociol Methodol 1988;18:449-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/271055
41. Kaufman JS, MacLehose R, Kaufman S. A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation. Epidemiol Perspect Innovations 2004;1.
42. Kaufman S, Kaufman JS, MacLehose RF, Greenland S, Poole C. Improved estimation of controlled direct effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding of intermediate variables. Stat Med 2005;24:1683-702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.2057
43. Tritchler D. Explanatory analyses of randomised studies. Biometrics 1996;52:1450-6. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2307/2532858
44. Tritchler D. Reasoning about data with directed graphs. Stat Med 1999;18:2067-76. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990830)18:16<2067::AID-SIM182>3.0.CO;2-2
45. McDonald RP. Haldane's lungs: a case study in path analysis. Mul Behav Res 1997;32:1-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3201_1
46. Wooldridge JM. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. 2nd edn. Ohio, OH: Thompson Learning; 2003.
47. Gennetian LA, Morris PA, Bos JM, Bloom HS. Constructing Instrumental Variables From Experimental Data to Explore how Treatments Produce Effects. In Bloom HS, editor. Learning More From Social Experiments: Evolving Analytic Approaches. 1st edn. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2005. pp. 75-114.
48. Gennetian LA, Magnuson K, Morris PA. From statistical associations to causation: what developmentalists can learn from instrumental variables techniques coupled with experimental data. Develop Psychol 2008;44:381-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.381
49. Sobel ME. Identification of causal parameters in randomised studies with mediating variables. J Educ Behav Stat 2008;33:230-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/1076998607307239
50. Fischer-Lapp K, Goetghebeur E. Practical properties of some structural mean analyses of the effect of compliance in randomized trials. Control Clin Trials 1999;20:531-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0197-2456(99)00027-6
51. Albert JM. Mediation analysis via potential outcomes models. Stat Med 2008;27:1282-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3016
52. Ten Have TR, Joffe M. A review of causal estimation of effects in mediation analyses. Stat Methods Med Res 2012;21:77-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0962280210391076
53. Fuller WA. Measurement Error Models. New York, NY: Wiley; 1987. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ 9780470316665
54. Carroll RJ, Ruppert D, Stefanski LA, Crainiceanu CM. Measurement Error in Non-Linear Models. 2nd edn. London: Chapman & Hall; 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781420010138
55. Bollen K. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. 2nd edn. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1989. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118619179
56. Dunn G. Statistical Evaluation of Measurement Errors. 2nd edn. London: Arnold; 2004.
57. Dunn G. Regression models for method comparison data. J Biopharm Stat 2007;17:739-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10543400701329513
58. Dunn G. The problem of measurement error in modelling the effect of compliance in a randomised trial. Stat Med 1999;18:2863-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258 (19991115)18:21<2863::AID-SIM238>3.0.CO;2-I
59. Goetghebeur E, Vansteelandt S. Structural mean models for compliance analysis in randomised clinical trials and the impact of errors in exposure. Stat Methods Med Res 2005;14:397-415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/0962280205sm407oa
60. Dunn G, Everitt BS, Pickles A. Modelling Covariances and Latent Variables in EQS. London: Chapman & Hall; 1993.
61. Weir CJ, Walley RJ. Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: literature review. Stat Med 2006;25:183-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.2319
62. Daniels MJ, Hughes MD. Meta-analysis for the evaluation of potential surrogate markers. Stat Med 1997;16:1965-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19970915)16:17<1965:: AID-SIM630>3.0.CO;2-M
63. Burzykowski T, Molenberghs G, Buyse M. The Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoints. New York, NY: Springer; 2006.
64. Florens JP, Heckman JJ, Meghir C, Vytlacil E. Identification of treatment effects using control functions in models with continuous, endogenous treatment and heterogeneous effects. Econometrica 2008;76:1191-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.3982/ECTA5317
65. Emsley RA, Dunn G, Liu H, Clarke P, White IR, Windmeijer F. Estimating rank preserving models using instrumental variables for causal mediation analysis. 2015; in preparation.
66. Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1960;23:56-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.23.1.56
67. Beck AT, Brown GK, Steer RA. Psychometric characteristics of the scale for suicide ideation with psychiatric outpatients. Behav Res Ther 1997;35:1039-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967 (97)00073-9
68. Follmann D. Augmented designs to assess immune response in vaccine trials. Biometrics 2006;62:1161-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00569.x
69. Gunderson JG, Frank AF, Katz HM, Vannicelli ML, Frosch JP, Knapp PH. Effects of psychotherapy in schizophrenia: II. Comparative outcome of two forms of treatment. Schizophr Bull 1984;10:564-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/10.4.564
70. Jo B. Estimation of intervention effects with noncompliance: alternative model specifications. J Educ Behav Stat 2002;27:385-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/10769986027004385
71. Dunn G, Maracy M, Tomenson B. Estimating treatment effects from randomized clinical trials with noncompliance and loss to follow-up: the role of instrumental variable methods. Stat Method Med Res 2005;14:369-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/0962280205sm403oa
72. Dunn G, Maracy M, Dowrick C, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Dalgard OS, Page H, et al. Estimating psychological treatment effects from an RCT with both non-compliance and loss to follow-up. Br J Psychiatry 2013;183:323-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.183.4.323
73. Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781119013563
74. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB. Addressing complications of intention-to-treat analysis in the combined presence of all-or-none treatment-noncompliance and subsequent missing outcomes. Biometrika 1999;86:365-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/86.2.365
75. Lewis S, Tarrier N, Haddock G, Bentall R, Kinderman P, Kingdon D, et al. Randomised controlled trial of cognitive-behavioural therapy in early schizophrenia: acute-phase outcomes. Br J Psychiatry 2002;181:S91-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.181.43.s91
76. Tarrier N, Lewis S, Haddock G, Bentall R, Drake R, Kinderman P, et al. Cognitive-behavioural therapy in first-episode and early schizophrenia-18-month follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2004;184:231-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.184.3.231
77. Kay SR, Fiszbein A, Opler LA. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schiz Bull 1987;13:261-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/13.2.261
78. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. London: Chapman & Hall; 1993.
79. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User's Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 1998-2012.
80. Pickles A, Green J and the PACT consortium. Therapeutic mechanism in the MRC Pre-school Autism Communication Trial: implications for study design and parent focussed therapy for children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2015;56:162-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12291
81. Garety P, Fowler D, Freeman D, Bebbington P, Dunn G, Kuipers E. Cognitive-behavioural therapy and family intervention for relapse prevention and symptom reduction in psychosis: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2008;192:412-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.107.043570
82. Cheong J, MacKinnon D, Khoo ST. Investigation of mediational processes using parallel process latent growth curve modeling. Struct Equation Modeling 2003;10:238. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1207/S15328007SEM1002_5
83. Muthén B, Khoo ST. Longitudinal studies of achievement growth using latent variable modeling. Learn Individ Differences 1998;10:73-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1041-6080(99)80135-6
84. McArdle JJ. Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data. Ann Rev Psychol 2009;60:577-605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163612
85. Muthén B, Brown H. Estimating drug effects in the presence of placebo response: Causal inference using growth mixture modeling. Stat Med 2009;28:3363-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3721
86. Asparouhov T, Muthén B. Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: 3-Step approaches using Mplus. Mplus Web Notes: No. 15 Version 8, 5 August 2014.
87. Bullock JG, Green DP, Ha SE. Yes, but what's the mechanism? (Don't expect an easy answer). J Personality Soc Psychol 2010;98:550-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018933
88. Burgess S, Thompson SG. Avoiding bias from weak instruments in Mendelian randomisation studies. Int J Epidemiol 2011;40:755-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyr036
89. Burgess S, Thompson SG. Bias in causal estimates from Mendelian randomisation studies with weak instruments. Stat Med 2011;30:1312-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.4197
90. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S. 'Mendelian randomisation': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? Int J Epidemiology 2003;32:1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyg070
91. Lawlor DA, Harbord RM, Sterne JAC, Timpson N, Davey Smith G. Mendelian randomisation: using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology. Stat Med 2008;27:1133-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3034
92. Didelez V, Sheehan NA. Mendeleian randomisation as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference. Stat Methods Med Res 2007;16:309-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0962280206077743
93. Garety PA, Kuipers E, Fowler D, Freeman D, Bebbington PE. A cognitive model of the positive symptoms of psychosis. Psychol Med 2001;31:189-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0033291701003312
94. Garety P, Freeman D. Cognitive approaches to delusions: a critical review of theories and evidence. Br J Clin Psychol 1999;38:113-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466599162700
95. Freeman D. Suspicious minds: the psychology of persecutory delusions. Clin Psychol Rev 2007;27:425-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.10.004
96. Emsley RA, VanderWeele TJ. Mediation and sensitivity analysis using two or more trials. 2015; in preparation.
97. VanderWeele TJ. Explanation in Causal Analysis: Methods for Mediation and Interaction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2015.
98. Spencer SJ, Zanna MP, Fong GT. Establishing a causal chain: why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. J Pers Soc Psychol 2005;89:845-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845
99. Stone-Romero EF, Rosopa PJ. The relative validity of inferences about mediation as a function of research design characteristics. Org Res Methods 2008;11:326-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1094428107300342
100. Young KY, Laird A, Zhou ZX. The efficiency of clinical trial designs for predictive biomarker validation. Clin Trials 2010;7:557-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774510370497
101. Freidlin B, McShane LM, Korn EL. Randomized clinical trials with biomarkers: design issues. J Nat Cancer Inst 2010;102:152-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp477
102. Dunn G, Emsley R, Liu H, Landau S. Integrating biomarker information within trials to evaluate treatment mechanisms and efficacy for personalised medicine. Clin Trials 2013;10:712-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774513499651
103. Imai K, Tingley D, Yamamoto T. Experimental designs for identifying causal mechanisms. J R Stat Soc A 2013;76:5-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01032.x
104. Imai K, Keele L, Tingley, D, Yamamoto T. Unpacking the black box of causality: learning about causal mechanisms from experimental and observational studies. Am Political Sci Rev 2011;105:765-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000414
105. Daniel RM, De Stavola BL, Cousens SN, Vansteelandt S. Causal mediation analysis with multiple mediators. Biometrics 2015;71:1-14.
106. Valeri L, Lin X, VanderWeele TJ. Mediation analysis when a continuous mediator is measured with error and the outcome follows a generalized linear model. Stat Med 2014;33:4875-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.6295
107. VanderWeele TJ. Causal mediation analysis with survival data. Epidemiology 2011;22:582-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31821db37e
108. VanderWeele TJ. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 2010;21:540-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181df191c
109. VanderWeele TJ, Arah OA. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders. Epidemiology 2011;22:42-52. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181f74493