Mediation Analysis: A Practitioner's Guide

Annual Review of Public Health

Volumn 37, Issue , 2016, Pages 17-32

  VanderWeele, Tyler J ^a  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Direct effects; Indirect effects; Mechanism; Pathway analysis

Indexed keywords

CASE CONTROL STUDY; CLASSIFICATION; EXPOSURE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEASUREMENT ERROR; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; STUDY DESIGN; TIME; CAUSALITY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME FACTOR;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; LOGISTIC MODELS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84982812637     PISSN: 01637525     EISSN: 15452093     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032315-021402     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Albert JM. 2012. Distribution-free mediation analysis for nonlinearmodels with confounding. Epidemiology 23:879-88
2. Albert JM, Nelson S. 2011. Generalized causal mediation analysis. Biometrics 67:1028-38
3. Alwin DF, Hauser RM. 1975. The decomposition of effects in path analysis. Am. Sociol. Rev. 40:37-47
4. Avin C, Shpitser I, Pearl J. 2005. Identifiability of path-specific effects. Proc. Int. Jt. Conf. Artif. Intel., Edinburgh, Aug., pp. 357-63
5. Baron RM, Kenny DA. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51:1173-82
6. Daniel RM, De Stavola BL, Cousens SN. 2011. gformula: estimating causal effects in the presence of time-varying confounding or mediation using the g-computation formula. Stata J. 11:479-517
7. Daniel RM, De Stavola BL, Cousens SN, Vansteelandt S. 2015. Causal mediation analysis with multiple mediators. Biometrics 71:1-14
8. Ding P, VanderWeele TJ. 2015. Sharp sensitivity bounds for mediation under unmeasured mediatoroutcome confounding. Tech. Rep. In press
9. Goetgeluk S, Vansteelandt S, Goetghebeur E. 2008. Estimation of controlled direct effects. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat Methodol. 70:1049-66
10. Greenland S. 2003. Quantifying biases in causalmodels: classical confounding versus collider-stratification bias. Epidemiology 14:300-6
11. Greenland S, Robins JM, Pearl J. 1999. Confounding and collapsibility in causal inference. Stat. Sci. 14:29-46
12. Hafeman DM. 2011. Confounding of indirect effects: a sensitivity analysis exploring the range of bias due to a cause common to both the mediator and the outcome. Am. J. Epidemiol. 174:710-17
13. Hong G, Nomi T. 2012. Weighting methods for assessing policy effects mediated by peer change. J. Res. Educ. Eff. (Spec. Issue: Stat. Approaches Stud. Mediat. Eff. Educ. Res.) 5:261-89
14. Hyman HH. 1955. Survey Design and Analysis: Principles, Cases and Procedures. Glencoe, IL: Free Press
15. Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D. 2010. A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol. Methods 15:309-34
16. Imai K, Yamamoto T. 2012. Identification and sensitivity analysis for multiple causal mechanisms: revisiting evidence from framing experiments. Pol. Anal. 21:141-71
17. Jiang Z, VanderWeele TJ. 2015. Causal mediation analysis in the presence of a misclassified binary exposure. Tech. Rep.
18. Jiang Z, VanderWeele TJ. 2015. Causal mediation analysis in the presence of a mismeasured outcome. Epidemiology 26:e8-9
19. Jiang Z, VanderWeele TJ. 2015. When is the difference method conservative for mediation? Am. J. Epidemiol. 182(2):105-8
20. Judd CM, Kenny DA. 1981. Process analysis: estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Eval. Rev. 5:602-19
21. Lange T, Hansen JV. 2011. Direct and indirect effects in a survival context. Epidemiology 22:575-81
22. Lange T, Vansteelandt S, Bekaert M. 2012. A simple unified approach for estimating natural direct and indirect effects. Am. J. Epidemiol. 176:190-95
23. le Cessie S, Debeij J, Rosendaal FR, Cannegieter SC, Vandenbroucke J. 2012. Quantification of bias in direct effects estimates due to different types of measurement error in the mediator. Epidemiology 23:551-60
24. MacKinnon DP. 2008. Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York: Erlbaum
25. MacKinnon DP, Warsi G, Dwyer JH. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivar. Behav. Res. 30:41-62
26. Martinussen T, Vansteelandt S, Gerster M, von Bornemann Hjelmborg J. 2011. Estimation of direct effects for survival data by using the Aalen additive hazards model. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 73:773-88
27. Nandi A, Glymour MM, Kawachi I, VanderWeeleTJ. 2012. Using marginal structural models to estimate the direct effect of adverse childhood social conditions on onset of heart disease, diabetes and stroke. Epidemiology 23:223-32
28. Ogburn EL, VanderWeele TJ. 2012. Analytic results on the bias due to nondifferential misclassification of a binary mediator. Am. J. Epidemiol. 176:555-61
29. Pearl J. 2001. Direct and indirect effects. Proc. Conf. Uncertain. Artif. Intel., 17th, Seattle, pp. 411-20. San Francisco: Kaufmann
30. Robins JM, Greenland S. 1992. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 3:143-55
31. Robins JM, Richardson TS. 2010. Alternative graphical causal models and the identification of direct effects. In Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and Their Cures, ed. P Shrout, pp. 103-58. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
32. Robinson L, Jewell NP. 1991. Some surprising results about covariate adjustment in logistic regression models. Int. Stat. Rev. 59:227-40
33. Sobel ME. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In Sociological Methodology, ed. S Leinhart, pp. 290-312. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
34. Strong V, Waters R, Hibberd C, Murray G, Wall L, et al. 2008. Management of depression for people with cancer (SMaRT oncology 1): a randomised trial. Lancet 372:40-48
35. Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ, Shpitser I. 2012. Semiparametric theory for causal mediation analysis: efficiency bounds, multiple robustness, and sensitivity analysis. Ann. Stat. 40:1816-45
36. Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ, VanderWeele TJ. 2014. On identification of natural direct effects when a confounder of the mediator is directly affected by exposure. Epidemiology 25:282-91
37. Tingley D, Yamamoto T, Hirose K, Keele L, Imai K. 2014. Mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. J. Stat. Softw. 59:1-38
38. Valeri L, Lin X, VanderWeele TJ. 2014. Mediation analysis when a continuous mediator is measured with error and the outcome follows a generalized linear model. Stat. Med. 33:4875-90
39. Valeri L, VanderWeele TJ. 2013. Mediation analysis allowing for exposure-mediator interactions and causal interpretation: theoretical assumptions and implementation with SAS and SPSS macros. Psychol. Methods 18:137-50
40. Valeri L, VanderWeele TJ. 2014. The estimation of direct and indirect causal effects in the presence of a misclassified binary mediator. Biostatistics 15:498-512
41. VanderWeele TJ. 2009. Marginal structural models for the estimation of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 20:18-26
42. VanderWeele TJ. 2010. Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 21:540-51
43. VanderWeele TJ. 2011. Causal mediation analysis with survival data. Epidemiology 22:575-81
44. VanderWeele TJ. 2012. Structural equation modeling in epidemiologic analysis. Am. J. Epidemiol. 176:608-12
45. VanderWeele TJ. 2013. Unmeasured confounding and hazard scales: sensitivity analysis for total, direct and indirect effects. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 28:113-17
46. VanderWeele TJ. 2014. A unification of mediation and interaction: a four-way decomposition. Epidemiology 25:749-61
47. VanderWeele TJ. 2015. Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
48. VanderWeele TJ, Knol MJ. 2014. A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiol. Methods 3:33-72
49. VanderWeele TJ, Robinson W. 2014. On the causal interpretation of race in regressions adjusting for confounding and mediating variables. Epidemiology 25:473-84
50. VanderWeele TJ, Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ. 2014. Mediation analysis with time-varying exposures and mediators. Work. Pap. 168, Harvard Univ. Biostat. Work. Pap. Ser. http://biostats.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1176&context=harvardbiostat
51. VanderWeele TJ, Valeri L, Ogburn EL. 2012. The role of misclassification and measurement error in mediation analyses. Epidemiology 23:561-64
52. VanderWeeleTJ, Vansteelandt S. 2009. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat. Interface 2:457-68
53. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. 2010. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am. J. Epidemiol. 172:1339-48
54. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. 2013. Mediation analysis with multiple mediators. Epidemiol. Methods 2:95-115
55. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S, Robins JM. 2014. Methods for effect decomposition in the presence of an exposure-induced mediator-outcome confounder. Epidemiology 25:300-6
56. Vansteelandt S. 2009. Estimating direct effects in cohort and case-control studies. Epidemiology 20:851-60
57. Vansteelandt S, VanderWeele TJ. 2012. Natural direct and indirect effects on the exposed: effect decomposition under weaker assumptions. Biometrics 68:1019-27
58. ZhengW, van der Laan MJ. 2012. Targeted maximum likelihood estimation of natural direct effects. Int. J. Biostat. 8:1-40