Confounding and effect modification: Distribution and measure

Epidemiologic Methods

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 54-82

  VanderWeele, Tyler J ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Causal inference; confounding; effect heterogeneity; effect modification

Indexed keywords

EID: 85062375539     PISSN: 21949263     EISSN: 2161962X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/2161-962X.1004     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Barnow, B.S., Cain, G.G., Goldberger, A.S. (1980). Issues in the analysis of selectivity bias. In: E. Stromsdorfer and G. Farkas (Eds.), Evaluation Studies vol. 5. San Francisco: Sage.
2. Brumback, B., Berg, A. (2008). On eect-measure modi.cation: Relation-ships among changes in the relative risk, odds ratio, risk dierence. Statistics in Medicine, 27:3453-3465.
3. Charig, C.R., Webb, D.R., Payne, S.R., Wickham, O.E. (1986). Com-parison of treatment of renal calculi by operative surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. British Med-ical Journal, 292:879-82.
4. Cole, S.R., Platt, R.W., Schisterman, E.F., Chu, H., Westreich, D., Richard-son, D., Poole, C. (2010). Illustrating bias due to conditioning on a collider. International Journal of Epidemiology, 39:417-420.
5. Fisher, R.A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
6. Fisher, L., Patil, K. (1974). Matching and unrelatedness. American Jour-nal of Epidemiology, 100:347-349.
7. Frangakis, C.E., Rubin, D.B. (2002). Principal strati.cation in causal inference. Biometrics, 58:21-29.
8. Geng, Z., Li, G. (2002). Conditions for non-confounding and collapsibility without knowledge of completely constructed causal diagrams. Scandina-vian Journal of Statistics, 29:169-181.
9. Glymour, M.M., Greenland, S. (2008). Causal diagrams In: Rothman, K.J., Greenland, S., Lash, T.L. (eds.) Modern Epidemiology, 3rd edition, Chapter 12. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
10. Greenland, S. (1990). Randomization, statistics and causal inference, Epi-demiology, 1:421-429.
11. Greenland, S. (2003). Quantifying biases in causal models: Classical confound-ing versus collider-strati.cation bias. Epidemiology, 14:300-306.
12. Greenland, S., Morgenstern, H. (1989). Ecological bias, confounding, eect modi.cation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 18:269-274.
13. Greenland, S., Robins, J.M. (1986). Identi.ability, exchangeability, epidemiologic confounding. International Journal of Epidemiology, 15:413-419.
14. Greenland, S., Robins, J.M. (2009). Identi.ability, exchangeability and confounding revisited. Epidemiologic Perspectives and Innovations, 6, Ar-ticle 4.
15. Greenland, S., Robins, J.M., Pearl, J. (1999). Confounding and collapsi-bility in causal inference. Statistical Science, 14:29-46.
16. Hernán, M.A. (2004). A de.nition of causal eect for epidemiological studies. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58:265.271.
17. Imbens, G.W. (2004). Nonparametric estimation of average treatment eects under exogeneity: A review. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86:4-29.
18. Kramer, M.S., Matush, L., Vanilovich, I. et al. (2007). Ects of prolonged and exclusive breastfeeding on child height, weight, aidposity, blood pressure at age 6.5 y: Evidence from a large randomized trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 86:1717-1721.
19. Kwok, M.K., Scholling, C.M., Lam, T.H., Lueng, G.M. (2010). Does breast-feeding protect against childhood overweight Hong Kong.s .Children of 1997.birth cohort. International Journal of Epidemiology, 39:297-305.
20. Lash, T.L., Fox, M.P., Fink, A.K. (2009). Applying Quantitative Bias Analysis to Epidemiologic Data. New York: Springer.
21. Miettinen, O. (1974). Confounding and eect modi.cation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 100:350-353.
22. Pearl, J. (1995). Casual diagrams for empirical research (with discussion). Biometrika, 82:669-710.
23. Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, Reasoning, Inference. 2nd Edition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Robins, J.M. (1992). Estimation of the time-dependent accelerated failure time model in the presence of confounding factors. Biometrika, 79:321-334.
25. Robins, J.M. (1997). Causal Inference from Complex Longitudinal Data. In: Latent Variable Modeling and Applications to Causality. Lecture Notes in Statistics (120), M. Berkane, Editor. NY: Springer Verlag, pp. 69-117.
26. Robins, J.M., Hernán, M.A., Brumback, B. (2000). Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11:550-560.
27. Robinson, L., Jewell, N.P. (1991). Some surprising results about covariate adjustment in logistic regression models. International Statistical Review, 59, 227.240.
28. Rosenbaum, P.R., Rubin, D.B. (1983).The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal eects. Biometrika, 1983; 70:41-55.
29. Rothman, K.J. (1976). Causes. American Journal of Epidemiology, 104:587-592.
30. Rothman, K.J. (1977). Epidemiologic methods in clinical trials. Cancer, 39:1771-1775.
31. Rothman, K.J. (2002). Measuring interactions. Epidemiology: An introduc-tion. Oxford: University Press, pp. 168-180.
32. Rothman, K.J., Greenland, S., Lash, T.L. (2008). Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed., Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
33. Rubin, D.B. (1990). Formal modes of statistical inference for causal eects. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 25:279-292.
34. Rubin, D.B. (1991). Practical implications of modes of statistical inference for causal eects and the critical role of the assignment mechanism. Biometrics, 47:1213-1234.
35. Schlesselman, J.J. (1978). Assessing eects of confounding variables. Ameri-can Journal of Epidemiology, 1978; 108, 3-8.
36. Shahar, E., Shahar, D.J. (2010). On the de.nition of eect modi.cation. Epidemiology, 21:586-587.
37. Stone, R. (1993). The assumptions on which causal inference rest. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 455-466.
38. Stürmer, T., Rothman, K.J., Glynn, R.J. (2006). Insights into dier-ent results from dierent causal contrasts in the presence of eect-measure modi.cation. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 15:698.709.
39. VanderWeele, T.J. (2008). The sign of the bias of unmeasured confounding. Biometrics, 64:702-706.
40. VanderWeele T.J. (2009a). On the distinction between interaction and eect modi.cation. Epidemiology, 20:863-871.
41. VanderWeele TJ. (2009b). On the relative nature of over-adjustment and unnecessary adjustment. Epidemiology, 20:496-499.
42. VanderWeele, T.J. (2010). Response to .On the de.nition of eect modi.ca-tion, .by E. Shahar and D.J. Shahar. Epidemiology, 21:587-588.
43. VanderWeele, T.J., Arah, O.A. (2011). Bias formulas for sensitivity analy-sis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments and con-founders. Epidemiology, 22:42-52.
44. Vander Weele, T.J., Knol, M.J. (2011). The interpretation of subgroup analyses in randomized trials: Heterogeneity versus secondary interventions. Annals of Internal Medicine, 154:680-683.
45. VanderWeele, T.J., Robins, J.M. (2007). Four types of eect modi.cation . a classi.cation based on directed acyclic graphs. Epidemiology, 18:561-568.
46. Vander Weele, T.J., Robins, J.M. (2010). Signed directed acyclic graphs for causal inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 72:111-127.
47. Vander Weele, T.J., Shpitser, I. (2011). A new criterion for confounder selection. Biometrics, 67:1406-1413.