Abstract

The study of mediation has a long tradition in the social sciences and a relatively more recent one in epidemiology. The first school is linked to path analysis and structural equation models (SEMs), while the second is related mostly to methods developed within the potential outcomes approach to causal inference. By giving model-free definitions of direct and indirect effects and clear assumptions for their identification, the latter school has formalized notions intuitively developed in the former and has greatly increased the flexibility of the models involved. However, through its predominant focus on nonparametric identification, the causal inference approach to effect decomposition via natural effects is limited to settings that exclude intermediate confounders. Such confounders are naturally dealt with (albeit with the caveats of informality and modeling inflexibility) in the SEM framework. Therefore, it seems pertinent to revisit SEMs with intermediate confounders, armed with the formal definitions and (parametric) identification assumptions from causal inference. Here we investigate: 1) how identification assumptions affect the specification of SEMs, 2) whether the more restrictive SEM assumptions can be relaxed, and 3) whether existing sensitivity analyses can be extended to this setting. Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (1990–2005) are used for illustration.

Highlights

  • IntroductionPubMed search for articles on mediation analysis in epidemiology produced 118 “hits” for articles published in 2012 and 110 “hits” for articles published in 2013.) The topic owes its origins, to an older body of literature that is well known in the social sciences

  • Contributions from the causal inference school have formalized and generalized notions intuitively developed in the structural equation model (SEM) school, first by defining precisely what is meant by direct and indirect effects, by giving clear assumptions under which they can be identified, and lastly by generalizing the statistical methods available for carrying out such analyses to allow for nonlinearities, interactions, discrete outcomes, and semiparametric estimation [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]

  • We review how paths are traced in order to derive direct and indirect effects in simple linear SEMs which include intermediate confounders but exclude nonlinearities, and show their equivalence to the definitions based on potential outcomes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

PubMed search for articles on mediation analysis in epidemiology produced 118 “hits” for articles published in 2012 and 110 “hits” for articles published in 2013.) The topic owes its origins, to an older body of literature that is well known in the social sciences. This school is often referred to as the “Baron and Kenny approach” [1, 2] but is linked to Sewall Wright’s path analysis [3] and its extension, structural equation models (SEMs) [4].

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call