Literature DB >> 20161106

Analytic Bounds on Causal Risk Differences in Directed Acyclic Graphs Involving Three Observed Binary Variables.

Sol Kaufman1, Jay S Kaufman, Richard F Maclehose.   

Abstract

We apply a linear programming approach which uses the causal risk difference (RD(C)) as the objective function and provides minimum and maximum values that RD(C) can achieve under any set of linear constraints on the potential response type distribution. We consider two scenarios involving binary exposure X, covariate Z and outcome Y. In the first, Z is not affected by X, and is a potential confounder of the causal effect of X on Y. In the second, Z is affected by X and intermediate in the causal pathway between X and Y. For each scenario we consider various linear constraints corresponding to the presence or absence of arcs in the associated directed acyclic graph (DAG), monotonicity assumptions, and presence or absence of additive-scale interactions. We also estimate Z-stratum-specific bounds when Z is a potential effect measure modifier and bounds for both controlled and natural direct effects when Z is affected by X. In the absence of any additional constraints deriving from background knowledge, the well-known bounds on RDc are duplicated: -Pr(Y not equalX) </= RD(C) </= Pr(Y=X). These bounds have unit width, but can be narrowed by background knowledge-based assumptions. We provide and compare bounds and bound widths for various combinations of assumptions in the two scenarios and apply these bounds to real data from two studies.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20161106      PMCID: PMC2739588          DOI: 10.1016/j.jspi.2009.03.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stat Plan Inference        ISSN: 0378-3758            Impact factor:   1.111


  11 in total

1.  Fallibility in estimating direct effects.

Authors:  Stephen R Cole; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Indirect assessment of confounding: graphic description and limits on effect of adjusting for covariates.

Authors:  W D Flanders; M J Khoury
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Improved estimation of controlled direct effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding of intermediate variables.

Authors:  Sol Kaufman; Jay S Kaufman; Richard F MacLehose; Sander Greenland; Charles Poole
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects.

Authors:  J M Robins; S Greenland
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 4.822

Review 5.  Bounding causal effects under uncontrolled confounding using counterfactuals.

Authors:  Richard F MacLehose; Sol Kaufman; Jay S Kaufman; Charles Poole
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Evaluating short-term drug effects using a physician-specific prescribing preference as an instrumental variable.

Authors:  M Alan Brookhart; Philip S Wang; Daniel H Solomon; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist's dream?

Authors:  Miguel A Hernán; James M Robins
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.822

8.  Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies.

Authors:  D Y Lin; B M Psaty; R A Kronmal
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  On estimating efficacy from clinical trials.

Authors:  A Sommer; S L Zeger
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Relationships between poverty and psychopathology: a natural experiment.

Authors:  E Jane Costello; Scott N Compton; Gordon Keeler; Adrian Angold
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  An introduction to causal inference.

Authors:  Judea Pearl
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 0.968

2.  Nonparametric Bounds and Sensitivity Analysis of Treatment Effects.

Authors:  Amy Richardson; Michael G Hudgens; Peter B Gilbert; Jason P Fine
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.901

3.  A complete graphical criterion for the adjustment formula in mediation analysis.

Authors:  Ilya Shpitser; Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Endogenous Selection Bias: The Problem of Conditioning on a Collider Variable.

Authors:  Felix Elwert; Christopher Winship
Journal:  Annu Rev Sociol       Date:  2014-06-02

5.  Mediation analysis for count and zero-inflated count data.

Authors:  Jing Cheng; Nancy F Cheng; Zijian Guo; Steven Gregorich; Amid I Ismail; Stuart A Gansky
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2017-01-08       Impact factor: 3.021

6.  Sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects in the presence of exposure-induced mediator-outcome confounders.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Yasutaka Chiba
Journal:  Epidemiol Biostat Public Health       Date:  2014

Review 7.  Instrumental variable methods in comparative safety and effectiveness research.

Authors:  M Alan Brookhart; Jeremy A Rassen; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Causal mediation analysis with multiple causally non-ordered mediators.

Authors:  Masataka Taguri; John Featherstone; Jing Cheng
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.021

9.  Controlled direct and mediated effects: definition, identification and bounds.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele
Journal:  Scand Stat Theory Appl       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.396

Review 10.  GPCRs Are Optimal Regulators of Complex Biological Systems and Orchestrate the Interface between Health and Disease.

Authors:  Hanne Leysen; Deborah Walter; Bregje Christiaenssen; Romi Vandoren; İrem Harputluoğlu; Nore Van Loon; Stuart Maudsley
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 5.923

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.