Cited by 12Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

A statistical method for synthesizing mediation analyses using the product of coefficient approach across multiple trials

Open access
Huang, Shi, MacKinnon, David P., Perrino, Tatiana, Gallo, Carlos, Cruden, Gracelyn, Brown, C. Hendricks·2016·Statistical Methods & Applications

Abstract

Mediation analysis often requires larger sample sizes than main effect analysis to achieve the same statistical power. Combining results across similar trials may be the only practical option for increasing statistical power for mediation analysis in some situations. In this paper, we propose a method to estimate: 1) marginal means for mediation path a, the relation of the independent variable to the mediator; 2) marginal means for path b, the relation of the mediator to the outcome, across multiple trials; and 3) the between-trial level variance-covariance matrix based on a bivariate normal distribution. We present the statistical theory and an R computer program to combine regression coefficients from multiple trials to estimate a combined mediated effect and confidence interval under a random effects model. Values of coefficients a and b, along with their standard errors from each trial are the input for the method. This marginal likelihood based approach with Monte Carlo confidence intervals provides more accurate inference than the standard meta-analytic approach. We discuss computational issues, apply the method to two real-data examples and make recommendations for the use of the method in different settings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10260-016-0354-y

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Familias Unidas has been shown to have its strongest effect with Hispanic families with poor parent-child communication.

    “Familias Unidas has been shown to have its strongest effect with Hispanic families with poor parent-child communication [24, 25]”
  • Recent methodologic developments have addressed challenging issues in causality for single and multiple randomized trials, evolving interventions, natural experiments, and multilevel as well as multidimensional situations.

    “Recent methodologic developments have addressed challenging issues in causality for single [77] and multiple randomized trials [25], evolving interventions [12], natural experiments [78, 79], and multilevel [78] as well as multidimensional situations [80].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Becker BJ Schram CM Examining explanatory models through research synthesis 1994 Portions of this chapter were presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association Mar 27, 1989 San Francisco, CA Russell Sage Foundation

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huang, S., MacKinnon, D. P., Perrino, T., Gallo, C., Cruden, G., & Brown, C. H.
Affiliations
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Brown, C. Hendricks
Venue
Statistical Methods & Applications
Published
2016-02-25
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
565-579
ISSN
  • 1121-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1618-2510
  • 1613-981X
OpenAlex
W2308692667
Cited by
12
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Statistical Methods & Applications (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH040859)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA09757, P30DA027828, R37DA009757)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
mediation analysis, random effects models, marginal means, statistical power

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review