Cited by 809Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Odds Ratios for Mediation Analysis for a Dichotomous Outcome

Open access
VanderWeele, T. J., Vansteelandt, S.·2010·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

For dichotomous outcomes, the authors discuss when the standard approaches to mediation analysis used in epidemiology and the social sciences are valid, and they provide alternative mediation analysis techniques when the standard approaches will not work. They extend definitions of controlled direct effects and natural direct and indirect effects from the risk difference scale to the odds ratio scale. A simple technique to estimate direct and indirect effect odds ratios by combining logistic and linear regressions is described that applies when the outcome is rare and the mediator continuous. Further discussion is given as to how this mediation analysis technique can be extended to settings in which data come from a case-control study design. For the standard mediation analysis techniques used in the epidemiologic and social science literatures to be valid, an assumption of no interaction between the effects of the exposure and the mediator on the outcome is needed. The approach presented here, however, will apply even when there are interactions between the effect of the exposure and the mediator on the outcome.

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 · 10.1093/aje/kwq332

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • For a rare outcome such as neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, the proportion-mediated can be used to measure how much of the effect of MCoC on each outcome is mediated through preterm birth.

    “For a rare outcome such as neonatal hyper­ bilirubinemia, the proportion-mediated (%) can be used to measure how much of the effect of MCoC on each outcome is mediated through pre­ term birth (VanderWeele and Vansteelandt, 2010).”

    From Midwifery continuity of care, breastfeeding and neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: A retrospective cohort study (2024) · cites this paper as VanderWeele and Vansteelandt, 2010

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. Robins JM. Testing and estimation of direct effects by repar- ameterizing directed acyclic graphs with structural nested models. In: Glymour C, Cooper GF, eds. Computation, Cau- sation, and Discovery. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/ Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1999:349-405.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
VanderWeele, T. J., & Vansteelandt, S.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
VanderWeele, T. J.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2010-10-29
Volume
172
Issue
12
Pages
1339-1348
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2132617827
Cited by
809
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 36
FWCI
23.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • World Health Organization
  • Universiteit Gent (P06/03)
  • National Institutes of Health (ES017876)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (ES017876, R01ES017876, R56ES017876)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R03HD060696, HD060696)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
mediation analysis, binary outcomes, controlled direct effect, natural direct and indirect effects, case-control study
MeSH terms
Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Causality, Linear Models, Logistic Models, Odds Ratio, Case-Control Studies, Treatment Outcome

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