Cited by 3,728Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Causal Diagrams for Epidemiologic Research

Greenland, Sander, Pearl, Judea, Robins, James M.·1999·Epidemiology

Abstract

Causal diagrams have a long history of informal use and, more recently, have undergone formal development for applications in expert systems and robotics. We provide an introduction to these developments and their use in epidemiologic research. Causal diagrams can provide a starting point for identifying variables that must be measured and controlled to obtain unconfounded effect estimates. They also provide a method for critical evaluation of traditional epidemiologic criteria for confounding. In particular, they reveal certain heretofore unnoticed shortcomings of those criteria when used in considering multiple potential confounders. We show how to modify the traditional criteria to correct those shortcomings. (Epidemiology 1999;10:37–48)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00001648-199901000-00008

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • SCM weeds out myths and misconceptions from outdated traditions.

    “Weeding out myths and misconceptions from outdated traditions (Meek and Glymour, 1994; Greenland et al., 1999; Cole and Hern´ an, 2002; Arah, 2008; Shrier, 2009; Pearl, 2009b).”

    From Causal inference in statistics: An overview (2009) · cites this paper as Greenland et al., 1999

  • SCM weeds out myths and misconceptions from outdated traditions.

    “Weeding out myths and misconceptions from outdated traditions (Meek and Glymour, 1994, Greenland et al., 1999, Cole and Hernan, 2002, Arah, 2008, Shrier, 2009, Pearl, 2009c).”

    From An Introduction to Causal Inference (2010) · cites this paper as Greenland et al., 1999

  • FA is one potential pathway linking the food environment to obesity, however there is a "backdoor path" through SES to STA, as well as a pathway that may not include FA.

    “Taken together, FA is one potential pathway linking the food environment to obesity, however there is a “backdoor path” [100] through SES to STA, as well as a pathway that may not include FA (i.e., through the built environment).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Greenland, S., Pearl, J., & Robins, J. M.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
Epidemiology
Published
1999-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
37-48
ISSN
1044-3983 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4294553991
Cited by
3,728
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 257 · 2025: 279 · 2024: 332 · 2023: 330 · 2022: 333 · 2021: 308 · 2020: 269 · 2019: 219 · 2018: 198 · 2017: 199 · 2016: 156 · 2015: 140 · 2014: 118 · 2013: 106 · 2012: 82
FWCI
18.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
causal graphs, directed acyclic graphs, confounding, feature selection, causal inference, expert systems

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