CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 356Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 115 of the 115 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mediation and moderation of treatment effects in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions

Emsley, Richard, Dunn, Graham, White, Ian R·2010·Statistical Methods in Medical Research
DOI 10.1177/0962280209105014
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Complex intervention trials should be able to answer both pragmatic and explanatory questions in order to test the theories motivating the intervention and help understand the underlying nature of the clinical problem being tested. Key to this is the estimation of direct effects of treatment and indirect effects acting through intermediate variables which are measured post-randomisation. Using psychological treatment trials as an example of complex interventions, we review statistical methods which crucially evaluate both direct and indirect effects in the presence of hidden confounding between mediator and outcome. We review the historical literature on mediation and moderation of treatment effects. We introduce two methods from within the existing causal inference literature, principal stratification and structural mean models, and demonstrate how these can be applied in a mediation context before discussing approaches and assumptions necessary for attaining identifiability of key parameters of the basic causal model. Assuming that there is modification by baseline covariates of the effect of treatment (i.e. randomisation) on the mediator (i.e. covariate by treatment interactions), but no direct effect on the outcome of these treatment by covariate interactions leads to the use of instrumental variable methods. We describe how moderation can occur through post-randomisation variables, and extend the principal stratification approach to multiple group methods with explanatory models nested within the principal strata. We illustrate the new methodology with motivating examples of randomised trials from the mental health literature.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0962280209105014

Cites

115 of 115 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 115 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Pearl J., 2000, Causality
  2. Kaufman JS, 2004, Epidemiologic Perspectives and Innovations, 1
  3. Joffe M.M., 2008, Biometrics
  4. 2007, Intercooled Stata Statistical Software: Release 10.0 [computer program]
  5. Croudace T., 2010, General latent variable modelling using mplus
  6. Muthén LK, 1998, Mplus user’s guide

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 356

Related

Metadata

Authors
Emsley, R., Dunn, G., & White, I. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • MRC Biostatistics Unit (GB)
Corresponding author
Dunn, Graham
ORCID
Venue
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-07-16
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
237-270
ISSN
  • 0962-2802 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0334
DOI
10.1177/0962280209105014
OpenAlex
W2092884989
Cited by
356
References
115
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 20
FWCI
11.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Statistical Methods in Medical Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
mediation analysis, moderation analysis, complex interventions, unmeasured confounding, principal stratification, instrumental variables, mental health interventions, causal inference
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Depression, Humans, Mental Health, Psychotherapy, Schizophrenia, Models, Statistical, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Risk Reduction Behavior, Biostatistics

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