Cited by 858Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

Mediation analysis with multiple mediators

Open access
VanderWeele, Tyler, Vansteelandt, Stijn·2014·Epidemiologic Methods

Abstract

Recent advances in the causal inference literature on mediation have extended traditional approaches to direct and indirect effects to settings that allow for interactions and non-linearities. In this paper, these approaches from causal inference are further extended to settings in which multiple mediators may be of interest. Two analytic approaches, one based on regression and one based on weighting are proposed to estimate the effect mediated through multiple mediators and the effects through other pathways. The approaches proposed here accommodate exposure-mediator interactions and, to a certain extent, mediator-mediator interactions as well. The methods handle binary or continuous mediators and binary, continuous or count outcomes. When the mediators affect one another, the strategy of trying to assess direct and indirect effects one mediator at a time will in general fail; the approach given in this paper can still be used. A characterization is moreover given as to when the sum of the mediated effects for multiple mediators considered separately will be equal to the mediated effect of all of the mediators considered jointly. The approach proposed in this paper is robust to unmeasured common causes of two or more mediators.

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 · 10.1515/em-2012-0010

Cites

24 of 24 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?

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 Richardson TS Shrout P Alternative graphical causal models and the identification of direct effects Causality and Psychopathology: Finding the Determinants of Disorders and Their Cures 2011 Oxford University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
VanderWeele, T., & Vansteelandt, S.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Ghent University (BE)
Corresponding author
VanderWeele, Tyler
Venue
Epidemiologic Methods
Published
2014-01-03
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
95-115
ISSN
  • 2161-962X (ISSN-L)
  • 2194-9263
OpenAlex
W2009754435
Cited by
858
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 140 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 106 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 4
FWCI
25.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiologic Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01ES017876)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Keywords
mediation analysis, multiple mediators, direct and indirect effects, count outcomes, causal inference, regression estimation

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