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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mediation Analysis with Multiple Mediators

Open access
VanderWeele, Tyler, Vansteelandt, Stijn·2014·Epidemiologic Methods
DOI 10.1515/em-2012-0010PMC PMC4287269
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

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.

Overview

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

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 23 references

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Robins, 1992, Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects, Epidemiology, 3, 143, 10.1097/00001648-199203000-00013 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Kotelchuck, 1994, An evaluation of the Kessner adequacy of prenatal care index and a proposed adequacy of prenatal care utilization index, American Journal of Public Health, 84, 1414, 10.2105/AJPH.84.9.1414 · DOI
  3. Albert, 2012, Distribution-free mediation analysis for nonlinear models with confounding, Epidemiology, 23, 879, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31826c2bb9 · DOI
  4. Valeri, 2013, Mediation analysis, Psychological Methods, 18, 137, 10.1037/a0031034 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Albert, 2011, Generalized causal mediation analysis, Biometrics, 67, 1028, 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01547.x · DOI
  6. VanderWeele, 2009, A comparison of four prenatal care indices in birth outcome models: Comparable results for predicting small-for-gestational-age outcome but different results for preterm birth or infant mortality, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62, 438, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.08.001 · DOI
  7. Pearl, 2009, Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference, 10.1017/CBO9780511803161 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Imai, 2012, Identification and sensitivity analysis for multiple causal mechanisms: revisiting evidence from framing experiments, Political Analysis, 21, 141, 10.1093/pan/mps040 · DOI
  9. van der Laan, 2008, Direct effect models, International Journal of Biostatistics, 4, 10.2202/1557-4679.1064 · DOI
  10. Robins, 2003, Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, 70, 10.1093/oso/9780198510550.003.0007 · DOI
  11. Zheng, 2012, Targeted maximum likelihood estimation of natural direct effects, International Journal of Biostatistics, 8, 10.2202/1557-4679.1361 · DOI
  12. Baron, 1986, The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173, 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Politis, 1994, Large sample confidence regions based on subsamples under minimal assumptions, Annals of Statistics, 22, 2031, 10.1214/aos/1176325770 · DOI
  14. VanderWeele,, 2009, Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition, Statistics and Its Interface, 2, 457, 10.4310/SII.2009.v2.n4.a7 · DOI
  15. VanderWeele, 2010, Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome, American Journal of Epidemiology, 172, 1339, 10.1093/aje/kwq332 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Tchetgen Tchetgen, 2012, Semiparametric theory for causal mediation analysis: Efficiency bounds, multiple robustness, and sensitivity analysis, Annals of Statistics, 40, 1816, 10.1214/12-AOS990 · DOI
  17. VanderWeele, 2010, Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects, Epidemiology, 21, 540, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181df191c · DOI · Paper page
  18. Imai, 2010, A general approach to causal mediation analysis, Psychological Methods, 15, 309, 10.1037/a0020761 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
VanderWeele, T., & Vansteelandt, S.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Ghent University (BE)
Corresponding author
VanderWeele, Tyler
ORCID
Venue
Epidemiologic Methods
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2014-01-03
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
95-115
ISSN
  • 2161-962X (ISSN-L)
  • 2194-9263
DOI
10.1515/em-2012-0010
PMC
PMC4287269
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