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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We conducted causal mediation analysis (CMA) with cortisol suppression (CS) by dexamethasone (DEX) as an exposure variable, HOMA-IR, hs-CRP, hypoxanthine, and GGT as the joint mediators, and metabolites as dependent variables while controlling for covariates (80).”
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This observation is possible and could be due to 3 factors: (1) mediators affecting one another, (2) interaction between mediators affecting the outcome, or (3) other mediators with a”
From Mindful attention is inversely associated with pain via mediation by psychological distress in orthopedic patients. (2024) · cites this paper as [52]
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
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference
Pearl, J. (2009) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803161 · Cited by 11,653
A general approach to causal mediation analysis.
Imai, K., Keele, L., & Tingley, D. (2010) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0020761 · Cited by 4,143
Valeri, L., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2013) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0031034 · Cited by 2,132
Self-citationIdentifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects
Robins, J. M., & Greenland, S. (1992) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-199203000-00013 · Cited by 1,793
Kotelchuck, M. (1994) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.84.9.1414 · Cited by 1,167
Pearl, J. (2022) · ACM eBooks · doi:10.1145/3501714.3501736 · Cited by 1,039
Odds Ratios for Mediation Analysis for a Dichotomous Outcome
VanderWeele, T. J., & Vansteelandt, S. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq332 · Cited by 809
Self-citationConceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition
VanderWeele, T. J., & Vansteelandt, S. (2009) · Statistics and Its Interface · doi:10.4310/sii.2009.v2.n4.a7 · Cited by 758
Self-citationLarge Sample Confidence Regions Based on Subsamples under Minimal Assumptions
Politis, D. N., & Romano, J. P. (1994) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176325770 · Cited by 748
Bias Formulas for Sensitivity Analysis for Direct and Indirect Effects
VanderWeele, T. J. (2010) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181df191c · Cited by 435 · cited 1×
“Sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects are now available for a single mediator (VanderWeele, 2010; Imai et al., 2010) and these approaches could perhaps be applied and extended to settings with multiple mediators.”
BackgroundSelf-citationMicali, N., Hagberg, K. W., Petersen, I., & Treasure, J. L. (2013) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002646 · Cited by 432
Effect Decomposition in the Presence of an Exposure-Induced Mediator-Outcome Confounder
VanderWeele, T. J., Vansteelandt, S., & Robins, J. M. (2014) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0000000000000034 · Cited by 420
Self-citationImai, K., & Yamamoto, T. (2013) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mps040 · Cited by 395
Tchetgen, E. J. T., & Shpitser, I. (2012) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/12-aos990 · Cited by 293
Semantics of causal DAG models and the identification of direct and indirect effects
Robins, J. M. (2003) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198510550.003.0007 · Cited by 243
Identifiability of path-specific effects
Avin, C., Shpitser, I., & Pearl, J. (2005) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 215
Imputation Strategies for the Estimation of Natural Direct and Indirect Effects
Vansteelandt, S., Bekaert, M., & Lange, T. (2012) · Epidemiologic Methods · doi:10.1515/2161-962x.1014 · Cited by 177
Self-citationGeneralized Causal Mediation Analysis
Albert, J. M., & Nelson, S. S. (2011) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01547.x · Cited by 156
van der Laan, M. J., & Petersen, M. L. (2008) · The International Journal of Biostatistics · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1064 · Cited by 100
Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Natural Direct Effects
Zheng, W., & van der Laan, M. J. (2012) · The International Journal of Biostatistics · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1361 · Cited by 92
VanderWeele, T. J., Lantos, J. D., Siddique, J., & Lauderdale, D. S. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.08.001 · Cited by 88
Self-citationDistribution-Free Mediation Analysis for Nonlinear Models with Confounding
Albert, J. M. (2012) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e31826c2bb9 · Cited by 31
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- Robins, 1992, Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects, Epidemiology, 3, 143, 10.1097/00001648-199203000-00013 · DOI · Paper page
- 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
- Albert, 2012, Distribution-free mediation analysis for nonlinear models with confounding, Epidemiology, 23, 879, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31826c2bb9 · DOI
- Valeri, 2013, Mediation analysis, Psychological Methods, 18, 137, 10.1037/a0031034 · DOI · Paper page
- Albert, 2011, Generalized causal mediation analysis, Biometrics, 67, 1028, 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01547.x · DOI
- 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
- Pearl, 2009, Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference, 10.1017/CBO9780511803161 · DOI · Paper page
- Imai, 2012, Identification and sensitivity analysis for multiple causal mechanisms: revisiting evidence from framing experiments, Political Analysis, 21, 141, 10.1093/pan/mps040 · DOI
- van der Laan, 2008, Direct effect models, International Journal of Biostatistics, 4, 10.2202/1557-4679.1064 · DOI
- Robins, 2003, Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, 70, 10.1093/oso/9780198510550.003.0007 · DOI
- Zheng, 2012, Targeted maximum likelihood estimation of natural direct effects, International Journal of Biostatistics, 8, 10.2202/1557-4679.1361 · DOI
- 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
- Politis, 1994, Large sample confidence regions based on subsamples under minimal assumptions, Annals of Statistics, 22, 2031, 10.1214/aos/1176325770 · DOI
- VanderWeele,, 2009, Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition, Statistics and Its Interface, 2, 457, 10.4310/SII.2009.v2.n4.a7 · DOI
- VanderWeele, 2010, Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome, American Journal of Epidemiology, 172, 1339, 10.1093/aje/kwq332 · DOI · Paper page
- 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
- VanderWeele, 2010, Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects, Epidemiology, 21, 540, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181df191c · DOI · Paper page
- Imai, 2010, A general approach to causal mediation analysis, Psychological Methods, 15, 309, 10.1037/a0020761 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mediation Analysis: A Practitioner's Guide
VanderWeele, T. J. (2016) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032315-021402 · Cited by 1,985
Self-citationOwen, M. J., Sawa, A., & Mortensen, P. B. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01121-6 · Cited by 1,870
Mendelian randomisation for mediation analysis: current methods and challenges for implementation
Carter, A. R., Sanderson, E., Hammerton, G., Richmond, R. C., Davey Smith, G., Heron, J., Taylor, A. E., Davies, N. M., & Howe, L. D. (2021) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-021-00757-1 · Cited by 1,215
A Unification of Mediation and Interaction
VanderWeele, T. J. (2014) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0000000000000121 · Cited by 681
Self-citationA Guideline for Reporting Mediation Analyses of Randomized Trials and Observational Studies
Lee, H., Cashin, A. G., Lamb, S. E., Hopewell, S., Vansteelandt, S., VanderWeele, T. J., MacKinnon, D. P., Mansell, G., Collins, P. G. S., Golub, R. M., et al. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.14075 · Cited by 559
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- VanderWeele, T., & Vansteelandt, S.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Ghent University (BE)
- Corresponding author
- VanderWeele, Tyler
- 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
- 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
- bronze
- doi.org
- 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