Natural Direct and Indirect Effects on the Exposed: Effect Decomposition under Weaker Assumptions

Summary We define natural direct and indirect effects on the exposed. We show that these allow for effect decomposition under weaker identification conditions than population natural direct and indirect effects. When no confounders of the mediator‐outcome association are affected by the exposure, identification is possible under essentially the same conditions as for controlled direct effects. Otherwise, identification is still possible with additional knowledge on a nonidentifiable selection‐bias function which measures the dependence of the mediator effect on the observed exposure within confounder levels, and which evaluates to zero in a large class of realistic data‐generating mechanisms. We argue that natural direct and indirect effects on the exposed are of intrinsic interest in various applications. We moreover show that they coincide with the corresponding population natural direct and indirect effects when the exposure is randomly assigned. In such settings, our results are thus also of relevance for assessing population natural direct and indirect effects in the presence of exposure‐induced mediator‐outcome confounding, which existing methodology has not been able to address.     

Generalized causal mediation analysis

The goal of mediation analysis is to assess direct and indirect effects of a treatment or exposure on an outcome. More generally, we may be interested in the context of a causal model as characterized by a directed acyclic graph (DAG), where mediation via a specific path from exposure to outcome may involve an arbitrary number of links (or "stages"). Methods for estimating mediation (or pathway) effects are available for a continuous outcome and a continuous mediator related via a linear model, while for a categorical outcome or categorical mediator, methods are usually limited to two-stage mediation. We present a method applicable to multiple stages of mediation and mixed variable types using generalized linear models. We define pathway effects using a potential outcomes framework and present a general formula that provides the effect of exposure through any specified pathway. Some pathway effects are nonidentifiable and their estimation requires an assumption regarding the correlation between counterfactuals. We provide a sensitivity analysis to assess the impact of this assumption. Confidence intervals for pathway effect estimates are obtained via a bootstrap method. The method is applied to a cohort study of dental caries in very low birth weight adolescents. A simulation study demonstrates low bias of pathway effect estimators and close-to-nominal coverage rates of confidence intervals. We also find low sensitivity to the counterfactual correlation in most scenarios.     

A complete graphical criterion for the adjustment formula in mediation analysis

Various assumptions have been used in the literature to identify natural direct and indirect effects in mediation analysis. These effects are of interest because they allow for effect decomposition of a total effect into a direct and indirect effect even in the presence of interactions or non-linear models. In this paper, we consider the relation and interpretation of various identification assumptions in terms of causal diagrams interpreted as a set of non-parametric structural equations. We show that for such causal diagrams, two sets of assumptions for identification that have been described in the literature are in fact equivalent in the sense that if either set of assumptions holds for all models inducing a particular causal diagram, then the other set of assumptions will also hold for all models inducing that diagram. We moreover build on prior work concerning a complete graphical identification criterion for covariate adjustment for total effects to provide a complete graphical criterion for using covariate adjustment to identify natural direct and indirect effects. Finally, we show that this criterion is equivalent to the two sets of independence assumptions used previously for mediation analysis.     

Sensitivity analysis: distributional assumptions and confounding assumptions

Summary .   In a presentation of various methods for assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounding, Lin, Psaty, and Kronmal (1998, Biometrics 54 , 948–963) use a conditional independence assumption to derive algebraic relationships between the true exposure effect and the apparent exposure effect in a reduced model that does not control for the unmeasured confounding variable. However, Hernán and Robins (1999, Biometrics 55 , 1316–1317) have noted that if the measured covariates and the unmeasured confounder both affect the exposure of interest then the principal conditional independence assumption that is used to derive these algebraic relationships cannot hold. One particular result of Lin et al. does not rely on the conditional independence assumption but only on assumptions concerning additivity. It can be shown that this assumption is satisfied for an entire family of distributions even if both the measured covariates and the unmeasured confounder affect the exposure of interest. These considerations clarify the appropriate contexts in which relevant sensitivity analysis techniques can be applied.     

Identification of causal effects with latent confounding and classical additive errors in treatment

In this paper, we discuss the identifiability and estimation of causal effects of a continuous treatment on a binary response when the treatment is measured with errors and there exists a latent categorical confounder associated with both treatment and response. Under some widely used parametric models, we first discuss the identifiability of the causal effects and then propose an approach for estimation and inference. Our approach can eliminate the biases induced by latent confounding and measurement errors by using only a single instrumental variable. Based on the identification results, we give guidelines for determining the existence of a latent categorical confounder and for selecting the number of levels of the latent confounder. We apply the proposed approach to a data set from the Framingham Heart Study to evaluate the effect of the systolic blood pressure on the coronary heart disease.     

On causal mediation analysis with a survival outcome

Suppose that having established a marginal total effect of a point exposure on a time-to-event outcome, an investigator wishes to decompose this effect into its direct and indirect pathways, also known as natural direct and indirect effects, mediated by a variable known to occur after the exposure and prior to the outcome. This paper proposes a theory of estimation of natural direct and indirect effects in two important semiparametric models for a failure time outcome. The underlying survival model for the marginal total effect and thus for the direct and indirect effects, can either be a marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model, or a marginal structural additive hazards model. The proposed theory delivers new estimators for mediation analysis in each of these models, with appealing robustness properties. Specifically, in order to guarantee ignorability with respect to the exposure and mediator variables, the approach, which is multiply robust, allows the investigator to use several flexible working models to adjust for confounding by a large number of pre-exposure variables. Multiple robustness is appealing because it only requires a subset of working models to be correct for consistency; furthermore, the analyst need not know which subset of working models is in fact correct to report valid inferences. Finally, a novel semiparametric sensitivity analysis technique is developed for each of these models, to assess the impact on inference, of a violation of the assumption of ignorability of the mediator.     

Ultra-high dimensional variable selection for doubly robust causal inference

Causal inference has been increasingly reliant on observational studies with rich covariate information. To build tractable causal procedures, such as the doubly robust estimators, it is imperative to first extract important features from high or even ultra-high dimensional data. In this paper, we propose causal ball screening for confounder selection from modern ultra-high dimensional data sets. Unlike the familiar task of variable selection for prediction modeling, our confounder selection procedure aims to control for confounding while improving efficiency in the resulting causal effect estimate. Previous empirical and theoretical studies suggest excluding causes of the treatment that are not confounders. Motivated by these results, our goal is to keep all the predictors of the outcome in both the propensity score and outcome regression models. A distinctive feature of our proposal is that we use an outcome model-free procedure for propensity score model selection, thereby maintaining double robustness in the resulting causal effect estimator. Our theoretical analyses show that the proposed procedure enjoys a number of properties, including model selection consistency and pointwise normality. Synthetic and real data analysis show that our proposal performs favorably with existing methods in a range of realistic settings. Data used in preparation of this paper were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database.     

A new criterion for confounder selection

Summary We propose a new criterion for confounder selection when the underlying causal structure is unknown and only limited knowledge is available. We assume all covariates being considered are pretreatment variables and that for each covariate it is known (i) whether the covariate is a cause of treatment, and (ii) whether the covariate is a cause of the outcome. The causal relationships the covariates have with one another is assumed unknown. We propose that control be made for any covariate that is either a cause of treatment or of the outcome or both. We show that irrespective of the actual underlying causal structure, if any subset of the observed covariates suffices to control for confounding then the set of covariates chosen by our criterion will also suffice. We show that other, commonly used, criteria for confounding control do not have this property. We use formal theory concerning causal diagrams to prove our result but the application of the result does not rely on familiarity with causal diagrams. An investigator simply need ask, “Is the covariate a cause of the treatment?” and “Is the covariate a cause of the outcome?” If the answer to either question is “yes” then the covariate is included for confounder control. We discuss some additional covariate selection results that preserve unconfoundedness and that may be of interest when used with our criterion.     

Causal mediation analysis with a latent mediator

Health researchers are often interested in assessing the direct effect of a treatment or exposure on an outcome variable, as well as its indirect (or mediation) effect through an intermediate variable (or mediator). For an outcome following a nonlinear model, the mediation formula may be used to estimate causally interpretable mediation effects. This method, like others, assumes that the mediator is observed. However, as is common in structural equations modeling, we may wish to consider a latent (unobserved) mediator. We follow a potential outcomes framework and assume a generalized structural equations model (GSEM). We provide maximum‐likelihood estimation of GSEM parameters using an approximate Monte Carlo EM algorithm, coupled with a mediation formula approach to estimate natural direct and indirect effects. The method relies on an untestable sequential ignorability assumption; we assess robustness to this assumption by adapting a recently proposed method for sensitivity analysis. Simulation studies show good properties of the proposed estimators in plausible scenarios. Our method is applied to a study of the effect of mother education on occurrence of adolescent dental caries, in which we examine possible mediation through latent oral health behavior.     

The Sign of the Unmeasured Confounding Bias under Various Standard Populations

Unmeasured confounders are a common problem in drawing causal inferences in observational studies. VanderWeele (Biometrics 2008, 64, 702–706) presented a theorem that allows researchers to determine the sign of the unmeasured confounding bias when monotonic relationships hold between the unmeasured confounder and the treatment, and between the unmeasured confounder and the outcome. He showed that his theorem can be applied to causal effects with the total group as the standard population, but he did not mention the causal effects with treated and untreated groups as the standard population. Here, we extend his results to these causal effects, and apply our theorems to an observational study. When researchers have a sense of what the unmeasured confounder may be, conclusions can be drawn about the sign of the bias.     

Bayesian Inference for the Causal Effect of Mediation

Summary We propose a nonparametric Bayesian approach to estimate the natural direct and indirect effects through a mediator in the setting of a continuous mediator and a binary response. Several conditional independence assumptions are introduced (with corresponding sensitivity parameters) to make these effects identifiable from the observed data. We suggest strategies for eliciting sensitivity parameters and conduct simulations to assess violations to the assumptions. This approach is used to assess mediation in a recent weight management clinical trial.     

Causal mediation analysis in nested case-control studies using conditional logistic regression

The paper proposes an approach to causal mediation analysis in nested case-control study designs, often incorporated with countermatching schemes using conditional likelihood, and we compare the method's performance to that of mediation analysis using the Cox model for the full cohort with a continuous or dichotomous mediator. Simulation studies are conducted to assess our proposed method and investigate the efficiency relative to the cohort. We illustrate the method using actual data from two studies of potential mediation of radiation risk conducted within the Adult Health Study cohort of atomic-bomb survivors. The performance becomes comparable to that based on the full cohort, illustrating the potential for valid mediation analysis based on the reduced data obtained through the nested case-control design.     

Counterfactual links to the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker

In a randomized clinical trial, a statistic that measures the proportion of treatment effect on the primary clinical outcome that is explained by the treatment effect on a surrogate outcome is a useful concept. We investigate whether a statistic proposed to estimate this proportion can be given a causal interpretation as defined by models of counterfactual variables. For the situation of binary surrogate and outcome variables, two counterfactual models are considered, both of which include the concept of the proportion of the treatment effect, which acts through the surrogate. In general, the statistic does not equal either of the two proportions from the counterfactual models, and can be substantially different. Conditions are given for which the statistic does equal the counterfactual model proportions. A randomized clinical trial with potential surrogate endpoints is undertaken in a scientific context; this context will naturally place constraints on the parameters of the counterfactual model. We conducted a simulation experiment to investigate what impact these constraints had on the relationship between the proportion explained (PE) statistic and the counterfactual model proportions. We found that observable constraints had very little impact on the agreement between the statistic and the counterfactual model proportions, whereas unobservable constraints could lead to more agreement.     

Comparing mortality in renal patients on hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis using a marginal structural model

When comparing the causal effect of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) treatment on lowering mortality in renal patients, using observational data, it is necessary to adjust for different forms of confounding and informative censoring. Both the type of dialysis treatment that is started with and mortality are affected by baseline covariates. Longitudinal and baseline variables can affect both the probability of switching from one type of dialysis to the other, and mortality. Longitudinal and baseline variables can also affect the probability of receiving a kidney transplant, possibly causing informative censoring. Adjusting for longitudinal variables by including them as covariates in a regression model potentially causes bias, for instance by losing a possible indirect effect of dialysis on mortality via these longitudinal variables. Instead, we fitted a marginal structural model (MSM) to estimate the causal effect of dialysis type, adjusted for confounding and informative censoring. We used the MSM to compare the hazard of death as well as cumulative survival between the potential treatment trajectories "always PD" and "always HD" over time, conditional on age and diabetes mellitus status. We used inverse probability weighting (IPW) to fit the MSM.     

Sensitivity analysis for principal stratum direct effects, with an application to a study of physical activity and coronary heart disease

Summary .  In many studies, the aim is to learn about the direct exposure effect, that is, the effect not mediated through an intermediate variable. For example, in circulation disease studies it may be of interest to assess whether a suitable level of physical activity can prevent disease, even if it fails to prevent obesity. It is well known that stratification on the intermediate may introduce a so-called posttreatment selection bias. To handle this problem, we use the framework of principal stratification ( Frangakis and Rubin, 2002 , Biometrics 58, 21–29) to define a causally relevant estimand—the principal stratum direct effect (PSDE). The PSDE is not identified in our setting. We propose a method of sensitivity analysis that yields a range of plausible values for the causal estimand. We compare our work to similar methods proposed in the literature for handling the related problem of "truncation by death."     

THE EFFECT OF UNMEASURED CONFOUNDERS ON THE ABILITY TO ESTIMATE A TRUE PERFORMANCE OR SELECTION GRADIENT (AND OTHER PARTIAL REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS)

Multiple regression of observational data is frequently used to infer causal effects. Partial regression coefficients are biased estimates of causal effects if unmeasured confounders are not in the regression model. The sensitivity of partial regression coefficients to omitted confounders is investigated with a Monte‐Carlo simulation. A subset of causal traits is “measured” and their effects are estimated using ordinary least squares regression and compared to their expected values. Three major results are: (1) the error due to confounding is much larger than that due to sampling, especially with large samples, (2) confounding error shrinks trivially with sample size, and (3) small true effects are frequently estimated as large effects. Consequently, confidence intervals from regression are poor guides to the true intervals, especially with large sample sizes. The addition of a confounder to the model improves estimates only 55% of the time. Results are improved with complete knowledge of the rank order of causal effects but even with this omniscience, measured intervals are poor proxies for true intervals if there are many unmeasured confounders. The results suggest that only under very limited conditions can we have much confidence in the magnitude of partial regression coefficients as estimates of causal effects.     

Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in dynamic treatment regimes

Data-driven methods for personalizing treatment assignment have garnered much attention from clinicians and researchers. Dynamic treatment regimes formalize this through a sequence of decision rules that map individual patient characteristics to a recommended treatment. Observational studies are commonly used for estimating dynamic treatment regimes due to the potentially prohibitive costs of conducting sequential multiple assignment randomized trials. However, estimating a dynamic treatment regime from observational data can lead to bias in the estimated regime due to unmeasured confounding. Sensitivity analyses are useful for assessing how robust the conclusions of the study are to a potential unmeasured confounder. A Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis is a probabilistic approach that involves positing and sampling from distributions for the parameters governing the bias. We propose a method for performing a Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis of the bias due to unmeasured confounding in the estimation of dynamic treatment regimes. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed procedure with a simulation study and apply it to an observational study examining tailoring the use of antidepressant medication for reducing symptoms of depression using data from Kaiser Permanente Washington.     

Population intervention models in causal inference

We propose a new causal parameter, which is a natural extension of existing approaches to causal inference such as marginal structural models. Modelling approaches are proposed for the difference between a treatment-specific counterfactual population distribution and the actual population distribution of an outcome in the target population of interest. Relevant parameters describe the effect of a hypothetical intervention on such a population and therefore we refer to these models as population intervention models. We focus on intervention models estimating the effect of an intervention in terms of a difference and ratio of means, called risk difference and relative risk if the outcome is binary. We provide a class of inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted and doubly-robust estimators of the causal parameters in these models. The finite-sample performance of these new estimators is explored in a simulation study.     

A formal causal interpretation of the case-crossover design

The case-crossover design of Maclure is widely used in epidemiology and other fields to study causal effects of transient treatments on acute outcomes. However, its validity and causal interpretation have only been justified under informal conditions. Here, we place the design in a formal counterfactual framework for the first time. Doing so helps to clarify its assumptions and interpretation. In particular, when the treatment effect is nonnull, we identify a previously unnoticed bias arising from strong common causes of the outcome at different person-times. We analyze this bias and demonstrate its potential importance with simulations. We also use our derivation of the limit of the case-crossover estimator to analyze its sensitivity to treatment effect heterogeneity, a violation of one of the informal criteria for validity. The upshot of this work for practitioners is that, while the case-crossover design can be useful for testing the causal null hypothesis in the presence of baseline confounders, extra caution is warranted when using the case-crossover design for point estimation of causal effects.     

Time-dependent mediators in survival analysis: Modeling direct and indirect effects with the additive hazards model

We discuss causal mediation analyses for survival data and propose a new approach based on the additive hazards model. The emphasis is on a dynamic point of view, that is, understanding how the direct and indirect effects develop over time. Hence, importantly, we allow for a time varying mediator. To define direct and indirect effects in such a longitudinal survival setting we take an interventional approach (Didelez, 2018) where treatment is separated into one aspect affecting the mediator and a different aspect affecting survival. In general, this leads to a version of the nonparametric g-formula (Robins, 1986). In the present paper, we demonstrate that combining the g-formula with the additive hazards model and a sequential linear model for the mediator process results in simple and interpretable expressions for direct and indirect effects in terms of relative survival as well as cumulative hazards. Our results generalize and formalize the method of dynamic path analysis (Fosen, Ferkingstad, Borgan, & Aalen, 2006; Strohmaier et al., 2015). An application to data from a clinical trial on blood pressure medication is given.