首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Epidemiology >When Is the Difference Method Conservative for Assessing Mediation?
【24h】

When Is the Difference Method Conservative for Assessing Mediation?

机译:差异方法何时保守评估调解?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Assessment of indirect effects is useful for epidemiologists interested in understanding the mechanisms of exposure-outcome relationships. A traditional way of estimating indirect effects is to use the "difference method," which is based on regression analysis in which one adds a possible mediator to the regression model and examines whether the coefficient for the exposure changes. The difference method has been criticized for lacking a causal interpretation when it is used with logistic regression. In this article, we use the counterfactual framework to define the natural indirect effect (NIE) and assess the relationship between the NIE and the difference method. We show that under appropriate assumptions, the difference method consistently estimates the NIE for continuous outcomes and is always conservative for binary outcomes. Thus, the difference method can be used to provide evidence for the presence of mediation but not for the absence of mediation.
机译:间接影响的评估对于有兴趣了解暴露-结果关系机制的流行病学家很有用。估计间接影响的传统方法是使用“差异方法”,该方法基于回归分析,在回归分析中,可以在回归模型中添加一种可能的中介,并检查暴露系数是否发生变化。差异方法因与逻辑回归一起使用时缺乏因果关系的解释而受到批评。在本文中,我们使用反事实框架来定义自然间接效应(NIE),并评估NIE与差异方法之间的关系。我们表明,在适当的假设下,差异方法会持续估计NIE的连续结果,并且对于二元结果始终是保守的。因此,差异方法可用于为存在调解提供证据,而不能为不存在调解提供证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号