Using directed acyclic graphs to guide analyses of neighbourhood health effects: an introduction

Background: Directed acyclic graphs, or DAGs, are a useful graphical tool in epidemiologic research that can help identify appropriate analytical strategies in addition to potential unintended consequences of commonly used methods such as conditioning on mediators. The use of DAGs can be particularly informative in the study of the causal effects of social factors on health. Methods: The authors consider four specific scenarios in which DAGs may be useful to neighbourhood health effects researchers: (1) identifying variables that need to be adjusted for in estimating neighbourhood health effects, (2) identifying the unintended consequences of estimating “direct” effects by conditioning on a mediator, (3) using DAGs to understand possible sources and consequences of selection bias in neighbourhood health effects research, and (4) using DAGs to identify the consequences of adjustment for variables affected by prior exposure. Conclusions: The authors present simplified sample DAGs for each scenario and discuss the insights that can be gleaned from the DAGs in each case and the implications these have for analytical approaches.

[1]  J. Pollock,et al.  Methods in Social Epidemiology , 2009 .

[2]  J. Robins,et al.  A Structural Approach to Selection Bias , 2004, Epidemiology.

[3]  J. Robins The control of confounding by intermediate variables. , 1989, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  John H. Miller,et al.  Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life (Princeton Studies in Complexity) , 2007 .

[5]  S. Raudenbush,et al.  Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. , 1997, Science.

[6]  M. Glymour,et al.  USING CAUSAL DIAGRAMS TO UNDERSTAND COMMON PROBLEMS IN SOCIAL EPIDEMIOLOGY , 2006 .

[7]  M. Hernán A definition of causal effect for epidemiological research , 2004, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[8]  S. Greenland Quantifying Biases in Causal Models: Classical Confounding vs Collider-Stratification Bias , 2003, Epidemiology.

[9]  J. Pearl Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[10]  S. Cole,et al.  Fallibility in estimating direct effects. , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[11]  James M. Robins,et al.  Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. , 1999 .

[12]  J. Robins Data, Design, and Background Knowledge in Etiologic Inference , 2001, Epidemiology.

[13]  John H. Miller,et al.  Complex adaptive systems - an introduction to computational models of social life , 2009, Princeton studies in complexity.

[14]  T. Blakely Commentary: estimating direct and indirect effects-fallible in theory, but in the real world? , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[15]  M. Glymour,et al.  Identifying Causal Ecologic Effects on Health: A Methodological Assessment , 2007 .

[16]  M. Hernán,et al.  The birth weight "paradox" uncovered? , 2006, American journal of epidemiology.

[17]  Christopher Winship,et al.  THE ESTIMATION OF CAUSAL EFFECTS FROM OBSERVATIONAL DATA , 1999 .

[18]  J. Robins,et al.  Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology , 2000, Epidemiology.

[19]  S. Galea Macrosocial Determinants of Population Health , 2010 .

[20]  J. Pearl,et al.  Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. , 1999, Epidemiology.

[21]  Mtw,et al.  Computation, causation, and discovery , 2000 .