Direct and Indirect Effects in a Survival Context

A cornerstone of epidemiologic research is to understand the causal pathways from an exposure to an outcome. Mediation analysis based on counterfactuals is an important tool when addressing such questions. However, none of the existing techniques for formal mediation analysis can be applied to survival data. This is a severe shortcoming, as many epidemiologic questions can be addressed only with censored survival data. A solution has been to use a number of Cox models (with and without the potential mediator), but this approach does not allow a causal interpretation and is not mathematically consistent. In this paper, we propose a simple measure of mediation in a survival setting. The measure is based on counterfactuals, and measures the natural direct and indirect effects. The method allows a causal interpretation of the mediated effect (in terms of additional cases per unit of time) and is mathematically consistent. The technique is illustrated by analyzing socioeconomic status, work environment, and long-term sickness absence. A detailed implementation guide is included in an online eAppendix (http://links.lww.com/EDE/A476).

[1]  Els Goetghebeur,et al.  Estimation of controlled direct effects , 2008 .

[2]  Karl Bang Christensen,et al.  Explaining the social gradient in long-term sickness absence: a prospective study of Danish employees , 2008, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[3]  Chen Avin,et al.  Identifiability of Path-Specific Effects , 2005, IJCAI.

[4]  Sharon Schwartz,et al.  Opening the Black Box: a motivation for the assessment of mediation. , 2009, International journal of epidemiology.

[5]  G. Raab,et al.  Does Widowhood Increase Mortality Risk?: Testing for Selection Effects by Comparing Causes of Spousal Death , 2011, Epidemiology.

[6]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Direct and Indirect Effects , 2001, UAI.

[7]  D. Rubin Direct and Indirect Causal Effects via Potential Outcomes * , 2004 .

[8]  Tyler J VanderWeele,et al.  Alternative Assumptions for the Identification of Direct and Indirect Effects , 2011, Epidemiology.

[9]  D. Commenges,et al.  A general dynamical statistical model with causal interpretation , 2009 .

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

[11]  Tyler J. VanderWeele,et al.  Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition , 2009 .

[12]  Mark J van der Laan,et al.  Estimation of Direct Causal Effects , 2006, Epidemiology.

[13]  Odd Aalen,et al.  A Model for Nonparametric Regression Analysis of Counting Processes , 1980 .

[14]  J. Robins,et al.  Identifiability and Exchangeability for Direct and Indirect Effects , 1992, Epidemiology.

[15]  Stijn Vansteelandt,et al.  Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. , 2010, American journal of epidemiology.

[16]  Tyler J. VanderWeele,et al.  Marginal Structural Models for the Estimation of Direct and Indirect Effects , 2009, Epidemiology.

[17]  S. Kochar,et al.  Comparing Sub-Survival Functions in a Competing Risks Model , 2000, Lifetime data analysis.

[18]  O. Aalen,et al.  Dynamic path analysis—a new approach to analyzing time-dependent covariates , 2006, Lifetime data analysis.

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

[20]  Richard F MacLehose,et al.  A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation. , 2004, Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I.

[21]  Torben Martinussen,et al.  Dynamic Regression Models for Survival Data , 2006 .

[22]  Stijn Vansteelandt,et al.  Estimating Direct Effects in Cohort and Case–Control Studies , 2009, Epidemiology.

[23]  T. Martinussen,et al.  Dynamic path analysis for event time data: large sample properties and inference , 2010, Lifetime data analysis.