Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23255363›Full record

ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2013

Deep determinism and the assessment of mechanistic interaction.

Carlo Berzuini, A Philip Dawid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Interaction Continuum.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2019
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Carlo BerzuiniStatistical Laboratory, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0WB, UK. c.berzuini@statslab.cam.ac.uk
A Philip Dawid

Funding

Medical Research Council G0802320
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given two variables that causally influence a binary response, we formalize the idea that their effects operate through a common mechanism, in which case we say that the two variables interact mechanistically. We introduce a mechanistic interaction relationship of "interference" that is asymmetric in the two causal factors. Conditions and assumptions under which such mechanistic interaction can be tested under a given regime of data collection, be it interventional or observational, are expressed in terms of conditional independence relationships between the problem variables, which can be manipulated with the aid of causal diagrams. The proposed method is able, under appropriate conditions, to test for interaction between direct effects, and to deal with the situation where one of the two factors is a dichotomized version of a continuous variable. The method is illustrated with the aid of a study on heart disease.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdultBiostatisticsCausalityHumansLogistic ModelsMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionRisk FactorsBiological mechanismCausal inferenceCompositional epistasisDirected acyclic graphsDirect effectsExcess risk

Identifiers

PMID23255363
PMCPMC3677734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.