Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32013883›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020

Development of A Guideline for Reporting Mediation Analyses (AGReMA).

Aidan G Cashin, James H McAuley, Sarah E Lamb, Sally Hopewell, Steven J Kamper, Christopher M Williams, Nicholas Henschke, Hopin Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Practical challenges in mediation analysis: a guide for applied researchers.Health services & outcomes research methodology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Aidan G CashinNeuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
James H McAuleyNeuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
Sarah E LambCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sally HopewellCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Steven J KamperInstitute for Musculoskeletal Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Christopher M WilliamsCentre for Pain, Health and Lifestyle, New Lambton Heights, Australia.
Nicholas HenschkeSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Hopin LeeCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. hopin.lee@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5692-0314

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are a growing number of studies using mediation analysis to understand the mechanisms of health interventions and exposures. Recent work has shown that the reporting of these studies is heterogenous and incomplete. This problem stifles clinical application, reproducibility, and evidence synthesis. This paper describes the processes and methods that will be used to develop a guideline for reporting studies of mediation analyses (AGReMA). METHODS/

designAGReMA will be developed over five overlapping stages. Stage one will comprise a systematic review to examine relevant evidence on the quality of reporting in published studies that use mediation analysis. In the second stage we will consult a group of methodologists and applied researchers by using a Delphi process to identify items that should be considered for inclusion in AGReMA. The third stage will involve a consensus meeting to consolidate and prioritise key items to be included in AGReMA. The fourth stage will involve the production of AGReMA and an accompanying explanation and elaboration document. In the final stage we will disseminate the AGReMA statement via journals, conferences, and professional meetings across multiple disciplines. DISCUSSION: The development and implementation of AGReMA will improve the standardization, transparency, and completeness in the reporting of studies that use mediation analysis to understand the mechanisms of health interventions and exposures.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicMediation AnalysisConsensusDelphi TechniqueEarly Medical InterventionEnvironmental ExposureHumansResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicMechanismsMediation analysisReporting guideline

Identifiers

PMID32013883
PMCPMC6998151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.