Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33221880›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2021

A directed acyclic graph for interactions.

Anton Nilsson, Carl Bonander, Ulf Strömberg, Jonas Björk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Application of Graphs in a One Health Framework.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Anton NilssonEPI@LUND (Epidemiology, Population Studies and Infrastructures at Lund University), Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5774-7189
Carl BonanderSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Ulf StrömbergSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jonas BjörkEPI@LUND (Epidemiology, Population Studies and Infrastructures at Lund University), Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDirected acyclic graphs (DAGs) are of great help when researchers try to understand the nature of causal relationships and the consequences of conditioning on different variables. One fundamental feature of causal relations that has not been incorporated into the standard DAG framework is interaction, i.e. when the effect of one variable (on a chosen scale) depends on the value that another variable is set to. In this paper, we propose a new type of DAG-the interaction DAG (IDAG), which can be used to understand this phenomenon.

methodsThe IDAG works like any DAG but instead of including a node for the outcome, it includes a node for a causal effect. We introduce concepts such as confounded interaction and total, direct and indirect interaction, showing that these can be depicted in ways analogous to how similar concepts are depicted in standard DAGs. This also allows for conclusions on which treatment interactions to account for empirically. Moreover, since generalizability can be compromised in the presence of underlying interactions, the framework can be used to illustrate threats to generalizability and to identify variables to account for in order to make results valid for the target population.

conclusionsThe IDAG allows for a both intuitive and stringent way of illustrating interactions. It helps to distinguish between causal and non-causal mechanisms behind effect variation. Conclusions about how to empirically estimate interactions can be drawn-as well as conclusions about how to achieve generalizability in contexts where interest lies in estimating an overall effect.

Indexed as

Confounding Factors, EpidemiologicCausalityData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansCausal inferenceexternal validitygeneralizabilityinteractioninternal validitymediation

Identifiers

PMID33221880
PMCPMC8128466

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.