ArticleJournal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology2020
Robust inference on population indirect causal effects: the generalized front door criterion.
Article in Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lifestyle mediates the association between normal-weight visceral obesity and MASLD in older adults with hypertension and diabetes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Quantifying interventional causality by knockoff operation.Science advances · 2025Article
- Utilising causal inference methods to estimate effects and strategise interventions in observational health data.PloS one · 2024Article
- Nonparametric causal mediation analysis for stochastic interventional (in)direct effects.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- To Adjust or Not to Adjust? When a "Confounder" Is Only Measured After Exposure.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2021Article
- Estimation of Natural Indirect Effects Robust to Unmeasured Confounding and Mediator Measurement Error.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Standard methods for inference about direct and indirect effects require stringent no-unmeasured-confounding assumptions which often fail to hold in practice, particularly in observational studies. The goal of the paper is to introduce a new form of indirect effect, the population intervention indirect effect, that can be non-parametrically identified in the presence of an unmeasured common cause of exposure and outcome. This new type of indirect effect captures the extent to which the effect of exposure is mediated by an intermediate variable under an intervention that holds the component of exposure directly influencing the outcome at its observed value. The population intervention indirect effect is in fact the indirect component of the population intervention effect, introduced by Hubbard and Van der Laan. Interestingly, our identification criterion generalizes Judea Pearl's front door criterion as it does not require no direct effect of exposure not mediated by the intermediate variable. For inference, we develop both parametric and semiparametric methods, including a novel doubly robust semiparametric locally efficient estimator, that perform very well in simulation studies. Finally, the methods proposed are used to measure the effectiveness of monetary saving recommendations among women enrolled in a maternal health programme in Tanzania.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.