Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34991898›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2022

A principled approach to mediation analysis in perinatal epidemiology.

Cande V Ananth, Justin S Brandt

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Wildfire Seasons, Prenatal PMACS ES&T air · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Expected and Desirable Preterm and Small Infant Growth Patterns.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Cande V AnanthDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ; Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ; Cardiovascular Institute of New Jersey, Department of Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ; Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ. Electronic address: ananthcv@rwjms.rutgers.edu.
Justin S BrandtDivision of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ.

Funding

Ambient Air Pollution, Weather, and Placental Abruption (APWA)R01ES033190 · NIEHS · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Cande V. Ananth · 2021 to 2026
$3.1M
Cardiovascular Health After Placental Abruption (CHAP)R01HL150065 · NHLBI · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ANANTH, CANDE V., KOSTIS, WILLIAM J · 2020 to 2023
$2.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL150065NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES033190
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For many research questions in perinatal epidemiology, gestational age is a mediator that features the causal pathway between exposure and outcome. A mediator is an intermediate variable between an exposure and outcome, which is influenced by the exposure on the causal pathway to the outcome. Therefore, conventional analyses that adjust, stratify, or match for gestational age or its proxy (eg, preterm vs term deliveries) are problematic. This practice, which is entrenched in perinatal research, induces an overadjustment bias. Depending on the causal question, it may be inappropriate to adjust (or condition) for a mediator, such as gestational age, by either design or statistical analysis, but its effect can be quantified through causal mediation analysis. In an exposition of such methods, we demonstrated the relationship between the exposure and outcome and provided a formal analytical framework to quantify the extent to which a causal effect is influenced by a mediator. We reviewed concepts of confounding and causal inference, introduced the concept of a mediator and illustrated the perils of adjusting for a mediator in an exposure-outcome paradigm for a given causal question, adopted causal methods that call for an evaluation of a mediator in a causal exposure effect on the outcome, and discussed unmeasured confounding assumptions in mediation analysis. Furthermore, we reviewed other developments in the causal mediation analysis literature, including decomposition of a total effect when the mediator interacts with the exposure (4-way decomposition), methods for multiple mediators, mediation methods for case-control studies, mediation methods for time-to-event outcomes, sample size and power analysis for mediation analysis, and available software to apply these methods. To illustrate these methods, we provided a clinical example to estimate the risk of perinatal mortality (outcome) concerning placental abruption (exposure) and to determine the extent to which preterm delivery (mediator; a proxy for gestational age) plays a role in this causal effect. We hoped that the adoption of mediation methods described in this review will move research in perinatal epidemiology away from biased adjustments of mediators toward a more nuanced quantification of effects that pose unique challenges and provide unique insights in our field.

Indexed as

EpidemiologyMediation AnalysisPerinatologyFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancycausal analysiscollider biasepidemiologymediation analysisperinatal researchunmeasured confounding

Identifiers

PMID34991898
PMCPMC9204564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.